From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Jun 1 06:40:31 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 23:40:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Jeanne Robinson, in peace In-Reply-To: <201005311533.o4VFXlqV020208@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201005311533.o4VFXlqV020208@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: I really feel for Spider Robinson and his wife. But at least they had many good years together. Robinson's "Callahan's Saloon" stories really delighted & emotionally touched me over the years (if someone reading this has not read them, they should!). John On 5/31/10, David Lubkin wrote: > From Spider Robinson -- > >>Jeanne Robinson left this life at about 4:45 Sunday afternoon, a >>gentle smile on her face. Her departure was quite peaceful and she >>was in no pain at all. >> >>Because her Palliative Care doctor, Paul Sugar, was able to forecast >>her passing almost to the hour, her daughter Terri, son-in-law Heron >>and granddaughter Marisa flew back from NYC just in time, and were >>with me at her side when Jeanne died; and her mother Dorothy and >>sister Laurie arrived from Massachusetts only a couple of hours >>later, after Terri had had time to expertly make Jeanne look better >>than she had for days. Zen priests Michael and Kate Newton were also >>present per Jeanne's wishes, as were our oldest friends in this part >>of the world, Greg McKinnon, Anya Coveney-Hughes and Stevie >>McDowell. Over the next few hours more sangha buddies arrived, and >>chanting of the Prajna Paramita Heart Sutra was done. Her body was >>then bathed and dressed in her hand-sewn rakasu as per Zen tradition. >> >>In accordance with her wishes she will be cremated. Half her ashes >>will be scattered off this coast, and half will be taken back to her >>childhood home, Cape Cod, so that her East Coast family will have a >>place to go and visit her. > > > -- David. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Jun 1 06:42:29 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 23:42:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] black atheists society In-Reply-To: <419856.91326.qm@web114401.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <419856.91326.qm@web114401.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Max, What about Cthulhu? John ; ) On 5/31/10, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Most telling quote from that item: > "I would get thrown out of religion class for asking questions". > > Says it all, really. > > Ben Zaiboc > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From dan_ust at yahoo.com Tue Jun 1 17:13:56 2010 From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan) Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 10:13:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? Message-ID: <66467.21692.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> http://www.amazon.com/What-Darwin-Wrong-Jerry-Fodor/dp/0374288798 Any of you read this one? Comments? I just picked it up a few days ago and have started in on it. No big surprises just yet... Regards, Dan From pharos at gmail.com Tue Jun 1 18:08:35 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 19:08:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Seven mega-projects proposed Message-ID: Boing boing draws attention to this proposal for Futuristic mega-projects by Shimizu 01 Jun 2010 Japanese construction firm Shimizu Corporation has developed a series of bold architectural plans for the world of tomorrow. Here is a preview of seven mega-projects that have the potential to reshape life on (and off) Earth in the coming decades. Lunar Solar Power Generation -LUNA RING- The Energy Paradigm Shift Opens the Door to a Sustainable Society TRY2025 The Environmental Island -GREEN FLOAT- The Botanical City Concept TRY 2004 The "Pyramid City in the Air" Concept Dreaming the Future Inter Cell City Creating a Sustainable, Environmentally Conscious City Space Hotel -Space Tourism- Formation of Space Tourism Lunar Bases -Construction on The Moon- Plan of Lunar Bases Urban Geo-Grid Plan Systematic Coexistence of Above-Ground and Underground Areas to Create Efficient, Orderly Urban Spaces Desert Aqua-Net Plan Creating Lakes in the Desert: A Proposal for Creating a Network of Canals and Exploring New Ways to Inhabit Our Planet ----------------- No mention of a space elevator though. BillK From dan_ust at yahoo.com Tue Jun 1 18:53:56 2010 From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan) Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 11:53:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Seven mega-projects proposed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <478410.24063.qm@web30107.mail.mud.yahoo.com> A while back, Discovery aired an episode of Extreme Engineering devoted to #3 from that list: http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/engineering/pyramidcity/interactive/interactive.html Regarding the Space Elevator, I think Shimozu is mainly highlighting projects they've either come up with or have put some money into. Regards, Dan ----- Original Message ---- From: BillK To: Extropy Chat Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 2:08:35 PM Subject: [ExI] Seven mega-projects proposed Boing boing draws attention to this proposal for Futuristic mega-projects by Shimizu 01 Jun 2010 Japanese construction firm Shimizu Corporation has developed a series of bold architectural plans for the world of tomorrow. Here is a preview of seven mega-projects that have the potential to reshape life on (and off) Earth in the coming decades. Lunar Solar Power Generation -LUNA RING- The Energy Paradigm Shift Opens the Door to a Sustainable Society TRY2025 The Environmental Island -GREEN FLOAT- The Botanical City Concept TRY 2004 The "Pyramid City in the Air" Concept Dreaming the Future Inter Cell City Creating a Sustainable, Environmentally Conscious City Space Hotel -Space Tourism- Formation of Space Tourism Lunar Bases -Construction on The Moon- Plan of Lunar Bases Urban Geo-Grid Plan Systematic Coexistence of Above-Ground and Underground Areas to Create Efficient, Orderly Urban Spaces Desert Aqua-Net Plan Creating Lakes in the Desert: A Proposal for Creating a Network of Canals and Exploring New Ways to Inhabit Our Planet ----------------- No mention of a space elevator though. BillK _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 1 20:15:00 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 13:15:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? In-Reply-To: <66467.21692.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <66467.21692.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > ...On Behalf Of Dan > Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? > > http://www.amazon.com/What-Darwin-Wrong-Jerry-Fodor/dp/0374288798 > > Any of you read this one? Comments? I just picked it up a few > days ago and have started in on it. No big surprises just yet... > > Regards, Dan Hi Dan thanks. From the Amazon.com editorial reviews: "...For one thing, according to the authors, natural selection contains a logical fallacy by linking two irreconcilable claims: first, that creatures with adaptive traits are selected, and second, that creatures are selected for their adaptive traits..." I haven't read the book, but that review almost sounds like what Darwin carefully differentiated as two separate effects: survival selection and mate selection. He and later authors recognized that it is possible for these two effects to work against each other in at least some cases. In Origin of Species Chapter 4, second paragraph under the section called Sexual Selection, Darwin mentions specifically the peacock. This might be a puzzle, since the enormous plumage is heavy and would work against flight from a predator. Darwin's take on it is that in some species, the females choose a mated based on his attractiveness, as opposed to many other species in which the males fight for dominance to access mates. This may-the-pretties-man-win strategy prevents battle injury and would surely contribute to the survival of the species encumbered by the absurd but beautiful tail plumage. I see no logical fallacy in Darwin's reasoning. After reading the passage in OoS, we can easily envision Darwin pondering these effects to great length. His writing demonstrates a life spent pondering nature. spike From davidmc at gmail.com Tue Jun 1 21:02:55 2010 From: davidmc at gmail.com (David McFadzean) Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 15:02:55 -0600 Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? In-Reply-To: <66467.21692.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <66467.21692.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: PZ was not impressed >> http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/02/fodor_and_piattelli-palmarini.php On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Dan wrote: > http://www.amazon.com/What-Darwin-Wrong-Jerry-Fodor/dp/0374288798 > > Any of you read this one? Comments? I just picked it up a few days ago and > have started in on it. No big surprises just yet... > > Regards, > > Dan > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 1 21:03:54 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 14:03:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? In-Reply-To: References: <66467.21692.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <73A61DE7DEBF42B0A1C78830CF845AC1@spike> > > ...On Behalf Of Dan > > Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? > > > > http://www.amazon.com/What-Darwin-Wrong-Jerry-Fodor/dp/0374288798 > > > > Any of you read this one? Comments? ... Regards, Dan > > Hi Dan thanks. From the Amazon.com editorial reviews: > > ... I see no logical fallacy in Darwin's reasoning. After > reading the passage in OoS, we can easily envision Darwin > pondering these effects to great length... spike Dan, there has emerged a body of literature of guys trying to second-guess Darwin this long after his original publication. Perhaps the biggest contribution these later writers make is in leading the student to go back and carefully read what Darwin originally said. Example creationists like to loosely paraphrase (*very loosely*) Darwin's admittedly odd comment about possibly convergent habits of bears and whales in the bottom of the eighth paragraph under the section ON THE ORIGIN AND TRANSITION OF ORGANIC BEINGS WITH PECULIAR HABITS AND STRUCTURE. If you read it in the original, Darwin wasn't actually saying whales evolved from bears, even though later creationist writers have suggested that is what he meant. If the readers go back to Darwin's original work, Fodor is the lesser light which has guided the seeker to the greater light, and has contributed to the scientific understanding. Most of what Steven Jay Gould has done for me is to serve as that lesser light. spike From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Jun 2 04:34:52 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 21:34:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Happiness may come with age... http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/01/health/research/01happy.html I sure hope so... John From pharos at gmail.com Wed Jun 2 08:59:42 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 09:59:42 +0100 Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/2/10, John Grigg wrote: > Happiness may come with age... > http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/01/health/research/01happy.html > > Quote: It is inevitable. The muscles weaken. Hearing and vision fade. We get wrinkled and stooped. We can?t run, or even walk, as fast as we used to. We have aches and pains in parts of our bodies we never even noticed before. We get old. It sounds miserable, but apparently it is not. A large Gallup poll has found that by almost any measure, people get happier as they get older, and researchers are not sure why. ---------------- My guess is that the researchers were young. ;) The answer is obvious. There is less pressure when you are older. The things you got stressed about when you were young just seem triviial and don't bother you anymore. Even if it is something important, you realise that there is nothing you can do about it, so you just accept it and get on with your life. Lots more detail to be filled in, but that's basically the answer......... BillK From pharos at gmail.com Wed Jun 2 11:15:55 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 12:15:55 +0100 Subject: [ExI] MindMeister online mindmaps Message-ID: Brainstorming the easy way Online mind mapping software for innovative people and businesses. Share and collaborate Working together with friends and colleagues has never been easier. Simultaneously work on maps with friends and colleagues and see changes as they happen. ---------------- They have a free option for online collaboration on up to three maps. One feature I liked is that they have a selection of public maps available, here: One example is 'Best Online Collaboration Tools 2010', which includes every type of online collaboration you can think of, even including other mindmapping software. BillK From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 2 14:44:51 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 07:44:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Subject: Re: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says > > On 6/2/10, John Grigg wrote: > > Happiness may come with age... > > http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/01/health/research/01happy.html > > ...> It sounds miserable, but apparently it is not. A large Gallup > poll has found that by almost any measure, people get happier > as they get older, and researchers are not sure why. > ---------------- ... > The answer is obvious. There is less pressure when you are older. > The things you got stressed about when you were young just > seem triviial and don't bother you anymore... BillK Ja! I hope this thread generates many comments. When I was a child I noticed something interesting about my grandfathers. To have fun, my parents wanted to go to a ball game, or go downtown to some event or other, or *do* something, or go somewhere. My grandfather and I could just walk down the street, or walk across the way to where a bird was making a nest in a tree, or go over to the local park, or just mess around the house. We would have a great time! He didn't need to be *doing* something all the time. My grandfathers knew how to enjoy just seeing, just being, didn't need to always be going and doing. As I have gotten older myself, I completely get that now. I still like to go and do, but I get the enjoyment of just watching and being. spike From pharos at gmail.com Wed Jun 2 16:37:15 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 17:37:15 +0100 Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/2/10, spike wrote: > As I have gotten older myself, I completely get that now. I still like to > go and do, but I get the enjoyment of just watching and being. > > In my experience, the female of the species objects rather noisily to their men just sitting and being. :) In England, men usually retire to their garden shed where no women are allowed. BillK From reasonerkevin at yahoo.com Wed Jun 2 17:37:47 2010 From: reasonerkevin at yahoo.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 10:37:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] two observations In-Reply-To: References: <82E79D4B70CF4A39B3B4043DE0FAAB30@DFC68LF1> <1448B5D2E0D247BFB7154B0708D5BF59@spike> Message-ID: <591758.37864.qm@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> >I think it's interesting the way spiders fly. A small spider will >produce a strand of silk that catches enough breeze to carry the >spider up into the air. Maybe it's not technically self-powered >flight; it's a cool trick though. I imagine it as a metaphor for >human diaspora to the stars - our puny boats won't carry a whole >civilization but a largest enough number of seeds cast to the [solar] >wind might eventually be lucky. Given our inherent sense of >self-preservation, those seeds will probably have to be digital copies >else the failure rate would be depressingly prohibitive. I saw an amazing example of this on my NAR level 3 certification flight many years ago. It was a 2pm launch and my rocket veered slightly to the west. As I turned my head to follow I could see hundreds, or perhaps thousands of spider silk strands shimmering in the sky. It was weird, but beautiful. I was captivated by it and lost track of my rocket. I never did recover that rocket and I never saw another example of spider ballooning as magical. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dan_ust at yahoo.com Wed Jun 2 18:28:46 2010 From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:28:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? In-Reply-To: <73A61DE7DEBF42B0A1C78830CF845AC1@spike> References: <66467.21692.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <73A61DE7DEBF42B0A1C78830CF845AC1@spike> Message-ID: <316594.50391.qm@web30103.mail.mud.yahoo.com> This is true -- there are plenty of "guys trying to second-guess Darwin this long after his original publication" and "carefully read[ing] what Darwin originally said" often cures much of that. I'm not sure that's the case with this book. For the record, too, I'm not a big Jerry Fodor groupie. What should matter here is who is a greater or lesser light, but whether the light actually reveals an important facts. I'm only a few pages into the book, so I can't say at this point whether there's much to say. (Let's not forget, too, Fodor has a co-author.:) Regards, Dan ----- Original Message ---- From: spike To: ExI chat list Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 5:03:54 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? > > ...On Behalf Of Dan > > Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? > > > > http://www.amazon.com/What-Darwin-Wrong-Jerry-Fodor/dp/0374288798 > > > > Any of you read this one? Comments? ... Regards, Dan > > Hi Dan thanks.? From the Amazon.com editorial reviews: > > ... I see no logical fallacy in Darwin's reasoning.? After > reading the passage in OoS, we can easily envision Darwin > pondering these effects to great length... spike Dan, there has emerged a body of literature of guys trying to second-guess Darwin this long after his original publication.? Perhaps the biggest contribution these later writers make is in leading the student to go back and carefully read what Darwin originally said.? Example creationists like to loosely paraphrase (*very loosely*) Darwin's admittedly odd comment about possibly convergent habits of bears and whales in the bottom of the eighth paragraph under the section ON THE ORIGIN AND TRANSITION OF ORGANIC BEINGS WITH PECULIAR HABITS AND STRUCTURE. If you read it in the original, Darwin wasn't actually saying whales evolved from bears, even though later creationist writers have suggested that is what he meant. If the readers go back to Darwin's original work, Fodor is the lesser light which has guided the seeker to the greater light, and has contributed to the scientific understanding.? Most of what Steven Jay Gould has done for me is to serve as that lesser light. spike _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From jrd1415 at gmail.com Wed Jun 2 18:45:26 2010 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:45:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] microbot competition Message-ID: I was particularly impressed by the precise action of the ETH Zurich microbot. http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/guest/25259/?nlid=3058 Enjoy. Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles From dan_ust at yahoo.com Wed Jun 2 18:23:29 2010 From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:23:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? In-Reply-To: References: <66467.21692.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <114068.47024.qm@web30103.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I'm reading the book before making any detailed comments, but, so far, the authors haven't differentiated between the two -- and I really don't think there's much of a difference between them. In the case of sexual selection, the organism (or the gene or whatever unit of selection) is still facing a survival selection. Its progeny won't be represented or won't be represented in high numbers if it fails against that particular filter, no? (The difference being, though, that it's likely that sexual selection can be roped off from other environmental factors because it's more likely to be directional.) Regards, Dan ----- Original Message ---- From: spike To: ExI chat list Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 4:15:00 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? > ...On Behalf Of Dan > Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? > > http://www.amazon.com/What-Darwin-Wrong-Jerry-Fodor/dp/0374288798 > > Any of you read this one? Comments? I just picked it up a few > days ago and have started in on it. No big surprises just yet... > > Regards, Dan Hi Dan thanks.? From the Amazon.com editorial reviews: "...For one thing, according to the authors, natural selection contains a logical fallacy by linking two irreconcilable claims: first, that creatures with adaptive traits are selected, and second, that creatures are selected for their adaptive traits..." I haven't read the book, but that review almost sounds like what Darwin carefully differentiated as two separate effects: survival selection and mate selection.? He and later authors recognized that it is possible for these two effects to work against each other in at least some cases.? In Origin of Species Chapter 4, second paragraph under the section called Sexual Selection, Darwin mentions specifically the peacock.? This might be a puzzle, since the enormous plumage is heavy and would work against flight from a predator.? Darwin's take on it is that in some species, the females choose a mated based on his attractiveness, as opposed to many other species in which the males fight for dominance to access mates.? This may-the-pretties-man-win strategy prevents battle injury and would surely contribute to the survival of the species encumbered by the absurd but beautiful tail plumage. I see no logical fallacy in Darwin's reasoning.? After reading the passage in OoS, we can easily envision Darwin pondering these effects to great length.? His writing demonstrates a life spent pondering nature. spike From dan_ust at yahoo.com Wed Jun 2 18:32:07 2010 From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:32:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? In-Reply-To: References: <66467.21692.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20852.94328.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Actually, yeah. In fact, I'm putting off reading this review until I've finished the book -- to see how many "errors" I uncover. :) Regards, Dan From: David McFadzean To: ExI chat list Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 5:02:55 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? PZ was not impressed >>?http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/02/fodor_and_piattelli-palmarini.php On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Dan wrote: http://www.amazon.com/What-Darwin-Wrong-Jerry-Fodor/dp/0374288798 > >Any of you read this one? Comments? I just picked it up a few days ago and have started in on it. No big surprises just yet... > >Regards, > >Dan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 2 18:33:03 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:33:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] two observations In-Reply-To: <591758.37864.qm@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <82E79D4B70CF4A39B3B4043DE0FAAB30@DFC68LF1><1448B5D2E0D247BFB7154B0708D5BF59@spike> <591758.37864.qm@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: ...On Behalf Of Kevin Freels Subject: Re: [ExI] two observations >>I think it's interesting the way spiders fly... >...As I turned my head to follow I could see hundreds, or perhaps thousands of spider silk strands shimmering in the sky. It was weird, but beautiful... Spiders are an example of bugs with the habit of doing something in unison, like your thousands of silk strands example. My own is when I went on a motorcycle ride in the Mojave Desert on a hot spring morning in 1984, soon after having moved there. I had never seen a tarantula, but that day I saw one, stopped, examined it. Then another and another, as I headed out toward Death Valley. Then dozens per mile, crossing the road, from east to west, all of them walking walking walking, like something out of a horror flick. Oy. Good thing I like bugs, jeeeeez. That was the only time I ever actually saw a tarantula migration in progress, even though I went out there on that same road dozens of times. spike http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSIGcWATJ3g From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Wed Jun 2 21:15:12 2010 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 14:15:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> ----- Original Message ---- > From: spike > To: ExI chat list > Sent: Wed, June 2, 2010 7:44:51 AM > Subject: Re: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says > The answer is obvious. There is less pressure > when you are older. > The things you got stressed about when you were > young just > seem triviial and don't bother you anymore... > BillK > Ja!? I hope this thread generates many comments.? [snip] As I have gotten older myself, I completely get that > now.? I still like to go and do, but I get the enjoyment of just > watching and being. While both?Spike and Bill make good points, I doubt the authors of the NYT article, or the researchers they mentioned,?interviewed?any elderly in nursing homes. I however had?lived in a nursing home in Los Angeles?for the greater part of two months in the autumn of 2004,?convalescing from a motorcyle accident that broke both my ankles and rendered me wheelchair-bound for that time. I can say quite assuredly that whatever natural?happiness age brings the elderly, nursing homes rob them of it.?My first night there I could not?sleep on account of the many moans, groans, and occasionally the?plea to God?for death.?Octagenarians were calling for their mommies and daddies. Then there were the loud screeching protests whenever a nurse or orderly had to change someone's diaper, or give someone a shot. I heard many?disturbing things there and the only laughter I heard would be?when my friends came to visit me and it would come from us. The food?was?pretty bad consisting almost entirely of carbs with only the occasional protein except for the milk which I was thankful was plentiful.?The medical care was likewise horrible.?The supervising doctors were never on the premises and they didn't allow antiseptics (like alcohol) on open wounds only antibiotic ointments.?When?my road rash got infected with MRSA, I had to convince the nurse to?use the vodka that my friends had smuggled in to me to dress the wound, and it took?almost a week for the doctor?to prescribe?IV?vancomycin to?clear the infection. My observation was that the happiest people there were the ones that were sufficiently able-bodied to leave during the day and return at night. The?whole mood of the place could be summarized by the satff's?choice of?Halloween decorations: a life-size paper cutout of the grim reaper?looming in the hallway as you wheeled your chair past.?This experience sure put the anti-aging aspects of H+ into perspective for me. And I shant be returning to a place like that, not when the world offers so many fine ways to die.? Stuart LaForge "What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight." - Joseph Joubert From pharos at gmail.com Wed Jun 2 21:43:39 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 22:43:39 +0100 Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 6/2/10, The Avantguardian wrote: > > While both Spike and Bill make good points, I doubt the authors of the NYT article, > or the researchers they mentioned, interviewed any elderly in nursing homes. It was a telephone poll, so they probably phoned people at home, who would probably be reasonably healthy. Sick people at any age are generally not too happy with the way life is treating them. The geriatric sick have very little to look forward to. (On the other hand, I have heard good stories about hospice care for the terminally ill). So I agree that my comments assume old age and good health. BillK From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 2 21:58:05 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 16:58:05 -0500 Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com> On 6/2/2010 4:15 PM, The Avantguardian wrote: > I can say quite assuredly that whatever natural happiness age brings the elderly, nursing homes rob them of it. My first night there I could not sleep on account of the many moans, groans, and occasionally the plea to God for death. Octagenarians were calling for their mommies and daddies. Then there were the loud screeching protests whenever a nurse or orderly had to change someone's diaper, or give someone a shot. I heard many disturbing things there and the only laughter I heard would be when my friends came to visit me and it would come from us. > > The food was pretty bad consisting almost entirely of carbs with only the occasional protein except for the milk which I was thankful was plentiful. The medical care was likewise horrible. Barbara and I have been idly musing for some years on the possibility of opening an optimal nursing home for elderly transhumanists (including us--which is one of our main motivators--not that many years or, one might hope, decades away!), but obviously it would need a major capital infusion and even then most of those who might consider using its facilities are scattered around the USA and the rest of the planet and probably unwilling to move. Damien Broderick From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Thu Jun 3 00:13:16 2010 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 17:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: <4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com> References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> ----- Original Message ---- > From: Damien Broderick > To: ExI chat list > Sent: Wed, June 2, 2010 2:58:05 PM > Subject: Re: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says Damien wrote: > Barbara and I have > been idly musing for some years on the possibility of opening an optimal nursing > home for elderly transhumanists (including us--which is one of our main > motivators--not that many years or, one might hope, decades away!), but > obviously it would need a major capital infusion and even then most of those who > might consider using its facilities are scattered around the USA and the rest of > the planet and probably unwilling to move. That is a really good idea, Damien, but perhaps you are limiting your options unnecessarily by thinking of a specific location?for such an establishment. I think maybe your idea would be better served by setting up an H+?health insurance company that would pay higher than normal?coverage but have equivalently higher standards of care aimed toward the transhumanist community. Things such as nutritional supplements, cutting-edge treatment options, morale/quality of life programs,?and a medical staff trained in?prepping?patients for cryogenic suspension could all be offered as part of the policy. One could?specify these things into contracts with any nursing homes willing to comply with and become certified in?such additional standards of care. Enforcement of these standards could consist of routine?inspections by the H+ insurance reps as well as questionaires to the clients. Admittedly such a business model would still require the infusion of substantial capital, however the?scattered nature of transhumanists would pose less a problem for it then?setting up an actual nursing home somewhere.?? Stuart LaForge "What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight." - Joseph Joubert From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 3 00:57:13 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 17:57:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? In-Reply-To: <114068.47024.qm@web30103.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <66467.21692.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <114068.47024.qm@web30103.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <52BF92BDA16F4EF2B63E5887D97E58B5@spike> >> I haven't read the book, but that review almost sounds like >> what Darwin carefully differentiated as two separate effects: >> survival selection and mate selection... spike > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dan > Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 11:23 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] What Darwin Got Wrong? > > I'm reading the book before making any detailed comments, > but, so far, the authors haven't differentiated between the > two -- and I really don't think there's much of a difference > between them... Dan Hmmm, I do respectfully disagree sir. To really understand evolution and Darwin's classic, one must recognize the critical difference between these two evolutionary mechanisms, and all the implications for how it drives evolution. In most mammals and reptilians, mate selection is not as strong a driver because female choice is not highly enabled: the dominant males have large harems. In the great apes, the dominant male gets most of the sex. But humans are an intriquing oddball case: female choice is highly enabled, and perhaps getting moreso over time. So that causes humans to develop a wild and interesting array of behaviors to attract mates. Ours species is way out there in that we have a mind-boggling complicated mating dance compared to every other species I can imagine. A good exercise for the evolution fan is to really concentrate and think the hell out of mate selection vs survival selection, and ponder all the many implications. spike From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 3 02:05:50 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 19:05:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: <42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com> <42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike> > ...On Behalf Of The Avantguardian ... > Damien wrote: > > > Barbara and I have > > been idly musing for some years on the possibility of opening an > > optimal nursing home for elderly transhumanists... > > ...Things such as nutritional > supplements, cutting-edge treatment options, morale/quality > of life programs,?and a medical staff trained in?prepping? > patients for cryogenic suspension could all be offered... Stuart LaForge I have been thinking about this for years, decades actually. I had a mercifully short stint as a nursing home assistant when in college, only because the place desperately needed able-bodied help and noooobody wanted to work there, nobody. One of the big problems of the very sick elderly was in elimination of solid waste. In many cases, bowel control had failed, leading to honest to god genuine misery for the elderly sufferer, the kind of misery which leads one to cry out for merciful death. Do let us draw the curtain of mercy on the incident that is burned into my memory like a cattle brand on tender flesh. I had a notion that we could build a device which would insert into the rectum with a water-driven enclosed whirling blade which would frappe the shit and allow it to be washed out painlessly. If done properly I can imagine a semi-permanently installed device with a water line about the diameter of a small woman's thumb, with an in-body processing device perhaps thrice that diameter, reducing discomfort to the rectal sphincter. A device of that size might be able to stay in place without excess discomfort to the patient, certainly nothing in comparison to the procedure that must be followed in the event of catastrophic constipation followed by the sometimes fatal impacted colon. Do take my word for it on this one, oy, as a second-hand observer who never wishes to see that again ever. I can imagine really good individualized virtual realities for the elderly. The flat screen monitors like the one you are now using could be adapted into a dome that would create a terrific VR environment. This could be controlled by the patients to be wildly entertaining methinks. If one could have really good entertainment for the immobile and some good means of getting rid of the solids, those two advances would be an enormous step forward. I do hope Damien and Barbara, and perhaps others with influence such as business-minded people like our own Stuart Avantguardian LaForge manage to organize such an effort, and get the right people on it. Plenty of geezers have piles of money with nothing left to spend it on, other than really good end-game care. I can imagine a high-end (spendy) terminal and elder care facilities taking off like wildfire. spike From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 3 03:23:10 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 20:23:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] nursing homes, was RE: NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: <0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike> References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com><42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike> Message-ID: > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > ...> > One of the big problems of the very sick elderly was in > elimination of solid waste. In many cases, bowel control had > failed, leading to honest to god genuine misery for the > elderly sufferer, the kind of misery which leads one to cry > out for merciful death. > > Do let us draw the curtain of mercy on the incident that is > burned into my memory like a cattle brand on tender flesh... spike OK, well I had a change of heart on this topic. I decided to post this story about something that happened over 30 yrs ago, but I remember as if it happened yesterday. It was close to the end of the school year, employees at the local low-end elder care facility (with mostly Medicare patients) were fleeing the worst job they would ever have. The desperately short-handed facility was reaching out for anyone who would work for minimum wage and would not steal the patients' pain medications. But these two characteristics were my *only* *qualifications* for that job. I had exactly zero medical training and the place offered no real on-the-job training for temps. So. This place was set up in something like a letter H with four wings. One of the wings was the Alzheimer's patients. The lowest ranking employees worked that wing because the patients there were unlikely to complain or report to anyone. They preferred to staff it with men if possible, since some of the male Alzheimer's patients can be dangerous, and men are more likely to absorb a blow without serious damage. So there I was. Night shift, with another temp who had been there about three weeks longer than I, with similar qualifications. One of our patients on the Alzheimer's wing was a really far-gone elderly lady, a forgotten gray raisin of a human being, hadn't spoken a word in over a year, almost couldn't move at all, no visitors, blind and apparently deaf, a breathing corpse. She needed to be spoon fed, she was unable to sit on a toilet, so she had a diaper, which needed changing often. The bowel had failed, so she was on a low fiber diet, but every few days some unfortunate staffer had to put on a latex glove, grease up and go in for a clean-out. Night shift, it fell to us. I was no expert, but I was pretty sure what we were doing was very wrong there, unethical at least, if not illegal. No doctor in house, the nurses were elsewhere, we had no formal training. Two temps were doing something we were grossly unqualified to do, under direct written orders from a supervisor who was a registered nurse. My colleague had smaller hands, so she got the honors. Upon commencement of the procedure, this Alheimers patient who hadn't spoken in a year, moaned as plain as your own voice, "...ooooohhh god that hurts..." I said "OK stop this right now, dammit." I went and found a nurse, who gave her some additional pain meds. We finished that distasteful task with the patient in a drug induced stupor. She perished a couple weeks later. That nursing home went out of business in 1997. This incident is chapter 1 of 2. I do not know why I felt it necessary to write that experience, but there it is. spike From aware at awareresearch.com Thu Jun 3 03:05:59 2010 From: aware at awareresearch.com (Aware) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 20:05:59 -0700 Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 2:15 PM, The Avantguardian wrote: > > My observation was that the happiest people there were the ones that were sufficiently able-bodied to leave during the day and return at night. The?whole mood of the place could be summarized by the satff's?choice of?Halloween decorations: a life-size paper cutout of the grim reaper?looming in the hallway as you wheeled your chair past.?This experience sure put the anti-aging aspects of H+ into perspective for me. And I shant be returning to a place like that, not when the world offers so many fine ways to die. At the heart of this is that on the Extropy list, we should know better than to conflate chronological aging with senescence and loss of abilities. - Jef From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Thu Jun 3 03:19:29 2010 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 20:19:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] to install Message-ID: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> The conversation went, "Well if you are going to go to church, you might well as be..." I agree. I think churches are a really good place to learn moral and valued skills. Not as a mortar but a place that people go for guidance that doesn't cost them. Not every parent has the answers even if you wish them to teach "morals", "values" and philosophy. I think every parent wants to install basic common adversities. Education has proved that the smarter (the more memory) you have does not produce always the exact behavior that is anticipated. Why shouldn't there be a place that people can go to feel loved? There is a big division between the institution and the philosophy. Does eveyone agree? Just curious Anna From x at extropica.org Thu Jun 3 04:13:09 2010 From: x at extropica.org (x at extropica.org) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 21:13:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Anna Taylor wrote: > The conversation went, "Well if you are going to go to church, you might well as be..." > > I agree. ?I think churches are a really good place to learn moral and valued skills. Not as a mortar but a place that people go for guidance that doesn't cost them. ?Not every parent has the answers even if you wish them to teach "morals", "values" and philosophy. ?I think every parent wants to install basic common adversities. ?Education has proved that the smarter (the more memory) you have does not produce always the exact behavior that is anticipated. Why shouldn't there be a place that people can go to feel loved? ?There is a big division between the institution and the philosophy. ?Does eveyone agree? Anna, I would suggest watching this video before continuing the discussion. - Jef From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 3 04:23:11 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 21:23:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > ...On Behalf Of Anna Taylor > Subject: [ExI] to install > > The conversation went, "Well if you are going to go to > church, you might well as be..." > > I agree. I think churches are a really good place to learn > moral and valued skills... Does eveyone agree? > > Just curious > Anna Hi Anna, goooood question. In my own case in having to instill moral values in my own 3 yr old son, I am stuck in a wildly paradoxical position. I can allow him to go with his mother to church, but I am in a position of having to carefully explain that while the ethical and moral values are OK, the entire theory behind them, the entire memetic infrastructure in support of it, is *completely* wrong, no truth there at all. So what would go on in the mind of a child, given such instruction? I haven't said anything yet, but I flatly refuse to tell him anything I know to be false. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 3 05:15:29 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 00:15:29 -0500 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C073A71.8050302@satx.rr.com> On 6/2/2010 11:13 PM, x at extropica.org wrote: > Anna, I would suggest watching this video before continuing the discussion. > > Check out The Intelligence? Debate - Christopher Hitchens (Unedited) while you're there. From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Thu Jun 3 04:55:50 2010 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 21:55:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <226022.28594.qm@web110407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Thank you Jef. Yes I watched it when you posted it on facebook. Again, my... was exactly what you would call Catholic or others would call synoguoges or place of worship. My comment was not in referal to a suggestive church or religion it was about "churches", which I believe should be called: A place to help others at no cost. Probably the wrong choice of words. How about "A place to be nice?". When I replied it was because someone mentioned, "well parents should just teach their children". My apology if that wasn't clear. Not all adults have been well taught, where can they go to get spiritual help? I still think churches should be a place of spiritual growth but i'm aware that it's not that easy. Just as it isn't just that easy to ban churches and expect spiritual growth to simply appear without any form of guidance. I really did enjoy the video, very educational although I was very much aware of many of the points already made. Again, maybe "churches" wasn't the right word. I'll think about it some more, thanks Anna --- On Thu, 6/3/10, x at extropica.org wrote: > From: x at extropica.org > Subject: Re: [ExI] to install > To: "ExI chat list" > Received: Thursday, June 3, 2010, 12:13 AM > On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Anna > Taylor > wrote: > > The conversation went, "Well if you are going to go to > church, you might well as be..." > > > > I agree. ?I think churches are a really good place to > learn moral and valued skills. Not as a mortar but a place > that people go for guidance that doesn't cost them. ?Not > every parent has the answers even if you wish them to teach > "morals", "values" and philosophy. ?I think every parent > wants to install basic common adversities. ?Education has > proved that the smarter (the more memory) you have does not > produce always the exact behavior that is anticipated. Why > shouldn't there be a place that people can go to feel loved? > ?There is a big division between the institution and the > philosophy. ?Does eveyone agree? > > > Anna, I would suggest watching this video before continuing > the discussion. > > > > - Jef > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 06:25:33 2010 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:55:33 +0930 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 3 June 2010 13:53, spike wrote: > Hi Anna, goooood question. ?In my own case in having to instill moral values > in my own 3 yr old son, I am stuck in a wildly paradoxical position. ?I can > allow him to go with his mother to church, but I am in a position of having > to carefully explain that while the ethical and moral values are OK, the > entire theory behind them, the entire memetic infrastructure in support of > it, is *completely* wrong, no truth there at all. > > So what would go on in the mind of a child, given such instruction? ?I > haven't said anything yet, but I flatly refuse to tell him anything I know > to be false. > > spike I've always communicated to my kids that religion was just wrong, and definitely no church. They're two of the loveliest people you'd ever meet. I wouldn't worry too much :-) -- Emlyn http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog Find me on Facebook and Buzz From ddraig at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 06:32:11 2010 From: ddraig at gmail.com (ddraig) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 16:32:11 +1000 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 3 June 2010 13:19, Anna Taylor wrote: > Why shouldn't there be a place that people can go to feel loved? > What if you are gay, or of some wildly different faith? What then? It seems to me that pretty much all churches are places you can go to feel loved *as long as you fit into their narrow definition of allowable memesets* If I want to feel loved, I'll go to rave. Ooooooodles of love, gushing out all over everyone there. I don't buy into this concept that you need to believe in some giant invisible sapce-wizard to lead a moral life. I grew up reading a lot of greek and roman classics from an early age. I am an extremely moral and upright person. Annoyingly so, according to most of the people I know. My parents are *fiercely* anti-religion and the only time I have *ever* been to a church is for a wedding. Or a funeral. Sometimes I'll rock up to cathedral to ooh and aaah at the architecture. It seems to me if you can't teach your children morals and values without some external (and bullshit-based) structure and support group, you're failing as a parent. I'd say you should not have had kids at all, but that tends to get breeders all flippy-outy and punchy-punchy. Dwayne -- ddraig at pobox.com irc.deoxy.org #chat ...r.e.t.u.r.n....t.o....t.h.e....s.o.u.r.c.e... http://www.barrelfullofmonkeys.org/Data/3-death.jpg our aim is wakefulness, our enemy is dreamless sleep -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 06:35:00 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 23:35:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Tomorrow night I may be going with friends to see a supposedly very disturbing new horror film, but the chills I received reading this thread will top anything I might experience there... As a teenager I volunteered to read the Bible to an elderly woman who had had a stroke and also suffered from Alzheimer's. Despite this, her eyes would light up when she saw me, and once in a blue moon her mind would seem to partially clear & she would try to communicate. I felt very relieved and even happy when I received the news that she had finally died (a few years later). John On 6/2/10, Aware wrote: > On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 2:15 PM, The Avantguardian > wrote: >> >> My observation was that the happiest people there were the ones that were >> sufficiently able-bodied to leave during the day and return at night. >> The?whole mood of the place could be summarized by the satff's?choice >> of?Halloween decorations: a life-size paper cutout of the grim >> reaper?looming in the hallway as you wheeled your chair past.?This >> experience sure put the anti-aging aspects of H+ into perspective for me. >> And I shant be returning to a place like that, not when the world offers >> so many fine ways to die. > > At the heart of this is that on the Extropy list, we should know > better than to conflate chronological aging with senescence and loss > of abilities. > > - Jef > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 06:54:36 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 23:54:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hold on here, for those of you who reject conservative mainstream/old school denominations & faiths, why not attend a Unitarian Universalist congregation?? LOL I have attended Unitarian services a few times, and they definitely teach ethics (special classes for the children) & also have fun social gatherings. I am very impressed with what I have heard about their "OWL" training program to teach kids about sex. John On 6/2/10, ddraig wrote: > On 3 June 2010 13:19, Anna Taylor wrote: > > >> Why shouldn't there be a place that people can go to feel loved? >> > > What if you are gay, or of some wildly different faith? What then? It seems > to me that pretty much all churches are places you can go to feel loved *as > long as you fit into their narrow definition of allowable memesets* > > > If I want to feel loved, I'll go to rave. Ooooooodles of love, gushing out > all over everyone there. > > > I don't buy into this concept that you need to believe in some giant > invisible sapce-wizard to lead a moral life. I grew up reading a lot of > greek and roman classics from an early age. I am an extremely moral and > upright person. Annoyingly so, according to most of the people I know. My > parents are *fiercely* anti-religion and the only time I have *ever* been to > a church is for a wedding. Or a funeral. > > Sometimes I'll rock up to cathedral to ooh and aaah at the architecture. > It seems to me if you can't teach your children morals and values without > some external (and bullshit-based) structure and support group, you're > failing as a parent. I'd say you should not have had kids at all, but that > tends to get breeders all flippy-outy and punchy-punchy. > > > Dwayne > -- > ddraig at pobox.com irc.deoxy.org #chat > ...r.e.t.u.r.n....t.o....t.h.e....s.o.u.r.c.e... > http://www.barrelfullofmonkeys.org/Data/3-death.jpg > our aim is wakefulness, our enemy is dreamless sleep > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 07:09:28 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 00:09:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] two observations In-Reply-To: References: <82E79D4B70CF4A39B3B4043DE0FAAB30@DFC68LF1> <1448B5D2E0D247BFB7154B0708D5BF59@spike> <591758.37864.qm@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: When I was new to Arizona I encountered a large soft object bouncing off my head. I looked down and there was a fairly large tarantula who was obviously used to walking on the ceiling, but it had gotten too big for such an activity and so gravity took over! lol I remember another time when a large white spider (the size of a large tarantula, I assume it was one) came inside and ran around the place like a speed demon! I'd never seen a tarantula move like this (I always thought they were fairly slow moving creatures) and I could not catch the lightning fast arachnid. I opened up a door and amazingly, the spider ran right out and I never saw it again. I sometimes wonder if there was a genetic engineering lab nearby... John On 6/2/10, spike wrote: > > > ...On Behalf Of Kevin Freels > Subject: Re: [ExI] two observations > > >>I think it's interesting the way spiders fly... > > >...As I turned my head to follow I could see hundreds, or perhaps > thousands of spider silk strands shimmering in the sky. It was weird, but > beautiful... > > > Spiders are an example of bugs with the habit of doing something in unison, > like your thousands of silk strands example. My own is when I went on a > motorcycle ride in the Mojave Desert on a hot spring morning in 1984, soon > after having moved there. I had never seen a tarantula, but that day I saw > one, stopped, examined it. Then another and another, as I headed out toward > Death Valley. Then dozens per mile, crossing the road, from east to west, > all of them walking walking walking, like something out of a horror flick. > Oy. Good thing I like bugs, jeeeeez. > > That was the only time I ever actually saw a tarantula migration in > progress, even though I went out there on that same road dozens of times. > > spike > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSIGcWATJ3g > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 07:19:55 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 00:19:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Jeanne Robinson, wife of Spider Robinson, has died due to cancer Message-ID: One of my favorite science fiction writers, Spider Robinson, has shared this about the passing of his wife from cancer. If you have not read Robinson's the "Callahan's Saloon" novels, you should. They are among the most humanistic and touching sf/fantasy stories I have ever read. Subject: Buchi Eihei In pacem From: Spider Jeanne Robinson left this life at about 4:45 Sunday afternoon, a gentle smile on her face. Her departure was quite peaceful and she was in no pain at all. (Buchi Eihei means "dancing wisdom, eternal peace". It's the name Jeanne's Soto Zen instructor bestowed on her). --Spider" From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jun 3 09:41:59 2010 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:41:59 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <718218.72776.qm@web27003.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Spike wrote:" In my own case in having to instill moral values in my own 3 yr old son, I am stuck in a wildly paradoxical position. I can allow him to go with his mother to church, but I am in a position of having to carefully explain that while the ethical and moral values are OK, the entire theory behind them, the entire memetic infrastructure in support of it, is *completely* wrong, no truth there at all. So what would go on in the mind of a child, given such instruction? I haven't said anything yet, but I flatly refuse to tell him anything I know to be false. spike" Here we hit the big question - how to install a filter against memetic infiltration that will last until adult reasoning is sufficiently developed and will hopefully provide backup when they're adults. A three year-old is still at the stage where magical thinking comes naturally. You read the them a fairy tale and read them a short story by a master of western literature, and they'll probably think the fairy tale makes more sense than the literature. As psychology is full of contradictory studies, I honestly couldn't say how long a period of magical thinking is necessary for normal development. The traditional method of keeping your child free from the strange ideas of people not like yourself is to ram their brains full of the traditions and ideas of people like yourself so anything they're exposed to will bounce off your pre-installed ideas. But you've dumped the traditions of your people in order to embrace shiny and new philosophical ideas of the future. So, do you try and teach them sensibly and hope they don't pick up strange memes from the people they meet at school? Or do you go radical transhumanist and make up fairy stories about the future - teach Nick Bostrom's parable of the great dragon as if it is prophecy, read Dr Broderick's tales for children each night, and tell them that there's no such thing as a soul or how do you hope to be uploaded? Admittedly, this may cause some dogmatic thinking on their part when they're grown up, but looking at this list's arguments there's plenty of Idees fixe amongst articulate and apparently rational transhumanists. Finally, to play devil's advocate - what if your children just aren't as rational and intelligent as you? Of course, your child is special and will go on to do great things and live out your dreams by proxy. But just suppose for a minute your cosy illusion is utterly wrong, and there's nothing special about your child - they're firmly in the 95-105 IQ range, no more given to logic or dreaming than any other kid in their class - are you quite sure your methods for protecting them from harmful memes will still work? Tom From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 10:57:43 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 03:57:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <226022.28594.qm@web110407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <226022.28594.qm@web110407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C078AA7.108@mac.com> Anna Taylor wrote: > Thank you Jef. Yes I watched it when you posted it on facebook. Again, my... was exactly what you would call Catholic or others would call synoguoges or place of worship. My comment was not in referal to a suggestive church or religion it was about "churches", which I believe should be called: A place to help others at no cost. How is that? There are huge costs. They instill mystical claptrap as the basis for everything they teach. It becomes a sort of package deal in the minds of many. The claptrap is the reason why the morality is so and the reason why every thing good in their lives is good is because they are good. Vicious circle. This is not by accident. Religions are designed to install themselves in this way. Instead of learning ethics on the basis of reason and reality a version of ethics is learned based on mysticism and acceptance on faith. This is incredibly costly. It splits the mind that takes it seriously. Most minds don't take it that seriously out of self-defense. As a result ethics becomes this untrustworthy realm one gives lip service to but really does not have integrated at all. Morality is split from reality. The mind compartmentalizes after all and simply will no longer look at some things deeply. Very costly. On top of this churches generally encourage heavy tithing and other volunteering of "time and talents". More costs. > Probably the wrong choice of words. How about "A place to be nice?". I actually agree with part of that. A place where you just let down the card and open your heart right on up. Seems to me we can do that and make places to do with one another without all the rest though. > When I replied it was because someone mentioned, "well parents should just teach their children". My apology if that wasn't clear. Not all adults have been well taught, where can they go to get spiritual help? What exactly is this "spiritual" help? You mean just life help and learning to be as well as you can be and enjoy life and be a boon to self and others? You don't need religion for that. There is humanism, self-help groups, therapy, trusted friends, support systems - all without church or religion. > I still think churches should be a place of spiritual growth but i'm aware that it's not that easy. Just as it isn't just that easy to ban churches and expect spiritual growth to simply appear without any form of guidance. Same question. What is "spiritual growth" as opposed to just plain growth as a human being (and more)? I am very curious about that. I know from experience that it can feel different, very different. But I am not at all sure why or that the why is something to be trusted. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 11:07:44 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 04:07:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C078D00.203@mac.com> ddraig wrote: > On 3 June 2010 13:19, Anna Taylor > wrote: > > > Why shouldn't there be a place that people can go to feel loved? > > > What if you are gay, or of some wildly different faith? What then? It > seems to me that pretty much all churches are places you can go to > feel loved *as long as you fit into their narrow definition of > allowable memesets* Depends on the church. As the Mormons came up recently I most definitely would not recommend being or attempting to become Mormon if you are queer in gender and/or sexuality. I had friends in both camps that went through a great deal of pain and damage due to the Mormon stance on such things. It was no accident that the Mormons were strongly involved in stopping gay marriage in California. That said, there are open and accepting congregations in various faith traditions. > > If I want to feel loved, I'll go to rave. Ooooooodles of love, gushing > out all over everyone there. > Oh yeah. Very powerful too. And for that group "psychic bond" thing I recommend a good wiccan ritual. Don't buy into the bizarre mysticism but way more of that energy than I ever felt in church. > > I don't buy into this concept that you need to believe in some giant > invisible sapce-wizard to lead a moral life. I grew up reading a lot > of greek and roman classics from an early age. I am an extremely moral > and upright person. Annoyingly so, according to most of the people I > know. My parents are *fiercely* anti-religion and the only time I have > *ever* been to a church is for a wedding. Or a funeral. > > Sometimes I'll rock up to cathedral to ooh and aaah at the architecture. > It seems to me if you can't teach your children morals and values > without some external (and bullshit-based) structure and support > group, you're failing as a parent. I'd say you should not have had > kids at all, but that tends to get breeders all flippy-outy and > punchy-punchy. Yes. I would go further and say that you can't really teach morals and values without screwing up their minds unless you teach it devoid of mystical nonsense. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 11:21:51 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 04:21:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C07904F.7020304@mac.com> spike wrote: > > > >> ...On Behalf Of Anna Taylor >> Subject: [ExI] to install >> >> The conversation went, "Well if you are going to go to >> church, you might well as be..." >> >> I agree. I think churches are a really good place to learn >> moral and valued skills... Does eveyone agree? >> >> Just curious >> Anna >> > > Hi Anna, goooood question. In my own case in having to instill moral values > in my own 3 yr old son, I am stuck in a wildly paradoxical position. At that age the basic lesson, which may not take for a few years, is that other people are just like him inside and their feelings and needs matter to them the same way his do to him. I remember very distinctly the moment in my childhood when I really got that all the way through. Much of the rest of interpersonal ethics grows out of that. The other part of morality is learning to not attempt to bullshit reality in any way whatsoever. It is learning to be rational and seeks to "make it real", to actually achieve, gain and maintain what you actually value including the wellbeing of others you value. That honest to reality thing will not make life easy with respect to so many he will interact with who are nearly explicitly taught to be dishonest or that their is something more important than reality. But it is very very important. > I can > allow him to go with his mother to church, but I am in a position of having > to carefully explain that while the ethical and moral values are OK, I don't think the ethical and moral values taught their are ok. They are based on a non-reality set of premises and thus are ungrounded pronouncements. They teach that anything done for yourself, because you value it (however rationally) is probably problematic and at the least not nearly so good as doing things for "others" - any old others, preferably for complete strangers one has no rational interest in whatsoever. This is a near complete perversion of honest sane ethical and moral values. > the > entire theory behind them, the entire memetic infrastructure in support of > it, is *completely* wrong, no truth there at all. > If they basis is wrong then in effect saying the ethics is ok is saying that ungrounded ethical commandments that cannot be understood to the root are "ok". Do you really think so? > So what would go on in the mind of a child, given such instruction? I > haven't said anything yet, but I flatly refuse to tell him anything I know > to be false. > That is good. Careful of sins of omission though. :) - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bbenzai at yahoo.com Thu Jun 3 13:10:02 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 06:10:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <806777.72030.qm@web114420.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> In addition to what's already been said, the morality taught by religions is inevitably based on the idea that the greatest good is voluntary (and sometimes not so voluntary) subjugation to a higher power. That's hardly morality, it's slavery and bullying. The fact that the higher power almost certainly doesn't even exist, just makes it (slightly) worse. Richard Dawkins calls religious education of children child abuse, and I tend to agree. Finally, it seems that the more religious a community is, the /less/ moral it's members seem to be, as they are more willing to suspend or override ordinary morality for the sake of an illusory 'greater good'. There's never been a pogrom, crusade or suicide bombing in the name of atheism. Ben Zaiboc From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 13:27:08 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:27:08 +0200 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 3 June 2010 05:19, Anna Taylor wrote: > I think churches are a really good place to learn moral and valued skills. Not as a mortar but a place that people go for guidance that doesn't cost them. ?Not every parent has the answers even if you wish them to teach "morals", "values" and philosophy. Yes, as long as one shares the moral, values and philosophy of the church concerned. Which is also true for meetings of the KKK or the communist party, btw. -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 13:31:29 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:31:29 +0200 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <4C07904F.7020304@mac.com> References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4C07904F.7020304@mac.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/3 samantha : > spike wrote: > I don't think the ethical and moral values taught there are ok. Yes, I suppose that this is the crux of the matter. Even though I am not especially a fan of "religious" jargon, nor am persuaded that we should indulge in it, I would have nothing per se against the fact of children going once a week to a building called "church of Extropy"... ;-) -- Stefano Vaj From pharos at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 13:40:01 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 14:40:01 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL Message-ID: The Lights in the Tunnel: Automation, Accelerating Technology and the Economy of the Future by Martin Ford This book is now available as a (no charge) downloadable pdf file from: Kindle Price: $8.17 from Amazon The author writes: The book is roughly divided into two parts. The first part argues that automation technology is ultimately going to advance to the point where most average workers will be unable to find employment within their capabilities. The second part of the book proposes some fairly radical ideas about how we might adapt capitalism to the new reality if jobs are in fact going to disappear for most people. Many people see the logic in my argument about where automation technology is going to ultimately lead, but very few people are ready to really think about the solutions?because there probably are not any solutions that aren?t fairly radical. I?ve found that most people who try to address this start by denying the premise: we?ll never have massive unemployment due to technology, so it won?t be a problem. Ok, but can you sustain capitalism without reform if you accept the premise? Remember that technology would not stop advancing, so we could reasonably expect that over time, a smaller and smaller fraction of the population would have marketable skills. If we take things to the extreme, the advent of genuinely intelligent machines could conceivably vaporize almost the entire job market. Advanced virtual reality technology?perhaps linking directly into your brain?might someday even eliminate opportunities for human celebrities and entertainers. Who could compete with that kind of digital fantasy? If most people don?t have jobs, where does consumer spending come from? What drives the economy? Why would automated production continue if there is no one to buy the output? --------------- BillK From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 3 14:07:03 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 07:07:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3BCC00DD57A44EFAB847E2E365C1C58D@spike> > ...On Behalf Of Emlyn > > On 3 June 2010 13:53, spike wrote: > > ...the entire memetic infrastructure in support of it, is *completely* > wrong, no truth there at all... spike > > I've always communicated to my kids that religion was just > wrong, and definitely no church. They're two of the loveliest > people you'd ever meet. ... :-) Emlyn Ja Emlyn but you may be crediting the memeset for their good character and wellbeing, when the credit should go to the genes. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 3 14:07:04 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 09:07:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <806777.72030.qm@web114420.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <806777.72030.qm@web114420.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C07B708.5010604@satx.rr.com> On 6/3/2010 8:10 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > There's never been a pogrom, crusade or suicide bombing in the name of atheism. Erm, never heard of the Soviet Union, Ben? China's assaults on woowoo Falun Gong? Arguably these were and are in the *name* of atheism, especially in the USSR, although actually in the service of unprincipled authoritarian power. Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 3 14:41:29 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 07:41:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > ...On Behalf Of John Grigg ... > Subject: Re: [ExI] to install > > Hold on here, for those of you who reject conservative > mainstream/old school denominations & faiths, why not attend > a Unitarian Universalist congregation?? LOL... John Ja! I have seen that UU definitely does not require belief in anything. It seems like taking an already bland religious memeset such as Presbyterian and stripping away every last vestige of supernatural, but keeping the ethics and morals. The thing that made me squirm in UU was what felt to me like leanings toward socialism. It just felt a bit too upper class for my modest upbringing. We need to come up with a version of UU for hardcore minarcho-capitalists. This old world is not finished with the economics of scarcity. spike From pharos at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 14:45:08 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:45:08 +0100 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <3BCC00DD57A44EFAB847E2E365C1C58D@spike> References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <3BCC00DD57A44EFAB847E2E365C1C58D@spike> Message-ID: On 6/3/10, spike wrote: > Ja Emlyn but you may be crediting the memeset for their good character and > wellbeing, when the credit should go to the genes. > > Oh,ohh. I think you're making that up Spike. ;) Physical characteristics are inherited, not acquired traits. If you claim that good morals are inherited, then logically you also have to claim that bad morals are inherited, and that leads on to eugenics and attempts to clean the bad genes out of the gene pool, mass sterilisations, abortions, etc. BillK From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 14:52:25 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 07:52:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Evolution drivers, was what Darwin Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 11:35 PM, "spike" wrote: snip >?In the great apes, the dominant male gets most of the > sex. ?But humans are an intriquing oddball case: female choice is highly > enabled, and perhaps getting moreso over time. ?So that causes humans to > develop a wild and interesting array of behaviors to attract mates. ?Ours > species is way out there in that we have a mind-boggling complicated mating > dance compared to every other species I can imagine. While in recent historical times there may have been considerable female choice, that doesn't seem to have been particularly operative during the vast length of time or ancestors lived as hunter gatherers. http://cniss.wustl.edu/workshoppapers/gatpres1.pdf This article is ten years old, the book that incorporates it was published in 2006. http://books.google.com/books?id=y4aXo_125REC&dq=War+in+Human+Civilization&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=o7wHTOykFYjANZnDibYE&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false > A good exercise for the evolution fan is to really concentrate and think the > hell out of mate selection vs survival selection, and ponder all the many > implications. I think an evolutionarily successful female strategy has been to be attracted to high status males. This almost certainly goes back to the point males started provisioning females and young. High status males were better at provisioning their mates and children. What personality characteristics contributed to high status has changed over evolutionary time. For example, being a fierce warrior and a good hunter worked in hunter gatherer groups. Since the middle ages, when "stable agrarian" societies persisted for 20+ generations, different psychological traits were advantageous. The lag in the sort of men females are attracted to may not have caught up. For those of you who have not read it, I consider this paper essential to understanding the world we live in. http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/papers/Capitalism%20Genes.pdf Keith From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 16:09:38 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 18:09:38 +0200 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <4C07B708.5010604@satx.rr.com> References: <806777.72030.qm@web114420.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4C07B708.5010604@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 3 June 2010 16:07, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/3/2010 8:10 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: >> There's never been a pogrom, crusade or suicide bombing in the name of >> atheism. > > Erm, never heard of the Soviet Union, Ben? China's assaults on woowoo Falun > Gong? Arguably these were and are in the *name* of atheism, especially in > the USSR, although actually in the service of unprincipled authoritarian > power. It remains the case that speaking of "crusades" in such cases is quite metaphorical, if indeed possible. Of course, one can well fight to death for a purely secular cause. But in fact a communist militant is much more likely to become a martyr for the liberation of proletarians, for the victory of the Soviets, for the defence of the party's best interest, than to testify his or her belief as to the (non-)existence of God. ? In this sense, the fact that, say, a given Japanese kamikaze, a heroic American marine, or a German gangster might well be a motivated atheist does not make him a martyr of atheism. -- Stefano Vaj From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 3 16:16:33 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:16:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com><3BCC00DD57A44EFAB847E2E365C1C58D@spike> Message-ID: <18850B3925584AABAB9D3BFC4C982CCB@spike> > ...On Behalf Of BillK > Subject: Re: [ExI] to install > > On 6/3/10, spike wrote: > > Ja Emlyn but you may be crediting the memeset for their good > > character and wellbeing, when the credit should go to the genes. > > Oh,ohh. I think you're making that up Spike. ;) > > Physical characteristics are inherited, not acquired traits... Ja. What my notion does is to attribute to some degree one's moral intuition as a physical characteristic as opposed to an entirely acquired trait. > If you claim that good morals are inherited, then logically > you also have to claim that bad morals are inherited, and > that leads on to eugenics and attempts to clean the bad genes > out of the gene pool, mass sterilisations, abortions, etc... BillK I see the concern, however we as a species do not entirely agree on what are good morals and bad morals. Our notions are usually similar but in a few stark cases, are exactly opposite. As an example, there are those who believe in a strong version of individuality. The sturdy individual packs up a few rudamentary tools, strikes out alone for the Alaskan back country, carves out a niche with muscle, courage and determination, lives out her life as a wilderness pioneer. That appeals to me. Then there is one who might argue this is sinful selfishness, that one with this kinds of talent and energy should go live in the big city, use it to the betterment of all humanity. Then there are those who think that on the contrary, humanity already has all the breaks, and that all our energy should be devoted to helping beasts rather than helping humanity. My notion is that this predisposition to one or more of these three moral positions (individuality, humanity, beastiality) is at least partially a function of the brain's hard wiring, not strictly to influences. spike From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Thu Jun 3 16:41:20 2010 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:41:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <4C078AA7.108@mac.com> Message-ID: <365336.58048.qm@web110415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/3/10, samantha wrote: > How is that?? There are huge costs.? They instill > mystical claptrap as the basis for everything they > teach.? It becomes a sort of package deal in the minds > of many.? The claptrap is the reason why the morality > is so and the reason why every thing good in their lives is > good is because they are good.? Vicious circle.? > This is not by accident.? Religions are designed to > install themselves in this way.? Instead of learning > ethics on the basis of reason and reality a version of > ethics is learned based on mysticism and acceptance on > faith.? This is incredibly costly.? It splits the > mind that takes it seriously.???Most minds > don't take it that seriously out of self-defense.? As a > result ethics becomes this untrustworthy realm one gives lip > service to but really does not have integrated at all.? > Morality is split from reality.? The mind > compartmentalizes after all and simply will no longer look > at some things deeply.? ? Very costly. I probably didn't explain myself properly again. Yesterday I visited an old friend, that like Spike, has a 2 year old. She has recently returned to church. She is very well aware of the garbage they teach. So when I asked, "why go then?". She replied, "it's the only place I know that people help each other and help others in a community environment." I always liked church as a social network but don't agree with what is taught. --- On Thu, 6/3/10, Stefano Vaj wrote: > Even though I am not especially a fan of "religious" > jargon, nor am > persuaded that we should indulge in it, I would have > nothing per se > against the fact of children going once a week to a > building called > "church of Extropy"... ;-) Cute but that is where I was going with this. I was thinking how great it would be if people could go once a week and be taught the real facts. Learn about respect, honesty, helping others, believing in a cosmic energy for the greater good. If churches could be replaced with "Community centers" everyone would benefit. Yes I know, wishful thinking. Anna From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Jun 3 17:46:35 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 10:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <201483.33724.qm@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/3/10, BillK wrote: > Remember that technology would not stop advancing, so we > could > reasonably expect that over time, a smaller and smaller > fraction of > the population would have marketable skills. This is the central flaw in the argument. As people's current skill set becomes non-marketable, people eventually tend to acquire marketable skills to replace them. (Yes, there are some who never do. Those retire, while new workers who start off with marketable skills come in to the market. The advent of extreme longevity may skew this, because older workers will have less incentive to retire, and thus are more likely to eventually acquire marketable skills; indeed, this effect can already be observed, even with today's relatively modest lifespan increases.) From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Jun 3 17:58:43 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 10:58:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <718218.72776.qm@web27003.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <508344.37538.qm@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/3/10, Tom Nowell wrote: > Finally, to play devil's advocate - what if your children > just aren't as rational and intelligent as you? Of course, > your child is special and will go on to do great things and > live out your dreams by proxy. But just suppose for a minute > your cosy illusion is utterly wrong, and there's nothing > special about your child - they're firmly in the 95-105 IQ > range, no more given to logic or dreaming than any other kid > in their class - are you quite sure your methods for > protecting them from harmful memes will still work? IQ is only partially genetic. Education can enhance one's ability to think rationally - even to dream - and this tends to be reflected in measured IQ. If a child is taught to see how people come up with ideas, and thus to see which of these ideas are likely true and which are not, that can both increase their IQ and vaccinate against harmful memes. From pharos at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 18:32:35 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 19:32:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: <201483.33724.qm@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <201483.33724.qm@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 6/3/10, Adrian Tymes wrote: > This is the central flaw in the argument. As people's > current skill set becomes non-marketable, people eventually > tend to acquire marketable skills to replace them. (Yes, > there are some who never do. Those retire, while new > workers who start off with marketable skills come in to the > market. The advent of extreme longevity may skew this, > because older workers will have less incentive to retire, > and thus are more likely to eventually acquire marketable > skills; indeed, this effect can already be observed, even > with today's relatively modest lifespan increases.) > As the author says, you are not pointing to a flaw in the argument. You are denying that massive unemployment will ever happen. The US already has about 40 million living on food stamps (i in 8 of the population) with many jobs disappearing, never to come back. Don't you think it would be a good idea to start thinking about what changes are needed to deal with massive unempoyment and poverty? BillK From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Jun 3 18:07:33 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 14:07:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <365336.58048.qm@web110415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <365336.58048.qm@web110415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20100603140733.yyac8f37k0gcs04k@webmail.natasha.cc> How about a "Society of Extropy"? I feel a bit alone sometimes and wish there were a philosophical series of talks that I could go listen to in an architecturally stunning structure that has beautiful windows, tall ceilings, and a chorus with enchanting echoes. Closest I have come is a DJ concert in Sao Paulo, Brazil. The building was amazing, the lights mesmerizing, and music enthralling. BUT there wasn't any philosophical worldview -- no inspiring/thought-provoking textual or spoken message. Natasha Quoting Anna Taylor : > --- On Thu, 6/3/10, samantha wrote: > >> How is that?? There are huge costs.? They instill >> mystical claptrap as the basis for everything they >> teach.? It becomes a sort of package deal in the minds >> of many.? The claptrap is the reason why the morality >> is so and the reason why every thing good in their lives is >> good is because they are good.? Vicious circle.? >> This is not by accident.? Religions are designed to >> install themselves in this way.? Instead of learning >> ethics on the basis of reason and reality a version of >> ethics is learned based on mysticism and acceptance on >> faith.? This is incredibly costly.? It splits the >> mind that takes it seriously.???Most minds >> don't take it that seriously out of self-defense.? As a >> result ethics becomes this untrustworthy realm one gives lip >> service to but really does not have integrated at all.? >> Morality is split from reality.? The mind >> compartmentalizes after all and simply will no longer look >> at some things deeply.? ? Very costly. > > I probably didn't explain myself properly again. Yesterday I > visited an old friend, that like Spike, has a 2 year old. She has > recently returned to church. She is very well aware of the garbage > they teach. So when I asked, "why go then?". She replied, "it's the > only place I know that people help each other and help others in a > community environment." > > I always liked church as a social network but don't agree with what > is taught. > > --- On Thu, 6/3/10, Stefano Vaj wrote: > >> Even though I am not especially a fan of "religious" >> jargon, nor am >> persuaded that we should indulge in it, I would have >> nothing per se >> against the fact of children going once a week to a >> building called >> "church of Extropy"... ;-) > > Cute but that is where I was going with this. I was thinking how > great it would be if people could go once a week and be taught the > real facts. Learn about respect, honesty, helping others, believing > in a cosmic energy for the greater good. If churches could be > replaced with "Community centers" everyone would benefit. Yes I > know, wishful thinking. > > Anna > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Jun 3 19:00:08 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 12:00:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <535751.54382.qm@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/3/10, BillK wrote: > As the author says, you are not pointing to a flaw in the > argument. > You are denying that massive unemployment will ever happen. Two responses: 1) Massive unemployment can happen due to other causes. I am just pointing out a flaw in this particular argument. 2) Reading that as "massive unemployment *due to technological advancement*" - well, yes. Pointing out that the author's logic is flawed here does suggest that the conclusion the author draws may be in error. (But, again, that's only the expanded/specified version. Massive unemployment could well happen for other reasons.) > The US > already has about 40 million living on food stamps (i in 8 > of the > population) with many jobs disappearing, never to come > back. And how many jobs exist now in industries that didn't exist 10 years ago? Looking only at one side of the coin does not yield useful predictions. > Don't you think it would be a good idea to start thinking > about what > changes are needed to deal with massive unempoyment and > poverty? How about making enough resources in flow that tomorrow's "poverty" is today's "middle class"? Some of the poor today are better off than certain kings of a few centuries ago. From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 3 19:39:31 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 12:39:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <365336.58048.qm@web110415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <4C078AA7.108@mac.com> <365336.58048.qm@web110415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > ...On Behalf Of Anna Taylor >... Learn about respect, honesty, helping > others, believing in a cosmic energy for the greater good. > If churches could be replaced with "Community centers" > everyone would benefit. Yes I know, wishful thinking... Anna Anna, some churches are evolving into this community center notion. I know of at least one example of a fundamentalist church that went this route. It is in Palo Alto. It started back in the early 80s as a church for former Seventh Day Adventists who were no longer believers but were still technically on the membership lists. Over the years it has become the Univeralist Unitarian equivalent of a former fundamentalist church, if that makes any sense. Lee Corbin suggested a kind of innoculation against religion, where the children were introduced to a weakened form of religion for information purposes, along with the clear message that the teachings and historical accounts are not "true" in the sense of court testimony or scientific evidence, but rather an ambiguously valuable ancient folklore with some ethical and moral content, use with caution, your mileage may vary, void where prohibited etc. Lee's notion is that it would be analogous to injecting a weakened form of a pathogen in order to pump the body's immune system. The brain's memetic immune system would then become better able to resist memetic infection of fundamentalist religion or fundamentalist environmentalism or any other fundamentalist memeset. I find Lee's notion compelling. spike From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 3 21:02:20 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 14:02:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] nursing homes, was RE: NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com><42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike> Message-ID: <8AEE0087FD3C4D02A01B80579F3BDDFF@spike> > ...On Behalf Of spike >... this Alheimers patient who > hadn't spoken in a year, moaned as plain as your own voice, > "...ooooohhh god that hurts..." ... That nursing home went out of business in 1997. > This incident is chapter 1 of 2... spike Chapter 2 of 2. I decided to end my temporary employment at the nursing home and take a pay cut to accept a sub-minimum wage job on campus ($2.65 an hour instead of the nursing home three bucks.) The campus job paid less but was a far more pleasant task, tutoring calculus, physics, chemistry, fortran. I met my sweetheart doing this. We graduated, married, happy years went by. Mid 1990s, my wife's grandfather began showing signs of dementia, and eventually began to wander outdoors at night, so the family decided to move him into assisted living at... the nursing home from hell. It wasn't the very worst one in existence, but it was in that range, the light blue properties on the old Monopoly board one might say. He had Medicare and a Social Security pension, which together would just cover the cost. He started in Charley wing, but soon was moved to the Delta wing and started the long walk. (Note: Delta is where the Alzheimer's patients are in lockdown always. Unlike the other wings where people sit around and converse to some extent, on Delta, there is very little conversation and nothing else to do, so the patients just go outdoors in the adjacent courtyard and walk and walk and walk until they can walk no more. The patients on Alpha, Bravo and Charley know this. They refer to the terrifying move to Delta wing as starting the long walk.) The family gathered one weekend to visit her grandfather, who was having a rare lucid day. (This was not an accident, but I will omit here the reason why he was having a lucid day.) The families are not allowed to see Delta wing, where I once worked. When the Delta families come to visit, the staff fetches the patient up to the front lobby. So we were visiting there and grandpa said "Oh, I had dinner with the *nicest* family, they have a sawmill, lotsa kids, really nice folks." We were puzzled by that comment, so I slipped away and went on back to Delta, buzzed in. When the teenage minimum wager answered, I said "Hi, former staffer, may I go back to the courtyard? I know the way." She allowed, I went back. Thru the window I saw something they didn't have when I worked there, a big screen projection TV, which was trendy spendy high-endy for 1994. Some kind soul had recorded a bunch of Walton's episodes, trimmed out the commercials and some of the tedious goodnight John Boy, goodnight Mary Ellens, go to hell Uncle Fester, etc. The nursing home played the Waltons tape continuously, a 1930s setting which was the environment of youth for many of those elderly patients. The patients slipped into that alternate reality effortlessly. So these two chapters have me thinking of improvements, big improvements, that can be made to end-game care for the elderly: mechanically facilitated solid waste removal and continuous virtual reality, guided by user preference, a bit like Second Life, only retro instead of futuristic. I hope one of ours, or someone, can create a company to develop this kind of technology, benefit humanity, and most importantly, make a buttload of money. spike From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 3 21:15:12 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 14:15:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] zubrin, sagan, et al, on mars Message-ID: Ooohh so cool, cheeeeeeck it out! This was a really special one for me. I am a personal acquaintance of Robert Zubrin. This video does such a great job of capturing the man's passion, intelligence and intensity. When speaking on the topic of Mars colonies, he really does sound exactly like this, whether at a conference or just at a casual dinner setting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ5sWfhkpE0 &feature=player_embedded spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 22:17:08 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 15:17:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <3BCC00DD57A44EFAB847E2E365C1C58D@spike> References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <3BCC00DD57A44EFAB847E2E365C1C58D@spike> Message-ID: <4C0829E4.2020901@mac.com> spike wrote: > > > >> ...On Behalf Of Emlyn >> >> On 3 June 2010 13:53, spike wrote: >> > > >>> ...the entire memetic infrastructure in support of it, is *completely* >>> >> wrong, no truth there at all... spike >> >> I've always communicated to my kids that religion was just >> wrong, and definitely no church. They're two of the loveliest >> people you'd ever meet. ... :-) Emlyn >> > > Ja Emlyn but you may be crediting the memeset for their good character and > wellbeing, when the credit should go to the genes. > Morality does not come from your genes except in those parts of it encoded in our Evolutionary Psychology. The rest is learned and applied based on reasoning. Not that many people do a good job of it. - s -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 22:18:19 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 15:18:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <4C07B708.5010604@satx.rr.com> References: <806777.72030.qm@web114420.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4C07B708.5010604@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C082A2B.2000102@mac.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/3/2010 8:10 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > >> There's never been a pogrom, crusade or suicide bombing in the name >> of atheism. > > Erm, never heard of the Soviet Union, Ben? China's assaults on woowoo > Falun Gong? Arguably these were and are in the *name* of atheism, > especially in the USSR, although actually in the service of > unprincipled authoritarian power. > That they were atheist was by no means the central part of those philosophies prompting aggression though. - s From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 22:21:03 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 15:21:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C082ACF.8000101@mac.com> spike wrote: > > > >> ...On Behalf Of John Grigg >> > ... > >> Subject: Re: [ExI] to install >> >> Hold on here, for those of you who reject conservative >> mainstream/old school denominations & faiths, why not attend >> a Unitarian Universalist congregation?? LOL... John >> > > Ja! I have seen that UU definitely does not require belief in anything. It > seems like taking an already bland religious memeset such as Presbyterian > and stripping away every last vestige of supernatural, but keeping the > ethics and morals. The thing that made me squirm in UU was what felt to me > like leanings toward socialism. It just felt a bit too upper class for my > modest upbringing. > > We need to come up with a version of UU for hardcore minarcho-capitalists. > This old world is not finished with the economics of scarcity. > > What I didn't like about UU was that it had some of the trappings of religion and dabbled around the edges of several but no real juice about those things that wasn't done better in humanitarian meetings. The social part was about the same too except again the humanitarian meetings, while smaller, felt better. YMMV and no offense to the many UU people I know. - s -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 22:27:12 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 15:27:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <18850B3925584AABAB9D3BFC4C982CCB@spike> References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <3BCC00DD57A44EFAB847E2E365C1C58D@spike> <18850B3925584AABAB9D3BFC4C982CCB@spike> Message-ID: <4C082C40.2080307@mac.com> spike wrote: > > > >> ...On Behalf Of BillK >> Subject: Re: [ExI] to install >> >> On 6/3/10, spike wrote: >> >>> Ja Emlyn but you may be crediting the memeset for their good >>> character and wellbeing, when the credit should go to the genes. >>> >> Oh,ohh. I think you're making that up Spike. ;) >> >> Physical characteristics are inherited, not acquired traits... >> > > Ja. What my notion does is to attribute to some degree one's moral > intuition as a physical characteristic as opposed to an entirely acquired > trait. > > >> If you claim that good morals are inherited, then logically >> you also have to claim that bad morals are inherited, and >> that leads on to eugenics and attempts to clean the bad genes >> out of the gene pool, mass sterilisations, abortions, etc... BillK >> > > I see the concern, however we as a species do not entirely agree on what are > good morals and bad morals. Our notions are usually similar but in a few > stark cases, are exactly opposite. > > As an example, there are those who believe in a strong version of > individuality. The sturdy individual packs up a few rudamentary tools, > strikes out alone for the Alaskan back country, carves out a niche with > muscle, courage and determination, lives out her life as a wilderness > pioneer. That appeals to me. Then there is one who might argue this is > sinful selfishness, that one with this kinds of talent and energy should go > live in the big city, use it to the betterment of all humanity. Then there > are those who think that on the contrary, humanity already has all the > breaks, and that all our energy should be devoted to helping beasts rather > than helping humanity. > Both of those have no relationship as stated with any sort of rational ethics. It is implying that all ethics are arbitrary choices of self or society and there is no such thing as an ethics grounded in reality. That is a very dangerous notion. > My notion is that this predisposition to one or more of these three moral > positions (individuality, humanity, beastiality) is at least partially a > function of the brain's hard wiring, not strictly to influences. > > What about what you THINK! Are you just a machine governed by your genetics and whatever culture you landed in or can you think and choose rationally your ethics? If you cannot then the only way to change the general ethical behavior of human societies is by eugenics and mass re-education (programming through new influences). Both have been tried with bloody and appalling results. - s -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 3 22:28:42 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 17:28:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <4C082A2B.2000102@mac.com> References: <806777.72030.qm@web114420.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4C07B708.5010604@satx.rr.com> <4C082A2B.2000102@mac.com> Message-ID: <4C082C9A.70800@satx.rr.com> On 6/3/2010 5:18 PM, samantha wrote: >> Erm, never heard of the Soviet Union, Ben? China's assaults on woowoo >> Falun Gong? Arguably these were and are in the *name* of atheism, >> especially in the USSR, although actually in the service of >> unprincipled authoritarian power. > That they were atheist was by no means the central part of those > philosophies prompting aggression though. Really? Well, of course, that Xians and Muslims were and are theists is by no means the central part of crusades, terror attacks, etc, either, if you look at underlying motives. But the religion and its authoritarian apparatus certainly provided the pretext, and so too, as I understand it, did the often murderous and expropriative assault of communist regimes on religious believers in the name of defending the nation against superstition and cult. Damien Broderick From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 22:32:41 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 15:32:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <365336.58048.qm@web110415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <365336.58048.qm@web110415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C082D89.1020002@mac.com> Anna Taylor wrote: > --- On Thu, 6/3/10, samantha wrote: > > >> How is that? There are huge costs. They instill >> mystical claptrap as the basis for everything they >> teach. It becomes a sort of package deal in the minds >> of many. The claptrap is the reason why the morality >> is so and the reason why every thing good in their lives is >> good is because they are good. Vicious circle. >> This is not by accident. Religions are designed to >> install themselves in this way. Instead of learning >> ethics on the basis of reason and reality a version of >> ethics is learned based on mysticism and acceptance on >> faith. This is incredibly costly. It splits the >> mind that takes it seriously. Most minds >> don't take it that seriously out of self-defense. As a >> result ethics becomes this untrustworthy realm one gives lip >> service to but really does not have integrated at all. >> Morality is split from reality. The mind >> compartmentalizes after all and simply will no longer look >> at some things deeply. Very costly. >> > > I probably didn't explain myself properly again. Yesterday I visited an old friend, that like Spike, has a 2 year old. She has recently returned to church. She is very well aware of the garbage they teach. So when I asked, "why go then?". She replied, "it's the only place I know that people help each other and help others in a community environment." > > I always liked church as a social network but don't agree with what is taught. > > --- On Thu, 6/3/10, Stefano Vaj wrote: > > >> Even though I am not especially a fan of "religious" >> jargon, nor am >> persuaded that we should indulge in it, I would have >> nothing per se >> against the fact of children going once a week to a >> building called >> "church of Extropy"... ;-) >> > > Cute but that is where I was going with this. I was thinking how great it would be if people could go once a week and be taught the real facts. Learn about respect, honesty, helping others, believing in a cosmic energy for the greater good. If churches could be replaced with "Community centers" everyone would benefit. Yes I know, wishful thinking. > Perhaps not. A Churh of Extropy or the equivalent could perhaps be done. Many have thought long and hard on this and a few attempts have been made to something similar. Humanitarianism attempts in its gatherings to provide something of a substitute for the good parts but the meetings I have gone to do not engage at as many levels as some other religious services do. We people who have escaped religion are very allergic to most anything that reminds us of it even if it is actually a good thing or can be used in very good ways. Which makes it difficult for such things to get off the ground. We are so justifiably proud of our mostly individualistic fight to separate ourselves from that warm but most smelly nest (if we were ever in it) that it is hard for us to build or enjoy a new nest that is not so smelly. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 22:40:42 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 15:40:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: <201483.33724.qm@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <201483.33724.qm@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C082F6A.3030203@mac.com> Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- On Thu, 6/3/10, BillK wrote: > >> Remember that technology would not stop advancing, so we >> could >> reasonably expect that over time, a smaller and smaller >> fraction of >> the population would have marketable skills. >> > > This is the central flaw in the argument. As people's > current skill set becomes non-marketable, people eventually > tend to acquire marketable skills to replace them. (Yes, > there are some who never do. Those retire, while new > workers who start off with marketable skills come in to the > market. They may retire to being street people or simply not make it. This too happens. The implied assumption that it is just a matter of willpower of deciding to learn something new is very debatable. Look at the IQ curve. How much IQ do you think is needed to become a programmer vs having been an assembly line worker? Oh, but you can get a job in construction? Nope, too many of those workers with less to do and more automation. You can work in a restaurant or burger joint? Perhaps, if you have the disposition and your burger joint does not become automated itself as many are likely to. The point is that there may not be anything at all left that pays well for a person of a certain level of intelligence as the society advances technologically. And there is nothing real that says there must be a workable niche for every human being that breathes. There is some pretty theory that it will always work out but the reality is not so pretty. I am not saying this is necessarily something we both can and should fix or at least not without MNT and/or being able to raise anyone's IQ we please. > The advent of extreme longevity may skew this, > because older workers will have less incentive to retire, > and thus are more likely to eventually acquire marketable > skills; indeed, this effect can already be observed, even > with today's relatively modest lifespan increases.) > Assuming for a moment that they are capable of learning marketable new skills, where exactly are they getting the funds to acquire these skills? Even if all the knowledge needed plus certification is freely available on the web, how do they support themselves in the meantime? - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 22:45:14 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 15:45:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <508344.37538.qm@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <508344.37538.qm@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C08307A.9050201@mac.com> Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- On Thu, 6/3/10, Tom Nowell wrote: > >> Finally, to play devil's advocate - what if your children >> just aren't as rational and intelligent as you? Of course, >> your child is special and will go on to do great things and >> live out your dreams by proxy. But just suppose for a minute >> your cosy illusion is utterly wrong, and there's nothing >> special about your child - they're firmly in the 95-105 IQ >> range, no more given to logic or dreaming than any other kid >> in their class - are you quite sure your methods for >> protecting them from harmful memes will still work? >> > > IQ is only partially genetic. Education can enhance one's > ability to think rationally - even to dream - and this tends > to be reflected in measured IQ. > > Apparently it is about 50-50 with most of the environmental aspects coming into play in the very early years. > If a child is taught to see how people come up with ideas, > and thus to see which of these ideas are likely true and > which are not, that can both increase their IQ and vaccinate > against harmful memes. > I wish it were that easy. IQ is about how easily you understand things and see their implications. Including seeing the things that you see in the above paragraph. It is not about the content per se. Effective IQ is partially about methods and ways you use you mind and that part can be optimized a bit. But it does'nt go that far. If it takes on average an IQ of say 150 to be successful in a certain profession it is extremely unlikely that an IQ 110 or even 120 will make it. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 22:47:50 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 15:47:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: References: <201483.33724.qm@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C083116.7070103@mac.com> BillK wrote: > On 6/3/10, Adrian Tymes wrote: > >> This is the central flaw in the argument. As people's >> current skill set becomes non-marketable, people eventually >> tend to acquire marketable skills to replace them. (Yes, >> there are some who never do. Those retire, while new >> workers who start off with marketable skills come in to the >> market. The advent of extreme longevity may skew this, >> because older workers will have less incentive to retire, >> and thus are more likely to eventually acquire marketable >> skills; indeed, this effect can already be observed, even >> with today's relatively modest lifespan increases.) >> >> > > > As the author says, you are not pointing to a flaw in the argument. > You are denying that massive unemployment will ever happen. The US > already has about 40 million living on food stamps (i in 8 of the > population) with many jobs disappearing, never to come back. > > Don't you think it would be a good idea to start thinking about what > changes are needed to deal with massive unempoyment and poverty? > > Yes. Start by rooting out the primary cause. The huge entitlement programs and the bloated government that attempts to manipulate economic reality in utterly irrational ways until it can't no more and the entire thing goes SPLAT! - s -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 23:04:18 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 16:04:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: <535751.54382.qm@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <535751.54382.qm@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C0834F2.6030204@mac.com> Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- On Thu, 6/3/10, BillK wrote: > >> As the author says, you are not pointing to a flaw in the >> argument. >> You are denying that massive unemployment will ever happen. >> > > Two responses: > > 1) Massive unemployment can happen due to other causes. I am > just pointing out a flaw in this particular argument. > > 2) Reading that as "massive unemployment *due to technological > advancement*" - well, yes. Pointing out that the author's > logic is flawed here does suggest that the conclusion the > author draws may be in error. (But, again, that's only the > expanded/specified version. Massive unemployment could well > happen for other reasons.) > > >> The US >> already has about 40 million living on food stamps (i in 8 >> of the >> population) with many jobs disappearing, never to come >> back. >> > > Part of the above is a feedback loop. You get more of what you pay for to put it bluntly. If you create a niche where you can survive on the dole then that niche will likely fill to its carrying capacity. We have built such a massive entitlement mentality in the process that even otherwise quite rational and even libertarian folks just sort of assume that to be born is to have the right to at least a modestly nice life. This mentality has fueled the destruction of economy after economy throughout history until the entitlements were cut back voluntarily or collapse occurred. In the US the unfunded entitlements amount to some $40 trillion in addition to a national debt that is nearly 90% of GDP. Yet with the entitlement mentality we call for yet more entitlements to fix the problems already in large part caused by the ones we already have. This is running toward the edge of the cliff full speed. But to say is to be considered heartless. > And how many jobs exist now in industries that didn't exist > 10 years ago? Looking only at one side of the coin does > not yield useful predictions. > Probably not 40 million or not that can be filled by arbitrary members of that 40 million. People are not fungible. Neither are jobs. > >> Don't you think it would be a good idea to start thinking >> about what >> changes are needed to deal with massive unempoyment and >> poverty? >> > > How about making enough resources in flow that tomorrow's > "poverty" is today's "middle class"? Some of the poor > today are better off than certain kings of a few centuries > ago. > How will you do that when you (taken individual as metaphor for nation) owe an order of magnitude more in credit card debt alone than your entire yearly income? Not to mention various promissory notes coming due that you keep kiting with new notes than total more than 4 times the huge credit card debt. I know! You will counterfeit money. :) - s -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 3 23:05:57 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 16:05:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: References: <4C078AA7.108@mac.com> <365336.58048.qm@web110415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C083555.7070208@mac.com> spike wrote: > > > >> ...On Behalf Of Anna Taylor >> ... Learn about respect, honesty, helping >> others, believing in a cosmic energy for the greater good. >> If churches could be replaced with "Community centers" >> everyone would benefit. Yes I know, wishful thinking... Anna >> > > > Anna, some churches are evolving into this community center notion. I know > of at least one example of a fundamentalist church that went this route. It > is in Palo Alto. It started back in the early 80s as a church for former > Seventh Day Adventists who were no longer believers but were still > technically on the membership lists. Over the years it has become the > Univeralist Unitarian equivalent of a former fundamentalist church, if that > makes any sense. > > Lee Corbin suggested a kind of innoculation against religion, where the > children were introduced to a weakened form of religion for information > purposes, along with the clear message that the teachings and historical > accounts are not "true" in the sense of court testimony or scientific > evidence, but rather an ambiguously valuable ancient folklore with some > ethical and moral content, use with caution, your mileage may vary, void > where prohibited etc. Lee's notion is that it would be analogous to > injecting a weakened form of a pathogen in order to pump the body's immune > system. The brain's memetic immune system would then become better able to > resist memetic infection of fundamentalist religion or fundamentalist > environmentalism or any other fundamentalist memeset. > > I find Lee's notion compelling. > It is far better to teach them to think well across multiple subjects including ethics before exposing them. - s -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Thu Jun 3 23:37:34 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 19:37:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] nursing homes, was RE: NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: <8AEE0087FD3C4D02A01B80579F3BDDFF@spike> References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com> <42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike> <8AEE0087FD3C4D02A01B80579F3BDDFF@spike> Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:02 PM, spike wrote: > So these two chapters have me thinking of improvements, big improvements, > that can be made to end-game care for the elderly: mechanically facilitated > solid waste removal and continuous virtual reality, guided by user > preference, a bit like Second Life, only retro instead of futuristic. ?I > hope one of ours, or someone, can create a company to develop this kind of > technology, benefit humanity, and most importantly, make a buttload of > money. hmm... if not money, then a buttload of ... well, what a butt is commonly loaded with. ;) (sorry Spike, you can't set that up and not expect someone to knock it down) From spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 4 00:52:49 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 17:52:49 -0700 Subject: [ExI] two observations In-Reply-To: <1448B5D2E0D247BFB7154B0708D5BF59@spike> References: <82E79D4B70CF4A39B3B4043DE0FAAB30@DFC68LF1> <1448B5D2E0D247BFB7154B0708D5BF59@spike> Message-ID: On Behalf Of spike Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 1:11 PM ... >...My folks have a toy poodle and a housecat. Both were outside when the neighbors' dog strayed over (a mongrel beast) and attacked the poodle (although without intent to slay or seriously injure.) The poodle yelped, resulting in the housecat charging the attacker, clearly *with* the intention of causing maximum harm (yowling and hissing with murder in her eye.) In all the years I have observed pets, I have never seen a housecat angrily attack a much larger dog... OK, so today the news agency comes along and outdoes my housecat story. This housecat attacked two bulldogs: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/06/03/woman.saved.by.her.cat.khou?h pt=T2 spike From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Jun 4 02:43:54 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 19:43:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Why religion at all? Message-ID: The capacity to be sucked into a religion is a widespread human behavioral trait. Evolutionary theory states that behavior traits as well as physical traits are subject to evolutionary selection. Some of these (like capture-bonding) have an obvious evolutionary selection path. Religion is a little more complex to account for. I make the case in an article I have quoted here before that the human capacity for religions is a side effect of millions of conflict events. In this context I make a case that the ability to hold a religion comes from the ability to be infected with a xenophobic meme where the function of the infection is to sync a tribe's warriors up for a do or die attempt to kill neighbors in times of ecological stress. If you look around, it's not hard to see the connection even today. Keith From spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 4 03:31:32 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 20:31:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] nursing homes, was RE: NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com><42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike><8AEE0087FD3C4D02A01B80579F3BDDFF@spike> Message-ID: > ...On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty > ... > hmm... if not money, then a buttload of ... well, what a butt > is commonly loaded with. ;) OK Mike, here's a little reminder of how things were 10 yrs ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0_tfoTTGOQ Har. OK now, how many ideas can we collect, innovative and creative ideas, to help the elderly. For this exercise, it is OK to assume the clientele has money coming out the wazoo. Example: One of the remaining big problems of the bedridden elderly, after you take care of the problem of solid waste removal is the problem of bedsores. The name makes the problem sound less trivial than it really is. If undiscovered, they can be fatal. http://library.med.utah.edu/kw/derm/mml/22320032.jpg http://www.eczema-answers.com/images/bed_sores2.jpg I had a notion that we could rig up a chair that could be gradually tilted in any direction like a 2 axis carco table. http://www.acutronic.com/upload/pdf/refurbishment_3.pdf Imagine the chair that you are now sitting in, with a hemispherical CCD dome over your head. It would be a little like those old time hair dryers the ladies used to sit under back in the 1960s, only it has what amounts to your flat screen monitor on the inside of the dome, all the way around and over. Now imagine the carco table gradually tilting your chair until your back is horizontal, and either direction so the pressure load can be smoothly transferred from back to either side to ass, allowing the skin in each pressure area to rest and restore circulation, to avoid the horrifying wounds like the ones shown in the previous links. Imagine this device operating continuously, providing a VR to the patient, removing solid waste, tilting this way and that, with a cycle lasting perhaps 10 minutes so that the motion is imperceptible to the patient. Wouldn't that be the ticket? Would not we be setting up something analogous to the Chinese opium houses? We could arrange for the sick elderly to have some fun with their last little bit of time. spike From msd001 at gmail.com Fri Jun 4 04:03:03 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 00:03:03 -0400 Subject: [ExI] nursing homes, was RE: NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com> <42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike> <8AEE0087FD3C4D02A01B80579F3BDDFF@spike> Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:31 PM, spike wrote: > Imagine this device operating continuously, providing a VR to the patient, > removing solid waste, tilting this way and that, with a cycle lasting > perhaps 10 minutes so that the motion is imperceptible to the patient. > > Wouldn't that be the ticket? ?Would not we be setting up something analogous > to the Chinese opium houses? ?We could arrange for the sick elderly to have > some fun with their last little bit of time. How about the sensory deprivation tank filled with heavier than salt water nutrient bath and instead of deprivation it provides stimulation via the VR setup you're proposing? Take away the sensation of gravity altogether. Or for the truly wealthy, move them to orbiting hospice - no need to worry about the loss of muscle tone if there is no plan to return to earth. Sure the fragile would have to worry about uncontrolled bumping into stuff, but that could be managed with probably less restricted motion than they get while sedated in a bed as it is. I guess the problem then would be how to get to space without the multiple g's the healthiest astronauts must withstand at takeoff. You know that "space-aged" memory foam they make mattresses out of? what about making a sabot[1] around a person? Then you could rotate them in your 3+ axis chair without risk of falling out/off the rig. If it was heated to "cozy" temps, it would probably be comfortable as well as provide healthier circulation for the literally thin-skinned elderly. The VR inputs could be facial expression and eye-tracking -aware, as well as voice activated - so moving arms and legs are unnecessary. Manual dexterity such as keyboard and mouse would also be unavailable (both from user capability and physical constraints of the rig) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabot From spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 4 04:05:14 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 21:05:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] nursing homes, was RE: NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com><42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike><8AEE0087FD3C4D02A01B80579F3BDDFF@spike> Message-ID: <9FA92F4C7A904F65A6B05C5431BAA442@spike> > ...On Behalf Of spike >... > ...We could > arrange for the sick elderly to have some fun with their last > little bit of time... spike Apologies for the overposting. My mind is really cranking on this idea. If we could work out a good tilt-chair hemispherical dome VR with exhaust pipe arrangement, perhaps with a processed food input mechanism, we might be able to create such a device for home use. If we get clever, I can imagine building something like that in the 30k to 50k range. That would be high end for some, but look at it this way: full time assisted living costs in the 6k to 10k range per month. So if you look at it that way, we can imagine a consumer level tilt chair that could be taken home for the cost of five months of assisted living, and of course would have plenty of resale value after the patient passes on. The problem with assisted living is that it requires proles to attend the elderly constantly, the feeding, the bathing, the other matters that need proles to attend. Even minimum wagers cost a lot of money. And think about it my extropian friends, how eager are you to be tended in your final painful months by proles who work for minimum wage and cannot find *any* other job besides sponge bathing you and changing your soiled diapers? Do the math please. You need about one orderly/attendant for each 8 to 10 patients, 10 bucks an hour, 24 hrs per day, 7 days a week, the doctor on call, the nurse in attendance, the building, the administration costs. Currently one can get a *really* low end terminal care facility with a fairly good social security pension plus medicare. Together they will just cover it. But we are almost out of other peoples' money. Then what? Plenty of us buy cars that are on the order of 30k to 50k. If we could facilitate home elder care, imagine the buttloads of money we could make, and save others at the same time. spike From aleksei at iki.fi Fri Jun 4 04:10:32 2010 From: aleksei at iki.fi (Aleksei Riikonen) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 07:10:32 +0300 Subject: [ExI] Why religion at all? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:43 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > > The capacity to be sucked into a religion is a widespread human > behavioral trait. > > Evolutionary theory states that behavior traits as well as physical > traits are subject to evolutionary selection. > > Some of these (like capture-bonding) have an obvious evolutionary > selection path. ?Religion is a little more complex to account for. ?I > make the case in an article I have quoted here before that the human > capacity for religions is a side effect of millions of conflict > events. > > In this context I make a case that the ability to hold a religion > comes from the ability to be infected with a xenophobic meme where the > function of the infection is to sync a tribe's warriors up for a do or > die attempt to kill neighbors in times of ecological stress. > > If you look around, it's not hard to see the connection even today. Such a specific explanation seems unnecessary, and very vulnerable to Occam's razor. I'd say the susceptibility to religion is more just a consequence of young humans being programmed to acquire knowledge through listening to their parents and other tribesfolk. I don't think those ancestral tribes, whose young members were too critical of what they were told and wanted to check the validity of everything on their own, fared too well. And actually the too critical young ones probably were already setting themselves up for low social status or even death, since they could easily be seen as a threat to tribal chiefs who used all sorts of bogus stories to justify their position of authority and so on. A degree of uncriticality and conformity has most likely been an adaptive trait, and has lead to all sorts of bogus stories perpetuating themselves (and mutating to the sorts of memes that confer some additional fitness, like that our-tribe-is-more-deserving-to-live thing you mention). -- Aleksei Riikonen - http://www.iki.fi/aleksei From msd001 at gmail.com Fri Jun 4 04:11:22 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 00:11:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Why religion at all? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:43 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > The capacity to be sucked into a religion is a widespread human > behavioral trait. > > Evolutionary theory states that behavior traits as well as physical > traits are subject to evolutionary selection. > > Some of these (like capture-bonding) have an obvious evolutionary > selection path. ?Religion is a little more complex to account for. ?I > make the case in an article I have quoted here before that the human > capacity for religions is a side effect of millions of conflict > events. > > In this context I make a case that the ability to hold a religion > comes from the ability to be infected with a xenophobic meme where the > function of the infection is to sync a tribe's warriors up for a do or > die attempt to kill neighbors in times of ecological stress. Even without neighboring enemies, individuals are commonly afraid of the unknown. Safety-in-numbers suggests that groups of like-minded individuals might be able to reinforce their commonly held beliefs despite individual wavering. Given the choice between the cruel world on your own and a welcoming community, it seems easier to belong. After all the identified enemies have been killed, the unidentified threats could still pose considerable danger. I agree with the xenophobic driver; i wonder if the unknown is a bigger bugaboo than large men wielding sticks and rocks. From spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 4 05:20:51 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 22:20:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] nursing homes, was RE: NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com><42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike><8AEE0087FD3C4D02A01B80579F3BDDFF@spike> Message-ID: > ...On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty > ... > > On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:31 PM, spike wrote: > > Imagine this device operating continuously, providing a VR to the > > patient, removing solid waste, tilting this way and that... > > How about the sensory deprivation tank filled with heavier > than salt water nutrient bath and instead of deprivation it > provides stimulation via the VR setup you're proposing?... Do you know the long term effects of soaking in Epsom salts? Intuition tells me you can't do it for too many hours without messing up something, but I don't know that for sure. Anyone? > ...Or for the truly wealthy, move them to orbiting hospice... AC Clarke suggested it, but for now I am thinking of a commercially viable consumer level device for the near term future. > ... > > You know that "space-aged" memory foam they make mattresses out of? > what about making a sabot[1] around a person? Coool! Now yer thinking Mike! I like the memory foam idea. To keep it clean, I can imagine a kind of a body stocking of some kind, made of some material which stretches but is just tight enough to not cut off circulation or wrinkle. Wrinkles would be bad for delicate skin over a long period. I am no expert in this matter having never worn nylon hosiery. Perhaps some of the ladies could comment, or men who have worn nylons too. Or anyone who has an idea: if we wanted to keep our expensive memory foam clean, is there a material that we can use to make pajamas that would hold skin waste, could be laundered and reused, could last one day per change, that would not wrinkle? > Then you could > rotate them in your 3+ axis chair without risk of falling > out/off the rig... Ja, well, 2 axis chair, with pi radians travel in longitudinal axis and pi/2 in the transverse would be plenty. I figured out a mechanism to do exactly that without all the carco table dual axis complication. > If it was heated to "cozy" temps, it would probably be > comfortable as well as provide healthier circulation for the > literally thin-skinned elderly... I like it. > The VR inputs could be > facial expression and eye-tracking -aware, as well as voice > activated - so moving arms and legs are unnecessary. Manual > dexterity such as keyboard and mouse would also be > unavailable (both from user capability and physical > constraints of the rig)... Sure but we could have all different levels of control, based on the needs of the patient. As with any product, we would start with the basic model and jazz it up as the market develops. So then, what I have so far is a shell we might be able to make from a modified bath tub with memory foam, with a closable lid. A standard flat screen monitor is mounted in the lid, as a primitive forerunner to the high-end CCD dome. Speakers could be mounted either side of the head. We could just go ahead and use Second Life for now as a primitive forerunner to the retro VR content. It isn't what I have in mind ultimately, but the bathtub, ventilation system, flat screen, speakers, Second Life with joystick control, and pi-pi/2 tip tilt mechanism could all be assembled for under the $30k target. I don't know about the exhaust pipe mechanism however. I would omit that for the time being if we are shooting for $30k. That wacky idea might be a major cost driver, but wouldn't be needed by everyone in any case. There is likely to be resistance from many consumers to having some device up the wazoo, when they still have the old fashioned option. But a basic system could be set up to entertain the still-mobile elderly, all using current technology and a bit of imagination. spike From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Fri Jun 4 09:54:30 2010 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 09:54:30 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <507502.20392.qm@web27007.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Adrian wrote "And how many jobs exist now in industries that didn't exist 10 years ago? Looking only at one side of the coin does not yield useful predictions." Are there any reliable figures for how many jobs exist in new industries? From my perspective (as a current welfare claimant in the UK), almost zero. If these jobs do exist en masse, they're not hiring anywhere near where I live and therefore not contributing to relieving the large unemployment situation. I suspect these new industries are very lean and prone to recruiting via word of mouth strictly as-and-when they REALLY need new people. Adrian also wrote in a different message on the same topic that if people find themselves without marketable skills, they will retrain themselves until they do have marketable skills. Again, my reality shows this requires a lot of work and no short-term prospects of a new job. For all you may study subjects, there's no qualification employers like more than recent experience in a similar role, so skills without work experience will put you behind people with experience in the interview shortlisting. Also, employers prefer formal qualifications to informal study. Formal qualifications cost money, as paying examiners and instructors costs. Furthermore, qualifications that are obviously commercially valuable tend to be priced more highly - look at how much it costs for Microsoft's MCSE, or many other software qualifications, or how expensive many business and law courses are. Every upturn following an economic downturn since the mid 90s has had the term "jobless recovery" tagged to it by the media. How many "jobless recoveries" do we have to face before people realise we face serious structural unemployment NOW, let alone when voice recognition software renders 90% of call centre staff redundant? Tom (find me a job, unemployment is making me irritable) From pharos at gmail.com Fri Jun 4 11:21:06 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 12:21:06 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: <507502.20392.qm@web27007.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <507502.20392.qm@web27007.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 6/4/10, Tom Nowell wrote: > Adrian also wrote in a different message on the same topic that if people find > themselves without marketable skills, they will retrain themselves until they do > have marketable skills. Again, my reality shows this requires a lot of work and > no short-term prospects of a new job. For all you may study subjects, there's no > qualification employers like more than recent experience in a similar role, so skills > without work experience will put you behind people with experience in the interview > shortlisting. > And just to cheer you up, there is a new trend emerging. When employers advertise job offers - even for the lowest paid, boring jobs - they are swamped with thousands of applicants. So they are now saying that the unemployed need not apply as their applications will be thrown out. Their reasoning is two-fold. 1) It gets rid of thousands of applications that they don't have to read. 2) They assume that when employers sacked people, they kept the best people on. So they want to recruit some of these 'best' people. > > Every upturn following an economic downturn since the mid 90s has had the term > "jobless recovery" tagged to it by the media. How many "jobless recoveries" do we > have to face before people realise we face serious structural unemployment NOW, > let alone when voice recognition software renders 90% of call centre staff redundant? > > Yup. That's the problem. And saying, 'What! They have no bread? Let them eat cake' is not a solution. BillK From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Jun 4 12:07:50 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 05:07:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: References: <507502.20392.qm@web27007.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C08EC96.4000106@mac.com> BillK wrote: > On 6/4/10, Tom Nowell wrote: > >> Adrian also wrote in a different message on the same topic that if people find >> themselves without marketable skills, they will retrain themselves until they do >> have marketable skills. Again, my reality shows this requires a lot of work and >> no short-term prospects of a new job. For all you may study subjects, there's no >> qualification employers like more than recent experience in a similar role, so skills >> without work experience will put you behind people with experience in the interview >> shortlisting. >> >> > > And just to cheer you up, there is a new trend emerging. When > employers advertise job offers - even for the lowest paid, boring jobs > - they are swamped with thousands of applicants. So they are now > saying that the unemployed need not apply as their applications will > be thrown out. Their reasoning is two-fold. > 1) It gets rid of thousands of applications that they don't have to read. > 2) They assume that when employers sacked people, they kept the best > people on. So they want to recruit some of these 'best' people. > > Hilarious. When I was at Apple it was way too hard to find even reasonable candidates to bother interviewing without throwing out applications on such bogus reasoning. I always wondered why it was so hard to find good people with so many out of work. > Yup. That's the problem. > > And saying, 'What! They have no bread? Let them eat cake' is not a solution. > No jobs? Invent something new or go homeless ultimately. - s -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bbenzai at yahoo.com Fri Jun 4 13:20:25 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 06:20:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <698713.11562.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/3/2010 8:10 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > > > There's never been a pogrom, crusade or suicide > bombing in the name of atheism. > > Erm, never heard of the Soviet Union, Ben? China's assaults > on woowoo > Falun Gong? Arguably these were and are in the *name* of > atheism, > especially in the USSR, although actually in the service of > unprincipled > authoritarian power. OK, perhaps I should say "There's never been a pogrom, crusade or suicide bombing for the cause of atheism." Ben Zaiboc From Danavictorston at aol.com Fri Jun 4 07:03:29 2010 From: Danavictorston at aol.com (Danavictorston at aol.com) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 03:03:29 EDT Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 4 Message-ID: <221fc.3f42d323.3939ff41@aol.com> After 4 years of dedication I've left the Universalist Unitarian church . My view is the UU church is good to a point . We lost our minister , the board elect is now republican and atheist and the result is a 'fall in line' approach to a don't make waves agenda. The spiritual empowerment i need from a church is trust in it's people the UU church I left is based on faith in it's policies and not its members. Dana In a message dated 6/3/2010 8:00:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org writes: Send extropy-chat mailing list submissions to extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org You can reach the person managing the list at extropy-chat-owner at lists.extropy.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of extropy-chat digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: to install (John Grigg) 2. Re: two observations (John Grigg) 3. Jeanne Robinson, wife of Spider Robinson, has died due to cancer (John Grigg) 4. Re: to install (Tom Nowell) 5. Re: to install (samantha) 6. Re: to install (samantha) 7. Re: to install (samantha) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 23:54:36 -0700 From: John Grigg To: ddraig at pobox.com, ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] to install Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hold on here, for those of you who reject conservative mainstream/old school denominations & faiths, why not attend a Unitarian Universalist congregation?? LOL I have attended Unitarian services a few times, and they definitely teach ethics (special classes for the children) & also have fun social gatherings. I am very impressed with what I have heard about their "OWL" training program to teach kids about sex. John On 6/2/10, ddraig wrote: > On 3 June 2010 13:19, Anna Taylor wrote: > > >> Why shouldn't there be a place that people can go to feel loved? >> > > What if you are gay, or of some wildly different faith? What then? It seems > to me that pretty much all churches are places you can go to feel loved *as > long as you fit into their narrow definition of allowable memesets* > > > If I want to feel loved, I'll go to rave. Ooooooodles of love, gushing out > all over everyone there. > > > I don't buy into this concept that you need to believe in some giant > invisible sapce-wizard to lead a moral life. I grew up reading a lot of > greek and roman classics from an early age. I am an extremely moral and > upright person. Annoyingly so, according to most of the people I know. My > parents are *fiercely* anti-religion and the only time I have *ever* been to > a church is for a wedding. Or a funeral. > > Sometimes I'll rock up to cathedral to ooh and aaah at the architecture. > It seems to me if you can't teach your children morals and values without > some external (and bullshit-based) structure and support group, you're > failing as a parent. I'd say you should not have had kids at all, but that > tends to get breeders all flippy-outy and punchy-punchy. > > > Dwayne > -- > ddraig at pobox.com irc.deoxy.org #chat > ...r.e.t.u.r.n....t.o....t.h.e....s.o.u.r.c.e... > http://www.barrelfullofmonkeys.org/Data/3-death.jpg > our aim is wakefulness, our enemy is dreamless sleep > ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 00:09:28 -0700 From: John Grigg To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] two observations Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 When I was new to Arizona I encountered a large soft object bouncing off my head. I looked down and there was a fairly large tarantula who was obviously used to walking on the ceiling, but it had gotten too big for such an activity and so gravity took over! lol I remember another time when a large white spider (the size of a large tarantula, I assume it was one) came inside and ran around the place like a speed demon! I'd never seen a tarantula move like this (I always thought they were fairly slow moving creatures) and I could not catch the lightning fast arachnid. I opened up a door and amazingly, the spider ran right out and I never saw it again. I sometimes wonder if there was a genetic engineering lab nearby... John On 6/2/10, spike wrote: > > > ...On Behalf Of Kevin Freels > Subject: Re: [ExI] two observations > > >>I think it's interesting the way spiders fly... > > >...As I turned my head to follow I could see hundreds, or perhaps > thousands of spider silk strands shimmering in the sky. It was weird, but > beautiful... > > > Spiders are an example of bugs with the habit of doing something in unison, > like your thousands of silk strands example. My own is when I went on a > motorcycle ride in the Mojave Desert on a hot spring morning in 1984, soon > after having moved there. I had never seen a tarantula, but that day I saw > one, stopped, examined it. Then another and another, as I headed out toward > Death Valley. Then dozens per mile, crossing the road, from east to west, > all of them walking walking walking, like something out of a horror flick. > Oy. Good thing I like bugs, jeeeeez. > > That was the only time I ever actually saw a tarantula migration in > progress, even though I went out there on that same road dozens of times. > > spike > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSIGcWATJ3g > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 00:19:55 -0700 From: John Grigg To: ExI chat list , World Transhumanist Association Discussion List , transfigurism Subject: [ExI] Jeanne Robinson, wife of Spider Robinson, has died due to cancer Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 One of my favorite science fiction writers, Spider Robinson, has shared this about the passing of his wife from cancer. If you have not read Robinson's the "Callahan's Saloon" novels, you should. They are among the most humanistic and touching sf/fantasy stories I have ever read. Subject: Buchi Eihei In pacem From: Spider Jeanne Robinson left this life at about 4:45 Sunday afternoon, a gentle smile on her face. Her departure was quite peaceful and she was in no pain at all. (Buchi Eihei means "dancing wisdom, eternal peace". It's the name Jeanne's Soto Zen instructor bestowed on her). --Spider" ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:41:59 +0000 (GMT) From: Tom Nowell To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] to install Message-ID: <718218.72776.qm at web27003.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Spike wrote:" In my own case in having to instill moral values in my own 3 yr old son, I am stuck in a wildly paradoxical position. I can allow him to go with his mother to church, but I am in a position of having to carefully explain that while the ethical and moral values are OK, the entire theory behind them, the entire memetic infrastructure in support of it, is *completely* wrong, no truth there at all. So what would go on in the mind of a child, given such instruction? I haven't said anything yet, but I flatly refuse to tell him anything I know to be false. spike" Here we hit the big question - how to install a filter against memetic infiltration that will last until adult reasoning is sufficiently developed and will hopefully provide backup when they're adults. A three year-old is still at the stage where magical thinking comes naturally. You read the them a fairy tale and read them a short story by a master of western literature, and they'll probably think the fairy tale makes more sense than the literature. As psychology is full of contradictory studies, I honestly couldn't say how long a period of magical thinking is necessary for normal development. The traditional method of keeping your child free from the strange ideas of people not like yourself is to ram their brains full of the traditions and ideas of people like yourself so anything they're exposed to will bounce off your pre-installed ideas. But you've dumped the traditions of your people in order to embrace shiny and new philosophical ideas of the future. So, do you try and teach them sensibly and hope they don't pick up strange memes from the people they meet at school? Or do you go radical transhumanist and make up fairy stories about the future - teach Nick Bostrom's parable of the great dragon as if it is prophecy, read Dr Broderick's tales for children each night, and tell them that there's no such thing as a soul or how do you hope to be uploaded? Admittedly, this may cause some dogmatic thinking on their part when they're grown up, but looking at this list's arguments there's plenty of Idees fixe amongst articulate and apparently rational transhumanists. Finally, to play devil's advocate - what if your children just aren't as rational and intelligent as you? Of course, your child is special and will go on to do great things and live out your dreams by proxy. But just suppose for a minute your cosy illusion is utterly wrong, and there's nothing special about your child - they're firmly in the 95-105 IQ range, no more given to logic or dreaming than any other kid in their class - are you quite sure your methods for protecting them from harmful memes will still work? Tom ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 03:57:43 -0700 From: samantha To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] to install Message-ID: <4C078AA7.108 at mac.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Anna Taylor wrote: > Thank you Jef. Yes I watched it when you posted it on facebook. Again, my... was exactly what you would call Catholic or others would call synoguoges or place of worship. My comment was not in referal to a suggestive church or religion it was about "churches", which I believe should be called: A place to help others at no cost. How is that? There are huge costs. They instill mystical claptrap as the basis for everything they teach. It becomes a sort of package deal in the minds of many. The claptrap is the reason why the morality is so and the reason why every thing good in their lives is good is because they are good. Vicious circle. This is not by accident. Religions are designed to install themselves in this way. Instead of learning ethics on the basis of reason and reality a version of ethics is learned based on mysticism and acceptance on faith. This is incredibly costly. It splits the mind that takes it seriously. Most minds don't take it that seriously out of self-defense. As a result ethics becomes this untrustworthy realm one gives lip service to but really does not have integrated at all. Morality is split from reality. The mind compartmentalizes after all and simply will no longer look at some things deeply. Very costly. On top of this churches generally encourage heavy tithing and other volunteering of "time and talents". More costs. > Probably the wrong choice of words. How about "A place to be nice?". I actually agree with part of that. A place where you just let down the card and open your heart right on up. Seems to me we can do that and make places to do with one another without all the rest though. > When I replied it was because someone mentioned, "well parents should just teach their children". My apology if that wasn't clear. Not all adults have been well taught, where can they go to get spiritual help? What exactly is this "spiritual" help? You mean just life help and learning to be as well as you can be and enjoy life and be a boon to self and others? You don't need religion for that. There is humanism, self-help groups, therapy, trusted friends, support systems - all without church or religion. > I still think churches should be a place of spiritual growth but i'm aware that it's not that easy. Just as it isn't just that easy to ban churches and expect spiritual growth to simply appear without any form of guidance. Same question. What is "spiritual growth" as opposed to just plain growth as a human being (and more)? I am very curious about that. I know from experience that it can feel different, very different. But I am not at all sure why or that the why is something to be trusted. - samantha ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 04:07:44 -0700 From: samantha To: ddraig at pobox.com, ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] to install Message-ID: <4C078D00.203 at mac.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" ddraig wrote: > On 3 June 2010 13:19, Anna Taylor > wrote: > > > Why shouldn't there be a place that people can go to feel loved? > > > What if you are gay, or of some wildly different faith? What then? It > seems to me that pretty much all churches are places you can go to > feel loved *as long as you fit into their narrow definition of > allowable memesets* Depends on the church. As the Mormons came up recently I most definitely would not recommend being or attempting to become Mormon if you are queer in gender and/or sexuality. I had friends in both camps that went through a great deal of pain and damage due to the Mormon stance on such things. It was no accident that the Mormons were strongly involved in stopping gay marriage in California. That said, there are open and accepting congregations in various faith traditions. > > If I want to feel loved, I'll go to rave. Ooooooodles of love, gushing > out all over everyone there. > Oh yeah. Very powerful too. And for that group "psychic bond" thing I recommend a good wiccan ritual. Don't buy into the bizarre mysticism but way more of that energy than I ever felt in church. > > I don't buy into this concept that you need to believe in some giant > invisible sapce-wizard to lead a moral life. I grew up reading a lot > of greek and roman classics from an early age. I am an extremely moral > and upright person. Annoyingly so, according to most of the people I > know. My parents are *fiercely* anti-religion and the only time I have > *ever* been to a church is for a wedding. Or a funeral. > > Sometimes I'll rock up to cathedral to ooh and aaah at the architecture. > It seems to me if you can't teach your children morals and values > without some external (and bullshit-based) structure and support > group, you're failing as a parent. I'd say you should not have had > kids at all, but that tends to get breeders all flippy-outy and > punchy-punchy. Yes. I would go further and say that you can't really teach morals and values without screwing up their minds unless you teach it devoid of mystical nonsense. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 04:21:51 -0700 From: samantha To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] to install Message-ID: <4C07904F.7020304 at mac.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" spike wrote: > > > >> ...On Behalf Of Anna Taylor >> Subject: [ExI] to install >> >> The conversation went, "Well if you are going to go to >> church, you might well as be..." >> >> I agree. I think churches are a really good place to learn >> moral and valued skills... Does eveyone agree? >> >> Just curious >> Anna >> > > Hi Anna, goooood question. In my own case in having to instill moral values > in my own 3 yr old son, I am stuck in a wildly paradoxical position. At that age the basic lesson, which may not take for a few years, is that other people are just like him inside and their feelings and needs matter to them the same way his do to him. I remember very distinctly the moment in my childhood when I really got that all the way through. Much of the rest of interpersonal ethics grows out of that. The other part of morality is learning to not attempt to bullshit reality in any way whatsoever. It is learning to be rational and seeks to "make it real", to actually achieve, gain and maintain what you actually value including the wellbeing of others you value. That honest to reality thing will not make life easy with respect to so many he will interact with who are nearly explicitly taught to be dishonest or that their is something more important than reality. But it is very very important. > I can > allow him to go with his mother to church, but I am in a position of having > to carefully explain that while the ethical and moral values are OK, I don't think the ethical and moral values taught their are ok. They are based on a non-reality set of premises and thus are ungrounded pronouncements. They teach that anything done for yourself, because you value it (however rationally) is probably problematic and at the least not nearly so good as doing things for "others" - any old others, preferably for complete strangers one has no rational interest in whatsoever. This is a near complete perversion of honest sane ethical and moral values. > the > entire theory behind them, the entire memetic infrastructure in support of > it, is *completely* wrong, no truth there at all. > If they basis is wrong then in effect saying the ethics is ok is saying that ungrounded ethical commandments that cannot be understood to the root are "ok". Do you really think so? > So what would go on in the mind of a child, given such instruction? I > haven't said anything yet, but I flatly refuse to tell him anything I know > to be false. > That is good. Careful of sins of omission though. :) - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ 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 81, Issue 4 ******************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri Jun 4 14:26:39 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 15:26:39 +0100 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <698713.11562.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <698713.11562.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 6/4/10, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > OK, perhaps I should say "There's never been a pogrom, crusade or suicide > bombing for the cause of atheism." > > Well, atheists fight just as much as everybody else and are just as likely to attack other ethnic groups. Groups attacking other ethnic or religious groups are a traditional human activity. The atheists have secular political or national leaders who lead their riots just as priests or imams lead their religious riots. There is plenty of evidence that atheism is no protective against psychotic homicide on a national scale. The question was asked here: "Have people been killed in the name of atheism at any time in history?" And the overall conclusion was 'Yes'. For example: The French Revolution had anti-religious riots. Quote: You could argue that the basis given for the Russian killing therefore was Communism, not atheism, and this would be correct, but I would argue that a core component of Communism was state atheism, and that the aspects of it that were directed against religious people were therefore atheist in their component. This became a core component of many communist regimes. The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia was atheist, and most notoriously slaughtered everyone, with Buddhist monks at the top of the list. ------------------------ BillK From spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 4 14:54:27 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 07:54:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] welcome dana In-Reply-To: <221fc.3f42d323.3939ff41@aol.com> References: <221fc.3f42d323.3939ff41@aol.com> Message-ID: <8541CB0D912C40729DB3AAD6DEE92444@spike> ________________________________ ...On Behalf Of Danavictorston at aol.com Subject: Re: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 4 >...After 4 years of dedication I've left the Universalist Unitarian church. ...the board elect is now republican and atheist... Dana There is a scandal a brewin' in this church! Are they out of the closet? Or are they being secretive about their republican tendencies? {8^D Welcome Dana! Do feel free to tell us anything about yourself, or nothing is OK too. You are among friends here. {8-] spike From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Jun 4 14:58:25 2010 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 09:58:25 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Open Science Summit 2010 (July 29-31 @ Berkeley, California) Message-ID: >From July 29-31, at Berkeley's iHouse, scientists, hackers, students, patients, and activists will convene to discuss the future of our science/technology paradigm. Topics include: Synthetic Biology, Gene Patents, Open Data, Open Access, Microfinance for Science, DIY Biology, Prize Funds for Innovation, Open Source Drug Discovery, Patent Pools, Open Health/Medicine, Patient Advocacy for Innovation. This event is for everyone who deeply cares about making science work more effectively to benefit all humanity. Any proceeds from the conference go to support the formation of BioCurious, the first of its kind Bay Area biology hacker space for citizen science. You can register at opensciencesummit.com Open Science Summit http://opensciencesummit.com/ Read more about the motivations behind the conference at http://www.hplusmagazine.com/articles/science/citizen-scientist-joseph-jackson-and-new-open-source I am looking forward to seeing many of you there. >From the site: """ Ready for a rapid, radical reboot of the global innovation system for a truly free and open 21st century knowledge economy? Join us at the first Open Science Summit, an attempt to gather all stakeholders who want to liberate our scientific and technological commons and enable an new era of decentralized, distributed innovation to solve humanity?s greatest challenges. It is trivially true that Science and Technology are the most powerful drivers of progress and prosperity. However, there is a tremendous and tragic gap between what is possible, and the shameful scenario that prevails today. The well known ?10/90? gap references the fact that only 10% of biomedical spending goes toward conditions that affect 90% of the world?s population. Under this regime, ?diseases of the poor,? such as Malaria, are neglected, while companies focus on ?blockbuster? drugs for conditions that affect citizens of the wealthiest nations. This situation, appalling though it is, actually grossly understates the systemic flaws of the prevailing biomedical innovation paradigm. Framing this as a tradeoff of Market vs Social Values or the need for balancing commercial interests with public health, implies that the bio-pharma industrial complex works for what it purports to do. If only we could find some way to engage or tweak existing mechanisms, we?ll make it through. Wrong! In fact, despite billions of dollars invested and decades of research, there has been little to no progress in recent decades even for extremely ?lucrative? conditions like depression or ?lifestyle? applications such as hair loss. Millions of ?wealthy? patients in developed countries suffer from horrific chronic diseases, poorly understood and difficult to treat auto-immune disorders, and degenerative conditions such as Parkinson?s and Alzhiemer?s. In the United Sates, a silver tsunami of aging baby boomers threatens to overwhelm an already strained healthcare system. Simultaneously, life expectancy for the youngest generation is falling for the first time, as an epidemic of obesity, diabetes, and associated preventable conditions mocks the notion that we?ve made progress. The world lacks rapid response capability to emerging pandemic viral threats, and bacteria such as Tuberculosis and MRSA have out-evolved our antibiotics, leaving humanity vulnerable to an age old foes once thought conquered. There is plenty of blame, shame, and pain to go around. Governments, Academia, and Industry alike, are all implicated. Certainly, it is tremendously difficult to develop and deploy new therapies, but the hideous expense ($1 billion+ for a new therapeutic) and long timelines (17 years to market) are unsustainable. Its not all doom and gloom. Game changing new technologies, genomic medicine and regenerative stem cell therapies among them, can cure, not just treat, some of the most intractable diseases that plague humanity today. Expending more resources without deep organizational change will not bring progress. The broken business models of the 20th century are not adequate to the challenges we face. We can and must do better. Just as disturbing as the innovation shortfall of recent decades, is the barometer of public opinion. Appallingly large numbers of people ascribe to the ?anti-vaccine movement.? Vaccination is the single greatest tool ever devised for public health, responsible for triumphs such as the eradication of Polio and Smallpox. To arrogantly dismiss public fears as hysterical or uneducated, even if there is some truth to this, fails to acknowledge the greater truth that we have not provided the transparency, education, and honesty (in the form of disclosing potential conflicts of interest where they arise), the public requires if it is to trust the global scientific and medical establishment. When scandals such as ?Climategate? occur, the integrity of Science itself is undermined at precisely the moment we need it most. With the falling costs of basic enabling technologies, we could choose to embrace a new golden era of citizen science, an era in which amateur investigators have ever more powerful tools with which to investigate themselves (via personal genomics), and their environments. Such a participatory paradigm shift can make all the difference. Only a renegotiation and reaffirmation of the social contract for science can open the path to a successful future for us all. The Summit attempts to chart that course. Students interested in attending the conference can contact us regarding discounted student rates. """ - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Jun 4 16:49:31 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 09:49:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: <507502.20392.qm@web27007.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <543599.92072.qm@web81608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Fri, 6/4/10, Tom Nowell wrote: > If these jobs do exist en > masse, they're not hiring anywhere near where I live Moving may sometimes help with finding new jobs. For example, it is much easier to find work as a software engineer, or almost anything having to do with biotech, in Silicon Valley than in most rural areas in the US. (It is somewhat easier than many other urban areas, too, but most of the time if this advice applies, the one being advised is living in an area that does not have much employment at all - though often just enough to offer a slim, and often false, hope of maybe finding a job locally.) The relative ease of finding work in cities is a large part of why urbanization happened, and is continuing to happen. ("Relative" must be emphasized, though: that can be 50% odds of finding a job vs. 15%, or 5% vs. 0%. Either way, it's higher.) > Adrian also wrote in a different message on the same topic > that if people find themselves without marketable skills, > they will retrain themselves until they do have marketable > skills. Again, my reality shows this requires a lot of work > and no short-term prospects of a new job. This is true. I was refuting the concept of permanent unemployment (as in, you'd never have a job again, not even in 10 or 20 or 100 years, no matter what you did). While there is short term unemployment, people can and do eventually retrain themselves given a long enough drought of work. Sorry if this was not clear. > For all you may > study subjects, there's no qualification employers like more > than recent experience in a similar role, so skills without > work experience will put you behind people with experience > in the interview shortlisting. Trick: claim recent experience doing X for a non-profit operation, that you've been doing on the side while looking for work. As it happens, said non-profit is also a sole proprietorship, and you are your own supervisor. (Without the corpspeak, this is "I've been doing X as a hobby". The corpspeak shows that you can think of X as a formal, organized project, compatible with being done in a business environment.) > Also, employers prefer formal qualifications to informal > study. Software engineering in the dot-com era - which, granted, was about 10 years ago. But still, one can get into industries without formal study when there's a need. > Furthermore, qualifications that are > obviously commercially valuable tend to be priced more > highly - look at how much it costs for Microsoft's MCSE HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA... MCSE, like most vendor-provided qualifications in the software industry, is bullshit and worthless. Few employers I know care about it, except for low-wage jobs. The only "formal qualification" that counts is a college degree - BS or higher - in Computer Science or a relevant field. Granted, that does cost money to get, though there exist scholarships and student loans for precisely this reason. > how expensive many > business and law courses are. Granted. But again, college degrees seem to be the primary qualification to enter the field - and even that can be bypassed in some cases with enough experience, using the method given above. "Executive seminars" and other things short of college degrees aren't worth the money. (They survive because those who provide them are good at selling to those who don't know how to judge their value.) > Every upturn following an economic downturn since the mid > 90s has had the term "jobless recovery" tagged to it by the > media. How many "jobless recoveries" do we have to face > before people realise we face serious structural > unemployment NOW, let alone when voice recognition software > renders 90% of call centre staff redundant? > > Tom (find me a job, unemployment is making me irritable) You mentioned software. That suggests you know, generally, how to program. So let me give you a variant of a trick I've used: * Download and install a PHP engine from http://php.net/downloads.php . * Download the Apache Web server, for whatever OS you're running. (Yes, there does exist Apache for Windows, and it is far more secure and stable than IIS. I don't recommend it for professional deployment - if you're using Apache anyway, pair it with Linux like most people do - but it suffices for training.) * Install it on your computer. Only have it running when you are actively using it; leave it off at all other times, and by default. (If you don't know how to do this, google for how to do so.) * Configure Apache to use PHP, for any file that ends in .php. (Again, google for this info if you don't already know how. Googling for info is, in and of itself, a job-useful skill, that many software managers don't fully understand even today - and thus, think that employees who get results that way are pulling off "magic". Like most magic, the trick is in not giving away more of the trick than you have to.) * Write some code to generate Web pages - simple "Hello World" stuff. * Download and install MySQL. * Set up a MySQL database, then alter your code to do something with the database. (Maybe just four pages: create a row from Web form inputs, update a row from the same inputs plus the id of the row to update, read the rows in the database, and delete a row given the row's id.) * Congratulations, you've created what's known as a "WAMP stack" if you did it on Windows. If you did it on Linux for bonus points, that's the even more popular "LAMP stack". Being able to say that you have created a LAMP stack application from scratch might just get you in the door to interviews for a number of Web programming positions. * This won't win you the job by itself, of course. Ultimately, finding a job does come down to luck, so nothing can guarantee you a job (unless it's coming from the one who would employ you). But you can do things like this to improve your odds. From pharos at gmail.com Fri Jun 4 19:43:30 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 20:43:30 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Wind-powered car goes down wind faster than the wind Message-ID: A wind-powered car has been clocked in the US traveling down wind faster than the wind. In a recent run at New Jerusalem in Tracy, California, the car reached a top speed of more than 2.85 times faster than the wind blowing at the time (13.5 mph) powered by the wind itself. The run should now settle the DWFTTW (down wind faster than the wind) debate that has been raging for some time on the Internet about whether or not such a feat was possible. --------------- Note the 'downwind' bit. Yachts can already exceed wind speed when tacking, but not downwind, even when using a spinnaker. BillK From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Jun 4 20:29:55 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 13:29:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: <543599.92072.qm@web81608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <543599.92072.qm@web81608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C096243.9080007@mac.com> Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- On Fri, 6/4/10, Tom Nowell wrote: > >> If these jobs do exist en >> masse, they're not hiring anywhere near where I live >> > > Moving may sometimes help with finding new jobs. For > example, it is much easier to find work as a software > engineer, or almost anything having to do with biotech, > in Silicon Valley than in most rural areas in the US. > (It is somewhat easier than many other urban areas, > too, but most of the time if this advice applies, the > one being advised is living in an area that does not > have much employment at all - though often just enough > to offer a slim, and often false, hope of maybe > finding a job locally.) > > The relative ease of finding work in cities is a > large part of why urbanization happened, and is > continuing to happen. ("Relative" must be emphasized, > though: that can be 50% odds of finding a job vs. 15%, > or 5% vs. 0%. Either way, it's higher.) > > >> Adrian also wrote in a different message on the same topic >> that if people find themselves without marketable skills, >> they will retrain themselves until they do have marketable >> skills. Again, my reality shows this requires a lot of work >> and no short-term prospects of a new job. >> > > This is true. I was refuting the concept of permanent > unemployment (as in, you'd never have a job again, not even > in 10 or 20 or 100 years, no matter what you did). While > there is short term unemployment, people can and do > eventually retrain themselves given a long enough drought of > work. Sorry if this was not clear. > > >> For all you may >> study subjects, there's no qualification employers like more >> than recent experience in a similar role, so skills without >> work experience will put you behind people with experience >> in the interview shortlisting. >> > > Trick: claim recent experience doing X for a non-profit > operation, that you've been doing on the side while looking > for work. As it happens, said non-profit is also a sole > proprietorship, and you are your own supervisor. (Without > the corpspeak, this is "I've been doing X as a hobby". The > corpspeak shows that you can think of X as a formal, > organized project, compatible with being done in a business > environment.) > In software, create or join an Open Source and get a bit of a name as at least a contributor. You hone skills, have references and build a reputation. > >> Also, employers prefer formal qualifications to informal >> study. >> > > Software engineering in the dot-com era - which, granted, > was about 10 years ago. But still, one can get into > industries without formal study when there's a need. > > Actually, employers prefer someone that can demonstrate some skill in an interview and have a reference or two. They may not pay you as much as someone with more experience if you are new to the area but they will be delighted to have someone with half a demonstrable brain. There are tons and tons of people with great formal credentials and years of experience who fail miserably in the interview to convince anyone they have what it takes for the job. The only trick is getting to the interview for a newcomer. >> Furthermore, qualifications that are >> obviously commercially valuable tend to be priced more >> highly - look at how much it costs for Microsoft's MCSE >> > > HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA... > > Not worth the paper it is written on. These things are not going to convince a savvy interview team you can do anything but collect credentials. > MCSE, like most vendor-provided qualifications in the > software industry, is bullshit and worthless. Few > employers I know care about it, except for low-wage jobs. > The only "formal qualification" that counts is a college > degree - BS or higher - in Computer Science or a > relevant field. Granted, that does cost money to get, > though there exist scholarships and student loans for > precisely this reason. > > I don't even care about a college degree in software. I care about experience of any kind including open source. I care much more about a burning passion to create and demonstrable skill (in the interview) at software design and implementation. I have interviewed countless MS and higher people who can't demonstrably think, design or code their way out of a paper bag and don't demonstrably know even the most fundamental of algorithms well enough to use it in a toy problem much less bend and mutilate it a bit. I have interviewed countless experienced people who have done some good even great thinks in the past but are burned out and are only looking for a paycheck for investing as little of themselves as possible. They are too bored or something usually to actually do well with interview questions. If they do reasonably well but that spark is low then I may recommend them hoping it can be reignited. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From max at maxmore.com Fri Jun 4 22:34:07 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 17:34:07 -0500 Subject: [ExI] SpaceX launch success Message-ID: <201006042300.o54N0igB019118@andromeda.ziaspace.com> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37509776/ns/technology_and_science-space/ From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sat Jun 5 10:16:28 2010 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 03:16:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL Message-ID: <56862.73319.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> >From: samantha >To: ExI chat list >Sent: Thu, June 3, 2010 3:47:50 PM >Subject: Re: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL Samantha wrote: ?? >>??Yes.? Start by rooting out the primary cause.? The huge entitlement programs and the bloated government that attempts to manipulate economic reality in utterly irrational ways until it can't no more and the entire thing goes SPLAT! There will come a time, if it that time has not long since past, where these government programs you speak of, namely welfare and the like are the only things that stave off total anarchy. The situation with modern society and automation is not very different than that faced by the waning Roman Empire. The only difference is that instead of machines taking all the jobs, it was slaves taking all the jobs. So in the later days, the Roman citizens were stratified into an aristocracy that owned all the land in the countryside and the poor who were crowded together into cities like Rome proper. The wealthy found it was far cheaper to have slaves do all the work than to hire Romans.?Because the Roman?aristocracy had access to very skilled slaves such as the Greeks, even high IQ labor such as?tradesmen, artisans, and teachers were replaced by slaves. The Roman middle class disappeared and was replaced by the fickle, hungry, and excitable mob and even the Emperor had cause to fear the mob?when they were agitated. The solution the?aristocracy implemented was one of "panem et circenses" or?bread and circuses. Keep the mob fed and entertained and they would refrain from tearing down the aristocracy and looting everything in sight. ? Some economists like to invoke "social darwinism" in reference to capitalism but that is not really a valid comparison. The economy is a game with winner and losers and so long as enough players have some stake in the game, the game will continue. But if a large enough percentage of the players lose and are marginalized by the capitalist system, then bonafide darwinism will take over. People are not so out of touch with their animal natures that they will meekly allow themselves and their family starve because they lost the money game. They will?find something to eat, even if it is the rich themselves.?So these government?entitlement programs?you criticize are in a way necessary because they are the rich and the powerful's insurance against?mob rule.? From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Jun 5 17:38:15 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 10:38:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: <56862.73319.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <56862.73319.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C0A8B87.80103@mac.com> The Avantguardian wrote: >> From: samantha >> To: ExI chat list >> Sent: Thu, June 3, 2010 3:47:50 PM >> Subject: Re: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL >> > > Samantha wrote: > > >>> Yes. Start by rooting out the primary cause. The huge entitlement programs and the bloated government that attempts to manipulate economic reality in utterly irrational ways until it can't no more and the entire thing goes SPLAT! >>> > > There will come a time, if it that time has not long since past, where these government programs you speak of, namely welfare and the like are the only things that stave off total anarchy. Not possible. Those programs and the mentality behind them are destroying the economy that is the real thing that keeps anarchy, and mass destitute conditions, at bay. The programs are parasitical. They produce nothing but only consume. When the host, the economy, dies they also die. > The situation with modern society and automation is not very different than that faced by the waning Roman Empire. Not entirely but there are similarities. Both over-promised at home and over extended massively abroad. Both played financial games to attempt to pretend all is well. All dying empiles do this. - s -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at bellsouth.net Sat Jun 5 17:31:18 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 13:31:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Why religion at all?. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> On Jun 3, 2010, at 10:43 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > I make a case that the ability to hold a religion comes from the ability to be infected with a xenophobic meme where the function of the infection is to sync a tribe's warriors up for a do or die attempt to kill neighbors in times of ecological stress. Maybe, but there might be a simpler explanation. In general it would be a Evolutionary advantage for children to listen to and believe what adults, particularly parents, have to say; don't eat those berries they will kill you, don't swim in that river there are crocodiles, etc. Most people may not be born with innate religious feelings but some are, and they teach their children that belief, and when they grow up they in turn teach their children that belief too. They do it because most people have this usually advantageous tendency to believe into adulthood whatever they were taught as children. And so screwy religious ideas that start small propagate. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Jun 5 18:18:33 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 13:18:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Why religion at all?. In-Reply-To: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <4C0A94F9.1080904@satx.rr.com> On 6/5/2010 12:31 PM, John Clark wrote: > most people have this usually advantageous tendency to believe into > adulthood whatever they were taught as children. And so screwy religious > ideas that start small propagate. Yes, but the odd thing about screwy religious ideas is how vehemently and murderously they can be held. You can deny the Tooth Fairy without too many people losing control on the spot and shooting you dead, but do a simple sketch of a non-Presbyterian prophet and many of his followers will go bugfuck crazy and hack you to death while setting random cars on fire. Of course this is an outlet for backed-up hormones and political grievances, but somehow religion has a singular capacity to fire up superstimuli uber-releasers. Keith's kill-the-Other evolutionary psych story is clearly part of what's going on, but that seems to me likely to be a side consequence of something far more deeply rooted in group and individual psychology (along the lines of informing a drunk redneck that his mother is a 'ho). Damien Broderick From pharos at gmail.com Sat Jun 5 18:30:29 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 19:30:29 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: <4C0A8B87.80103@mac.com> References: <56862.73319.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <4C0A8B87.80103@mac.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/5 samantha wrote: > Not possible.? Those programs and the mentality behind them are destroying > the economy that is the real thing that keeps anarchy, and mass destitute > conditions, at bay.?? The programs are parasitical.? They produce nothing > but only consume.? When the host, the economy, dies? they also die. > It is not welfare for the people that has destroyed the economy. The people need welfare because there is nothing left for them. The money and power has been concentrated into fewer and fewer hands. Capitalism only works while you have a stake in the game. Now that a few percent of the population own virtually everything, the game is over. > Not entirely but there are similarities.? Both over-promised at home and > over extended massively abroad.? Both played financial games to attempt to > pretend all is well.? All dying empires do this. > The capitalists realised that fraud pays much better than producing stuff. And now that they have captured the government, there is nothing to stop them. BillK From spike66 at att.net Sat Jun 5 19:26:09 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 12:26:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Why religion at all?. In-Reply-To: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: ...On Behalf Of John Clark On Jun 3, 2010, at 10:43 PM, Keith Henson wrote: >>I make a case that the ability to hold a religion comes from the ability to be infected with a xenophobic meme where the function of the infection is to sync a tribe's warriors up for a do or die attempt to kill neighbors in times of ecological stress. >Maybe, but there might be a simpler explanation. In general it would be a Evolutionary advantage for children to listen to and believe what adults, particularly parents, have to say... John K Clark I partially agree with both, but there is another element missing in both notions above. Religion produces a mild "high" of endorphines. It can be like a "rave" but without the actual chemicals. I looked up on the internet regarding what the heck is a "rave," so now I know everything about it, a veritable "rave" expert I am. Secondly as I have commented here before, church is a highly sexually charged environment. It really is, I am not kidding. Church is a singles bar for married people. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Jun 5 20:22:51 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 15:22:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Why religion at all?. In-Reply-To: References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> On 6/5/2010 2:26 PM, spike wrote: > Secondly as I have commented here before, church is a highly sexually > charged environment. It really is, I am not kidding. Church is a singles > bar for married people. And this explains the rabid non-Presbyterians, with their manly all-men devotions? If anything, maybe it explains the slightly more relaxed Presbyterians. Bonobos vs. chimps. Damien Broderick From rtomek at ceti.pl Sat Jun 5 21:03:08 2010 From: rtomek at ceti.pl (Tomasz Rola) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 23:03:08 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] Why religion at all?. In-Reply-To: <4C0A94F9.1080904@satx.rr.com> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> <4C0A94F9.1080904@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Howdy, As a human-trying-to-think-logically, I find all this antireligious stance amusing. I think religion actually helped humans to survive in a harsh environment, nowadays called nature. It gave a container into which a knowledge could be gradually accumulated and preserved. Also, I believe it was religion that helped develop science and gave birth to it. Think, maths, who did it first? Right, we don't know. Probably some animal did it first. But, the first recorded math usage comes from what are thought to be ancient sanctuaries, if I am right... So, credits due should be payed to whoever they are owed. On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/5/2010 12:31 PM, John Clark wrote: > > > most people have this usually advantageous tendency to believe into > > adulthood whatever they were taught as children. And so screwy religious > > ideas that start small propagate. > > Yes, but the odd thing about screwy religious ideas is how vehemently and > murderously they can be held. You can deny the Tooth Fairy without too many > people losing control on the spot and shooting you dead, but do a simple > sketch of a non-Presbyterian prophet and many of his followers will go bugfuck > crazy and hack you to death while setting random cars on fire. Of course this > is an outlet for backed-up hormones and political grievances, but somehow All of this belongs as much to religion as to anything else. Some kind of people simply cannot bear it when someone opposes their point of view. Also, perhaps it is worth asking if the true believers are doing all those bad things, or just some idiots and liars (like, politicians, mind-thiefs etc)? If I do something that is against my belief, can I still be regarded as a believer? It seems to me, there is not so many believers in our not so brave world (or maybe, they just say but in fact they believe in something different). And those, who are - I think they are really good folk, worth talking too. And, surprise, surprise, tolerating other points of view. Perhaps the true believer is really a doubter inside, at least partially. Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home ** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com ** From spike66 at att.net Sat Jun 5 21:28:03 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 14:28:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Why religion at all?. In-Reply-To: <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike> > ...On Behalf Of Damien Broderick > Subject: Re: [ExI] Why religion at all?. > > On 6/5/2010 2:26 PM, spike wrote: > > > ...Church is a singles bar for married people. > > And this explains the rabid non-Presbyterians, with their > manly all-men devotions? > > If anything, maybe it explains the slightly more relaxed > Presbyterians. Bonobos vs. chimps... Damien Broderick Well, exactly. Honestly Dr. B, I claim zero understanding of the rabid non-Presbyterians and their inscrutable ways, none. We may need to branch into alternative explanations for their system, but I can be of no help, having never been into one of these houses of worship. I sometimes get the feeling that the militant non-Presbyterians are sensing an actual threat to their entire memeset, or perhaps a feeling that their system is somehow incompatible with the rest of the civilzed world. Perhaps they are acting in desperate and violent fear that their memeset will be entirely swept away by modernity. I do like the chimps vs bonobos comparison, being a big fan of bonobos. Clearly there is an important evolutionary message in their existence. It isn't entirely clear that they are a distinct species from common chimps, however they clearly behave differently from their cousins. This is important to understand in light of a recent discussion here regarding differenial mating by the dominant male vs mating by ladies choice. I think what we see in this case is speciation as a result of a slight difference in behavior: dominant males-win-chimps = bigger individuals, stronger, a meaner, often murderously violent society, as opposed to ladies-choice-bonobos = smaller individuals, peaceful, a share the food and fuck everything in sight society. If there is a lesson in here anywhere for humans, which society would you prefer? spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Jun 5 22:05:54 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 17:05:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: <16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> <16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike> Message-ID: <4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> On 6/5/2010 4:28 PM, spike wrote: > I think > what we see in this case is speciation as a result of a slight difference in > behavior: dominant males-win-chimps = bigger individuals, stronger, a > meaner, often murderously violent society, as opposed to > ladies-choice-bonobos = smaller individuals, peaceful, a share the food and > fuck everything in sight society. In a novel I just read, it was suggested that because bonobos fuck everything in sight and are fucked by everything in sight no male can be sure of paternity, so they are far less rewarded (genetically) by killing a new mate's previous kids, which chimps like doing. This differential then cascades through into other phenotypic and behavior differences. Analogies come to mind. Damien Broderick From bbenzai at yahoo.com Sat Jun 5 23:03:38 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 16:03:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <533155.32400.qm@web114420.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> BillK wrote: > > On 6/4/10, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > > OK, perhaps I should say "There's never been a pogrom, > crusade or suicide > >? bombing for the cause of atheism." > > > > Well, atheists fight just as much as everybody else and are > just as > likely to attack other ethnic groups. Groups attacking > other ethnic or > religious groups are a traditional human activity. The > atheists have > secular political or national leaders who lead their riots > just as > priests or imams lead their religious riots. There is > plenty of > evidence that atheism is no protective against psychotic > homicide on a > national scale. All of which could also be said of blue-eyed people or people with a liking for goat's cheese. Blue-eyedness or goat's cheese liking are not belief systems, and are not protective against psychotic homicide. I'm certainly not claiming that atheism is protective against psychotic homicide on a national scale. Or any scale. > The question was asked here: > > "Have people been killed in the name of atheism at any time > in history?" > > And the overall conclusion was 'Yes'. > > For example: The French Revolution had anti-religious > riots. > Quote: > You could argue that the basis given for the Russian > killing therefore > was Communism, not atheism, and this would be correct, but > I would > argue that a core component of Communism was state atheism, > and that > the aspects of it that were directed against religious > people were > therefore atheist in their component.? This became a > core component of > many communist regimes.? The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia > was atheist, and > most notoriously slaughtered everyone, with Buddhist monks > at the top > of the list. So if a core component of some regime was goat's cheese eating, and that regime declares a war on it's neighbour, a country that eats mostly cow's cheese, should we conclude that goat's cheese eating causes warlike behaviour? A better example might be language. Many invading cultures have imposed their language (or tried to) on the people they conquered. We never take the view that the language is the main cause of the war. My point is that many religious belief systems lead people to treat other people very badly, up to and including physical and mental torture, and murder, and to declare war on whole groups of people, but the absence of a religious belief system - /in itself/ - does not. Yes, there are always psychopaths and unscrupulous megalomaniacs, but it makes no difference whether they have a religion or not, their behaviour is not driven by it, although it may serve as a convenient excuse. Yes, there are groups of people that do bad things, and they may be atheists, but the reasons for their actions are not "because we're atheists", they're because of the tyranny of a previous regime, because there isn't enough food to go round, because they want more power, because they're afraid of being exterminated, etc., etc., or because their god told them to. Those last ones obvously wouldn't be atheists. Ben Zaiboc From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Jun 6 00:06:09 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 17:06:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: <4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> <16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike> <4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Damien, Has science fiction ever explored a humanity that directly evolved from bonobo chimps and kept their key characteristics? Their world would sure be different... John On 6/5/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/5/2010 4:28 PM, spike wrote: > >> I think >> what we see in this case is speciation as a result of a slight difference >> in >> behavior: dominant males-win-chimps = bigger individuals, stronger, a >> meaner, often murderously violent society, as opposed to >> ladies-choice-bonobos = smaller individuals, peaceful, a share the food >> and >> fuck everything in sight society. > > In a novel I just read, it was suggested that because bonobos fuck > everything in sight and are fucked by everything in sight no male can be > sure of paternity, so they are far less rewarded (genetically) by > killing a new mate's previous kids, which chimps like doing. This > differential then cascades through into other phenotypic and behavior > differences. Analogies come to mind. > > 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 Jun 6 00:43:52 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 19:43:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> <16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike> <4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C0AEF48.8080704@satx.rr.com> On 6/5/2010 7:06 PM, John Grigg wrote: > Has science fiction ever explored a humanity that directly evolved > from bonobo chimps and kept their key characteristics? Several stories, one by Brian Aldiss back in the 1960s. No titles come to mind. From spike66 at att.net Sun Jun 6 00:45:02 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 17:45:02 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net><4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com><16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike><4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <5F48CADD79094E32A5FE85729815ACD6@spike> > ...On Behalf Of John Grigg > Subject: Re: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps > > On 6/5/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > > On 6/5/2010 4:28 PM, spike wrote: > > > >> ...what we see in this case is speciation as a result of a slight > >> difference in behavior... > > > > In a novel I just read, it was suggested that because bonobos fuck > > everything in sight...Analogies come to mind... Damien Broderick > Damien, > > Has science fiction ever explored a humanity that directly > evolved from bonobo chimps and kept their key > characteristics? Their world would sure be different... John John, the bonobos, chimps and humans all evolved from a common ancestor, recently. If you want to call that common ancestor a protohuman or a protochimp, either is perfectly accurate and acceptable but I like the sound of protobonobo. spike From spike66 at att.net Sun Jun 6 01:35:24 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 18:35:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: <5F48CADD79094E32A5FE85729815ACD6@spike> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net><4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com><16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike><4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> <5F48CADD79094E32A5FE85729815ACD6@spike> Message-ID: <9AA2065C112A472F841F0BC6DB292D47@spike> ...On Behalf Of spike ... >...either is perfectly accurate and acceptable but I like the sound of protobonobo. ...which would make an excellent name for a rock band. Particularly if they were touring with Toto and Los Lobos. The intrepid anomatopoet fearlessly tickles the tail of the fearsome ExI-chat pun dragon... {8^D spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 6 01:45:24 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 20:45:24 -0500 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: <9AA2065C112A472F841F0BC6DB292D47@spike> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net><4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com><16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike><4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> <5F48CADD79094E32A5FE85729815ACD6@spike> <9AA2065C112A472F841F0BC6DB292D47@spike> Message-ID: <4C0AFDB4.30306@satx.rr.com> On 6/5/2010 8:35 PM, spike wrote: >> >...either is perfectly accurate and acceptable but I like the sound of > protobonobo. > > ...which would make an excellent name for a rock band. Particularly if they > were touring with Toto and Los Lobos. The novel I was reading is Robert Sawyer's WWW: WATCH (sequel to WWW: WAKE), with a forthcoming vol next year; it's a charming tale of the emergent AI consciousness of the internet in 2014. One of the characters is a signing bonobo-chimp hybrid, Hobo Bonobo... Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Sun Jun 6 01:52:55 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 18:52:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: <9AA2065C112A472F841F0BC6DB292D47@spike> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net><4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com><16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike><4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com><5F48CADD79094E32A5FE85729815ACD6@spike> <9AA2065C112A472F841F0BC6DB292D47@spike> Message-ID: > ...On Behalf Of spike > ... > >...either is perfectly accurate and acceptable but I like > the sound of protobonobo. > > ...which would make an excellent name for a rock band. > Particularly if they were touring with Toto and Los Lobos. Kicking and screaming, through no fault of their own, Mirco and Stefano are being helplessly drawn towards the punchline black hole... From spike66 at att.net Sun Jun 6 05:12:44 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 22:12:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conjunction Message-ID: <91279F6C06F342BAB87D577243BC2163@spike> Hey cool! Mars and Regulus were in conjunction tonight. Caught me by surprise. Usually I know these things are coming, but this time I just looked up there and saw it. Good news if you missed tonight, it looks like it will be even better tomorrow night, 6 June. If you aren't into this sort of thing, check it out, after sunset, look out to the west. Mars is the reddish one that isn't twinkling, and you will see two bright things together that you don't recall ever seeing before. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scerir at libero.it Sun Jun 6 10:43:39 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 12:43:39 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] docking Message-ID: <23273126.2340251275821019667.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> http://vimeo.com/2865492 From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Jun 6 10:58:24 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 12:58:24 +0200 Subject: [ExI] zubrin, sagan, et al, on mars In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2010/6/3 spike > > Ooohh so cool, cheeeeeeck it out! This was a really special one for me. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ5sWfhkpE0&feature=player_embedded > > This is really wonderful. It makes you cry on the state of the affair. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Jun 6 11:06:21 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 13:06:21 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Why religion at all? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 4 June 2010 04:43, Keith Henson wrote: > The capacity to be sucked into a religion is a widespread human > behavioral trait. I suspect "religion", in its vaguest and broadest sense, including several purely secular beliefs (e.g., the "religion of science") to be a fundamental trait of out etology - and a rather neutral one, for that matter. On the other hand, this does not prevent me in the least from opposing a number of actual, very specific, religions the peculiar tenets of which I abhor. The so-called "religions of the Book" in the first place. Their replacement with something else would not affect the possible human need for "religion" any more than their past success did. -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Jun 6 12:06:10 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 14:06:10 +0200 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> <16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike> <4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> <5F48CADD79094E32A5FE85729815ACD6@spike> <9AA2065C112A472F841F0BC6DB292D47@spike> Message-ID: On 6 June 2010 03:52, spike wrote: > Kicking and screaming, through no fault of their own, Mirco and Stefano are > being helplessly drawn towards the punchline black hole... :-) -- Stefano Vaj From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sun Jun 6 12:15:36 2010 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 05:15:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL Message-ID: <901107.66893.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> ----- Original Message ---- > From: BillK > To: ExI chat list > Sent: Sat, June 5, 2010 11:30:29 AM > Subject: Re: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL ? > 2010/6/5 Samantha wrote: > Not possible.? Those programs and the mentality > behind them are destroying > the economy that is the real thing that keeps > anarchy, and mass destitute > conditions, at bay.?? The programs are > parasitical.? They produce nothing > but only consume.? When the host, the > economy, dies? they also die. To call people on?welfare parasites is an unfair characterization.?Docile sheep-like consumption?is all modern society expects or wants of?most?individuals whatever the rhetoric might be.?Society actively discourages them?from producing anything by placing high barriers to entry in most businesses and by promoting economies of scale that individual producers cannot compete against. Furthermore it is not?like?welfare?money disappears into a black hole because the recipients don't hoard it. They spend it on fast food and cheap manufactured goods putting most if not all of it right back into the economy where it inevitably ends up back on the balance sheets of the rich the next fiscal quarter. And if these days?a good deal of?the money?flows to China via Wal-Mart, then it is?not entirely?the fault of the consumer on the dole.? > Not entirely but there are > similarities.? Both over-promised at home and > over extended massively > abroad.? Both played financial games to attempt to > pretend all is well.? > All dying empires do this. All empires die but empires can be centuries dying and there are?decisions to be made?that can either delay or hasten?this ones?demise.?In our favor we are still officially a republic albeit a corrupt one.?And corruption can be cleaned up at least in the short term until?such time as the safeguards put into place are again circumvented.?Doomsaying?seems to be in fashion these days but?if we survived the Great Depression, then?we can survive this downturn.?That is not to say that there are not some really important lessons to be learned. We might not be so fortunate next time around.?? > Bill wrote: > It is not welfare for the > people that has destroyed the economy. The people need welfare because there > is nothing left for them. The money and power has been concentrated into > fewer and fewer hands. Capitalism only works while you have a stake in > the game. Now that a few percent of the population own virtually everything, > the game is > over. I don't think the game is over yet.?During the Great Depression, unemployment rose to 25% in the US and 33% in some other countries. Yet the Great Depression did not end us. Neither will this. The worse danger is?losing sight of the long term problems due to short term difficulties and the?elation of recovery.?For example,?an economic recovery will exacerbate the energy crisis, as people rejoining the workforce start commuting again and production of everything is stepped up.?? The capitalists realised that > fraud pays much better than producing stuff. And now that they have captured > the government, there is nothing to? stop > them. That is an unfair characterization of capitalists in general. A small percentage do this. The rest have ethics and are just trying to make an honest buck by providing valuable goods and services to the people. That the bad?apples may have captured the government is cause for concern but democratic governments can be fixed. The trick is to figure out where and how the foxes are getting into the hen house and plug those holes. That and not naively trusting them to guard it in the first place. Stuart LaForge "What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight." - Joseph Joubert From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Jun 6 15:29:21 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 10:29:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Off Topic Warning: H+ Summit Sharing Room Message-ID: <22B127E25E4F480BAD104B6328058A7A@DFC68LF1> I am looking for someone to share a room with me at the Humanity+ Summit @ Harvard. Please email me off list. Thank you! (Closing door quietly ...) Natasha Natasha Vita-More MSc, MPhil PhD Researcher, University of Plymouth Board of Directors: Humanity+ Fellow: Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies Visiting Scholar: 21st Century Medicine Advisor: Singularity University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sun Jun 6 18:59:26 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 11:59:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 8 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 5:00 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Jun 3, 2010, at 10:43 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > >> I make a case that the ability to hold a religion comes from the ability to be infected with a xenophobic meme where the function of the infection is to sync a tribe's warriors up for a do or die attempt to kill neighbors in times of ecological stress. > > Maybe, but there might be a simpler explanation. In general it would be a Evolutionary advantage for children to listen to and believe what adults, particularly parents, have to say; don't eat those berries they will kill you, don't swim in that river there are crocodiles, etc. Most people may not be born with innate religious feelings but some are, and they teach their children that belief, and when they grow up they in turn teach their children that belief too. They do it because most people have this usually advantageous tendency to believe into adulthood whatever they were taught as children. And so screwy religious ideas that start small propagate. While there is a evolutionary based trait to learn the business of surviving in a particular area, it is clear to me that different mechanisms are involved in being infected with and strongly motivated by xenophobic religious memes. Particularly, this behavior is under the control of a switch. The switch is turned off by perception of positive future economic (originally ecological) prospects. I had to invoke Hamilton's rule and do a detailed genetic accounting to account for the evolution of these traits. You have to take a gene view because as Damien Broderick noted: > > Yes, but the odd thing about screwy religious ideas is how vehemently > and murderously they can be held. You can deny the Tooth Fairy without > too many people losing control on the spot and shooting you dead, but do > a simple sketch of a non-Presbyterian prophet and many of his followers > will go bugfuck crazy and hack you to death while setting random cars on > fire. In the environment in which this behavioral mechanism evolved, going "bugfuck crazy" and attacking neighbors was taking a 50% chance (on average) of getting killed. For this mechanism to be positively selected you have to include the genes carried by the female offspring of the killed warriors *and* the alternative to going "bugfuck crazy" has to be worse, for example starving in a famine next year because the economic (ecological) prospects look rotten. > Of course this is an outlet for backed-up hormones and political > grievances, but somehow religion has a singular capacity to fire up > superstimuli uber-releasers. Keith's kill-the-Other evolutionary psych > story is clearly part of what's going on, but that seems to me likely to > be a side consequence of something far more deeply rooted in group and > individual psychology (along the lines of informing a drunk redneck that > his mother is a 'ho). I don't know how strongly these might be connected. Maintaining status in a group seems to me to be under continuous selection, not the episodic effects of wars. Spike comments: > I partially agree with both, but there is another element missing in both > notions above. ?Religion produces a mild "high" of endorphines. ?It can be > like a "rave" but without the actual chemicals. ?I looked up on the internet > regarding what the heck is a "rave," so now I know everything about it, a > veritable "rave" expert I am. I make the case in "sex, drugs and cults" for an evolved mechanism I refer to as "capture-bonding." This is the psychological mechanism that causes Stockholm syndrome. It was selected as a result of millions of years of women being captured from one little tribe to another. Women who were able to adapt to being captured (at times with their children being killed in front of them) became ancestors, our ancestors. Those who were not became breakfast. If the numbers were similar to the Yanomano, 10% of our female ancestors went through this filter. (Males were normally just killed.) The mechanism almost certainly includes release of endorphins. (See Patty Hearst's account.) Ten percent per generation is a *very* strong selection, so all of us have these mechanisms to various degrees. I am on less certain grounds here but I think the side effects partial activation of the capture-bonding mechanism includes the bonding people get from military basic training, bonding in hazing, paradoxical bonding in battered wife syndrome and BDSM. If the full blown activation of the xenophobic meme/war mechanism has people going "bugfuck crazy" then the partial activation of the mechanism as religious behavior in less stressed times could well cause the release of endorphins and maybe dopamine. > Secondly as I have commented here before, church is a highly sexually > charged environment. ?It really is, I am not kidding. ?Church is a singles > bar for married people. I am not surprised. There is a strong connection between war and sex and I make the connection that religions (or memes in that class) are part of the causal path to wars. Please keep in mind the EP viewpoint that typical human behavior is the result of evolutionary selection for the behavior or else the behavior is a side effect of some behavior that *was* selected. (Corner case being something fixed by genetic drift.) I would be most interested if someone can make a case that the EP viewpoint is not true. Keith Keith From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sun Jun 6 19:50:19 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 12:50:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] subject filter Message-ID: Could a filter be added to return group mail with "Re: extropy-chat Digest" in the subject line? Keith From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Jun 7 02:36:25 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 19:36:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: <4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> <16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike> <4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C0C5B29.8090401@mac.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/5/2010 4:28 PM, spike wrote: > >> I think >> what we see in this case is speciation as a result of a slight >> difference in >> behavior: dominant males-win-chimps = bigger individuals, stronger, a >> meaner, often murderously violent society, as opposed to >> ladies-choice-bonobos = smaller individuals, peaceful, a share the >> food and >> fuck everything in sight society. Laughs. Brings back fond memories of a lesbian household I was a member of some years ago. - s From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Jun 7 04:05:56 2010 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 23:05:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: The avatar revolution: Here come the new humans In-Reply-To: <772384.51030.qm@web38908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <626a26cc-80c9-4d49-9c94-f3b4d3cdd6dc@t10g2000yqg.googlegroups.com> <772384.51030.qm@web38908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Bob Keyes Date: Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 11:03 PM Subject: Re: The avatar revolution: Here come the new humans To: diybio at googlegroups.com What hasn't been revealed is the destiny of humanity. We are animals, but we are starting to become something else. We are now, or very shortly will, create life patterned by our own will. We will modify ourselves, as individuals and in our 'offspring', and this will enable us to do further modification, i.e. it will be recursive. In a millenium, humans will little resemble what we are now. Some will find this horrible, sinful, something which must be stopped. I can understand the discomfort. But it cannot be stopped. Humans will do what we can. We adapt and compete and change our environment and we change ourselves. We will just hone this trait to perfection. Look around us as the richest and most highly educated in the modern world fail to reproduce at the rate of 'replacement value'. Yet others reproduce without any chosen restraint, it is only malthusian pressure that keeps their numbers low. This will split the human race, as the few and the rich become less mortal. Nothing is unnatural. It is our nature to want to defeat death. Some of us will detach from our mortal shells. Others of us will draw the line at what we find acceptable in life extension and transformation. Will we have wars, mutants or superhumans against the mere-humans? Probably. Am I mad to say what I have said above? Certainly some people fear it, and fear that those in DIYbio will be the first to do so, beyond and in spite of laws meant to restrain our trans-human impulses. There are probably people in the DIYbio community who feel that the essence of humanity is different than I have described, and may think of such exposition as dangerous. So be it. To regulate DIYbio will not change the fundemental desires present in so many humans: the desire to be trans-human. --- On Sun, 6/6/10, Daniel Sander Hoffmann wrote: > From: Daniel Sander Hoffmann > Subject: Re: The avatar revolution: Here come the new humans > To: "DIYh+" > Cc: diybio at googlegroups.com > Date: Sunday, June 6, 2010, 6:27 PM > Hi Natasha, > > You are right! (I posted the link just to polemize.) > > Mimesis presupposes that behavioral match entails identity > (like e.g. > in the Turing Test.) Na?fs should have known better, > looking instead > for the causal underpinnings, i.e., behavior generation in > physical/ > biological systems (as true science does, as most DIYBio > practitioners > seem to do, and as opposed to mimetic wishful thinking like > computer- > based ALife, "mind uploading" and the like.) > > The failure of the mimetic approach is a huge shadow > falling upon some > of the most daring transhuman hopes. > > Take thy beak from out my heart, and take thy form from off > my door! > Quoth the raven, `Nevermore.' > > Thanks, Poe? :-) > > Daniel > > > On 2 jun, 18:32, nata... at natasha.cc > wrote: > > Thanks for the article. I enjoyed reading it. > > > > But do they continue as us after we die? ?Thus, the > link from the > > article regarding a back-up brain. ?This idea is not > new, but it seems > > to be quite premature. ?The entire philosophical > issue of identity and > > "self" is forgotten in this article. > > > > My concern is that this growing field of human > replacement engines is > > out of touch with "life" - the ecology of being alive. > ?I am not a > > dualist, but my "self" has experiences that are > reflective of my > > biology. ?No matter how many Primo Posthuman's I > design with > > nanomedicine and other systems, we cannot forgo our > senses and how > > awareness/consciousness is developed through cognitive > and perceptual > > properties. > > > > Best, > > Natasha > > > > Quoting Daniel Sander Hoffmann : > > > > > > > > >http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627632.100-the-avatar-revolut... > > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are > subscribed to the Google > > > Groups "DIYh+" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to diytranshumanist at googlegroups.com. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > diytranshumanist+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > > > For more options, visit this group at > > >http://groups.google.com/group/diytranshumanist?hl=en.- > Ocultar texto das mensagens anteriores - > > > > - Mostrar texto das mensagens anteriores - > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the > Google Groups "DIYbio" group. > To post to this group, send email to diybio at googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group. To post to this group, send email to diybio at googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en. -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Jun 7 04:35:49 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 21:35:49 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: The avatar revolution: Here come the new humans In-Reply-To: References: <626a26cc-80c9-4d49-9c94-f3b4d3cdd6dc@t10g2000yqg.googlegroups.com> <772384.51030.qm@web38908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Who is Bob Keyes? John . From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Jun 7 04:41:24 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 21:41:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: <4C0C5B29.8090401@mac.com> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> <16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike> <4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> <4C0C5B29.8090401@mac.com> Message-ID: What about a proto-bonobo that needs pro bono legal aid? John ; ) On 6/6/10, samantha wrote: > Damien Broderick wrote: >> On 6/5/2010 4:28 PM, spike wrote: >> >>> I think >>> what we see in this case is speciation as a result of a slight >>> difference in >>> behavior: dominant males-win-chimps = bigger individuals, stronger, a >>> meaner, often murderously violent society, as opposed to >>> ladies-choice-bonobos = smaller individuals, peaceful, a share the >>> food and >>> fuck everything in sight society. > > Laughs. Brings back fond memories of a lesbian household I was a member > of some years ago. > > - s > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mon Jun 7 04:49:02 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 23:49:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> <16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike> <4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> <4C0C5B29.8090401@mac.com> Message-ID: <4C0C7A3E.3070202@satx.rr.com> On 6/6/2010 11:41 PM, John Grigg wrote: > What about a proto-bonobo that needs pro bono legal aid? Throw him a bone. Unless he's already got a boner, of course, but then he probably will have. From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Jun 7 05:03:28 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 00:03:28 -0500 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: <4C0C7A3E.3070202@satx.rr.com> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> <16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike> <4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> <4C0C5B29.8090401@mac.com> <4C0C7A3E.3070202@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C0C7DA0.7080600@satx.rr.com> It's worth noting that when they get recognized as human the species term Homo homo bonobo probably applies. All of their marriages are gay, and open. From spike66 at att.net Mon Jun 7 05:29:32 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 22:29:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: <4C0C7DA0.7080600@satx.rr.com> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net> <4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com> <16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike> <4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> <4C0C5B29.8090401@mac.com> <4C0C7A3E.3070202@satx.rr.com> <4C0C7DA0.7080600@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <0EB514B6185D4A0E927F988E29AADD14@spike> >...On Behalf Of > Damien Broderick > Subject: Re: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps > > It's worth noting that when they get recognized as human the > species term Homo homo bonobo probably applies. All of their > marriages are gay, and open. OK this one wins. {8^D We see why it is that Damien makes an actual living with his words, where as you and I peck at a keyboard. Perhaps you have seen the good evolution science museums. Americans often must go to Canada for this, such as the excellent Royal Tyrrell in Drumheller, Alberta. http://www.tyrrellmuseum.com/ They actually have mechanized models of some lifeforms. If they had one of an ancestor of humans, it would be a roboprotobonobo. spike From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Jun 7 07:53:30 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 00:53:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] I think people tend to confuse 2050 with 2100! Message-ID: I googled the phrase "life in the year 2050" and found these rathering amusing links about the subject. I think people tend to be over-optimistic when prognosticating about the future. I run into predictions that may be reality by 2100, but probably not in 2050. http://2050-dafthermit.blogspot.com/2009/05/2050.html http://zone000.wordpress.com/2008/03/09/life-in-the-year-2050/ http://sg.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061202060931AAMCqp6 I liked the "pop out your brain when you go to the airport" idea. ; ) John From mlatorra at gmail.com Mon Jun 7 13:56:40 2010 From: mlatorra at gmail.com (Michael LaTorra) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 07:56:40 -0600 Subject: [ExI] NYTimes: Hooked on Gadgets, and Paying a Mental Price Message-ID: "Hooked on Gadgets, and Paying a Mental Price" SAN FRANCISCO ? When one of the most important e-mail messages of his life landed in his in-box a few years ago, Kord Campbell overlooked it. Not just for a day or two, but 12 days. He finally saw it while sifting through old messages: a big company wanted to buy his Internet start-up. ... [more] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/07/technology/07brain.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Jun 7 15:27:43 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 08:27:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps In-Reply-To: <4C0C5B29.8090401@mac.com> References: <9715A7DF-6D6D-4701-9D03-5B06AB9C321B@bellsouth.net><4C0AB21B.7000407@satx.rr.com><16892EA8645E46D9BF36AF7CC032D62D@spike><4C0ACA42.5060802@satx.rr.com> <4C0C5B29.8090401@mac.com> Message-ID: > ...On Behalf Of samantha > Subject: Re: [ExI] bonobos vs. chimps > > Damien Broderick wrote: > > On 6/5/2010 4:28 PM, spike wrote: > > > >> ... as opposed to > >> ladies-choice-bonobos = smaller individuals, peaceful, a share the > >> food and fuck everything in sight society. > > Laughs. Brings back fond memories of a lesbian household I > was a member of some years ago. - s In college I shared a house with 17 other guys, all heterosexual as far as I know. We were more like a troop of chimps however. spike From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Tue Jun 8 02:53:02 2010 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 19:53:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <189799.12138.qm@web110411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/3/10, spike wrote: > Anna, some churches are evolving into this community center > notion.? I know > of at least one example of a fundamentalist church that > went this route.? It > is in Palo Alto.? It started back in the early 80s as > a church for former > Seventh Day Adventists who were no longer believers but > were still > technically on the membership lists.? Over the years > it has become the > Univeralist Unitarian equivalent of a former fundamentalist > church, if that > makes any sense. Actually, with all the name calling I got lost:) fundamentalists? Palo Alto? 7th day Adventists? Spike, I was talking about duty to others. A cosmic energy for the greater good. You really think making religion disappear is the answer? What is a weakened form? Why believe Lee? This is what you would instill or install? Just curious, Anna > Lee Corbin suggested a kind of inoculation against > religion, where the > children were introduced to a weakened form of religion for > information > purposes, along with the clear message that the teachings > and historical > accounts are not "true" in the sense of court testimony or > scientific > evidence, but rather an ambiguously valuable ancient > folklore with some > ethical and moral content, use with caution, your mileage > may vary, void > where prohibited etc.? Lee's notion is that it would > be analogous to > injecting a weakened form of a pathogen in order to pump > the body's immune > system.? The brain's memetic immune system would then > become better able to > resist memetic infection of fundamentalist religion or > fundamentalist > environmentalism or any other fundamentalist memeset. > > I find Lee's notion compelling. > > spike > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 8 04:26:40 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 21:26:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <189799.12138.qm@web110411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <189799.12138.qm@web110411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <723F3761D0E34CF9A061E38E8F19B20F@spike> > ...On Behalf Of Anna Taylor > Subject: Re: [ExI] to install > ... > Spike, I was talking about duty to others. A cosmic energy > for the greater good. You really think making religion > disappear is the answer? Ja. Well, I guess it depends on the question. > What is a weakened form?... By this I mean religion without the supernatural, or a demythologized form of religion. What I would aim for is a form of religion that would make any scientist or atheist would be perfectly comfortable. I can imagine such forms, a spirituality that would be OK with Sagan, Asimov and Dawkins. Traditional religionists may not recognize it as a religion, but I would. > Why believe Lee? Lee is a smart man. I hope you get a chance to meet him in the flesh, creative thinker, very nice guy, not at all what you would expect from reading his stern no-nonsense ExI posts. > This is what you would instill or install?> Anna Inspire. I want my son to be inspired by scientists, to depend on evidence and reason, as opposed to divine revelation. Science is the way, the truth and the life. There is no other path to enlightenment. spike From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Jun 8 04:31:33 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 21:31:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <723F3761D0E34CF9A061E38E8F19B20F@spike> References: <189799.12138.qm@web110411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <723F3761D0E34CF9A061E38E8F19B20F@spike> Message-ID: Spike, I hope your son grows up to be a scientist. But I'm sure he'll be great at whatever he chooses as a profession. John : ) On 6/7/10, spike wrote: > > >> ...On Behalf Of Anna Taylor >> Subject: Re: [ExI] to install >> ... >> Spike, I was talking about duty to others. A cosmic energy >> for the greater good. You really think making religion >> disappear is the answer? > > Ja. Well, I guess it depends on the question. > >> What is a weakened form?... > > By this I mean religion without the supernatural, or a demythologized form > of religion. What I would aim for is a form of religion that would make any > scientist or atheist would be perfectly comfortable. I can imagine such > forms, a spirituality that would be OK with Sagan, Asimov and Dawkins. > Traditional religionists may not recognize it as a religion, but I would. > >> Why believe Lee? > > Lee is a smart man. I hope you get a chance to meet him in the flesh, > creative thinker, very nice guy, not at all what you would expect from > reading his stern no-nonsense ExI posts. > >> This is what you would instill or install?> Anna > > Inspire. I want my son to be inspired by scientists, to depend on evidence > and reason, as opposed to divine revelation. Science is the way, the truth > and the life. There is no other path to enlightenment. > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 8 04:50:54 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 21:50:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: References: <189799.12138.qm@web110411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com><723F3761D0E34CF9A061E38E8F19B20F@spike> Message-ID: > ...On Behalf Of John Grigg ... > Subject: Re: [ExI] to install > > Spike, > > I hope your son grows up to be a scientist. But I'm sure > he'll be great at whatever he chooses as a profession. > > John : ) Johnny thanks, you are a good and kind man. Your encouraging words remind me of a bible verse, Ecclesiastes chapter 9 verse 10: "Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest." This verse is a perfect example of what I suggested. This verse doesn't promise or suggest any afterlife, no ethereal harps and clouds, but rather a direct SEIZE THE DAY my young friends, do it now, work at it, work hard, do it with thy might, for this is the one life we have, and when it is gone it is gone forever. But it is here now, you and I are here now. Make the most of it with all you have. spike From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 8 05:37:28 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 22:37:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] idea regarding cats Message-ID: <0128833DF01841708C6B3D530F24B642@spike> Or discussion last week of housecats attacking dogs gave me an idea. Modern domestic dogs have been bred from wolves for all manner of different and useful behaviors, such as pulling sleds, guarding the junkyard, hunting, herding sheep and so on. But cats, not so much. The different breeds of cats behave pretty much the same; seldom do you see one that actually does anything. Cats are useless beasts, ja? So we now have a tool that the old timers didn't have, which could speed up the breeding of certain cat behaviors perhaps a hundredfold. When I was in college, my sweetheart and I were at a county park when a starving abandoned kitten came running up, attacking us wildly. It was crazed with hunger, leaping on any living thing regardless of its size, attempting to bite out a chunk of meat. Not wanting a cat but not wishing to part with any actual flesh, we took the starving beast home, fed him, cut the innumerable burrs out of his fur, generally brought him back from the brink. That evening I put the cat outside, where I assumed all cats belonged, but someone let him back in. I woke up in the night with a strange feeling: the cat had crawled underneath my neck, stretched out longways. He wanted to sleep with me. I don't know if the beast felt grateful for having been saved from starvation, or what was the deal, but that was the most human-loving cat you ever saw. If I let him, he would climb up on my shoulders while I was studying and drape himself across the back of my neck like a fur wrap, all four feet forward, and nap that way. It was quite the distraction having this napping beast purring right in my ear, but I occasionally allowed it. He always wanted to be right where all the people were. So here's the idea: if we wanted to breed cats for a certain behavior, the internet would be a perfect tool. We could advertise or form a cat breeding club, to breed for certain traits in cats, such as the biggest, the meanest, the nicest, the best mouser, the most easily trained to use a toilet (I have a friend who managed to train his cat to do that), the most likely to attack a dog to protect his own dog, the one who loves people the most, or does some oddball behavior like sleep hanging over one's shoulders, etc. It took humans thousands of years to create certain behaviors in dog breeds, but there were so many limitations. If we had an internet group, it essentially forms a worldwide gene pool from which we could single out some wacky trait or other, then find a pair, both of which like to drape across ones shoulders for instance, then use the beast equivalent of follistim to make a hundred embryos from those two. We could breed cats that come when they are called. We could breed cats that act more like dogs. We could perhaps create cat breeds which don't just fawn on their owners when they are hungry, but do so all the time like my college cat. We might be able to do this in a single human lifetime, or perhaps two. The more I think about it, the more I realize this is an obvious idea, so it must already exist somewhere. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Jun 8 07:11:15 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 00:11:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] idea regarding cats In-Reply-To: <0128833DF01841708C6B3D530F24B642@spike> References: <0128833DF01841708C6B3D530F24B642@spike> Message-ID: Spike, I really like your idea. I remember reading about a new and very expensive breed that resembles lions (they even have manes). And as you might hope, they are very social creatures (especially with humans). Good luck with the feline breeding program. I can imagine you as the founder of a modern-day Bene Gesserit with the goal of creating a super kitty. "How can Fluffy singlehandedly fight off packs of big dogs, purr like an Italian sports car, rescue drowning children from swimming pools, and be almost the size of a German Shepherd"? "How can this be?" "For he is the cat Kwisatz Haderach!!!" John : ) On 6/7/10, spike wrote: > Or discussion last week of housecats attacking dogs gave me an idea. > > Modern domestic dogs have been bred from wolves for all manner of different > and useful behaviors, such as pulling sleds, guarding the junkyard, hunting, > herding sheep and so on. But cats, not so much. The different breeds of > cats behave pretty much the same; seldom do you see one that actually does > anything. Cats are useless beasts, ja? So we now have a tool that the old > timers didn't have, which could speed up the breeding of certain cat > behaviors perhaps a hundredfold. > > When I was in college, my sweetheart and I were at a county park when a > starving abandoned kitten came running up, attacking us wildly. It was > crazed with hunger, leaping on any living thing regardless of its size, > attempting to bite out a chunk of meat. Not wanting a cat but not wishing > to part with any actual flesh, we took the starving beast home, fed him, cut > the innumerable burrs out of his fur, generally brought him back from the > brink. That evening I put the cat outside, where I assumed all cats > belonged, but someone let him back in. I woke up in the night with a > strange feeling: the cat had crawled underneath my neck, stretched out > longways. He wanted to sleep with me. > > I don't know if the beast felt grateful for having been saved from > starvation, or what was the deal, but that was the most human-loving cat you > ever saw. If I let him, he would climb up on my shoulders while I was > studying and drape himself across the back of my neck like a fur wrap, all > four feet forward, and nap that way. It was quite the distraction having > this napping beast purring right in my ear, but I occasionally allowed it. > He always wanted to be right where all the people were. > > So here's the idea: if we wanted to breed cats for a certain behavior, the > internet would be a perfect tool. We could advertise or form a cat breeding > club, to breed for certain traits in cats, such as the biggest, the meanest, > the nicest, the best mouser, the most easily trained to use a toilet (I have > a friend who managed to train his cat to do that), the most likely to attack > a dog to protect his own dog, the one who loves people the most, or does > some oddball behavior like sleep hanging over one's shoulders, etc. > > It took humans thousands of years to create certain behaviors in dog breeds, > but there were so many limitations. If we had an internet group, it > essentially forms a worldwide gene pool from which we could single out some > wacky trait or other, then find a pair, both of which like to drape across > ones shoulders for instance, then use the beast equivalent of follistim to > make a hundred embryos from those two. We could breed cats that come when > they are called. We could breed cats that act more like dogs. We could > perhaps create cat breeds which don't just fawn on their owners when they > are hungry, but do so all the time like my college cat. We might be able to > do this in a single human lifetime, or perhaps two. > > The more I think about it, the more I realize this is an obvious idea, so it > must already exist somewhere. > > spike > > > From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Jun 8 06:54:59 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 23:54:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] idea regarding cats In-Reply-To: <0128833DF01841708C6B3D530F24B642@spike> Message-ID: <450664.36597.qm@web81608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Mon, 6/7/10, spike wrote: The more I think about it, the more I realize this is an obvious idea, so it must already exist somewhere. Google on "cat breeding".? Much of it has to do with physical characteristics, but there is some breeding for mental attributes as well. It's not as ancient as dog breeding, but see this line from http://www.thecatsite.com/Breeds/53/About-Breeding-Cats.html : The great cat exhibition held in Great Britain in 1871 is traditionally considered to mark the beginning of the era of international cat breeding. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Tue Jun 8 07:59:46 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 08:59:46 +0100 Subject: [ExI] idea regarding cats In-Reply-To: <450664.36597.qm@web81608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <0128833DF01841708C6B3D530F24B642@spike> <450664.36597.qm@web81608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 6/8/10, Adrian Tymes wrote: > Google on "cat breeding". Much of it has to do with physical characteristics, > but there is some breeding for mental attributes as well. > > It's not as ancient as dog breeding, but see this line from > http://www.thecatsite.com/Breeds/53/About-Breeding-Cats.html : > > The great cat exhibition held in Great Britain in 1871 is traditionally considered > to mark the beginning of the era of international cat breeding. > > In case you didn't notice, the 1800s century is the same time that Keith believes that the UK population evolved 'capitalism' genes. Obviously wrong. It was the cats organising the economic system for their own benefit. (What do you mean 'correlation doesn't equal causation'? Sometimes it does. Keith hasn't found any 'capitalism' genes either). BillK From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Jun 8 11:13:07 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 04:13:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] I think people tend to confuse 2050 with 2100! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C0E25C3.2010202@mac.com> John Grigg wrote: > I googled the phrase "life in the year 2050" and found these rathering > amusing links about the subject. I think people tend to be > over-optimistic when prognosticating about the future. I run into > predictions that may be reality by 2100, but probably not in 2050. > > http://2050-dafthermit.blogspot.com/2009/05/2050.html > > http://zone000.wordpress.com/2008/03/09/life-in-the-year-2050/ > > http://sg.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061202060931AAMCqp6 > > I liked the "pop out your brain when you go to the airport" idea. ; ) > Middle one was much too tame. The first one is likely to be all attempted by then whether we succeed or not. The last one seemed to tame until the ridiculous settling venus. Clearly terraforming a place that screwed up for our body plans would take longer. Unless we are robots or deeply altered by then. Besides, what is down that gravity well that you can't get easier in space? You won't see all religions eliminated. We are talking about 40 years from now. How much happened in the last 40 years? How much faster do things happen now? My only uncertainty is the various ways we can majorly screw up our high tech civilization. Assuming we don't have too major meltdowns I fully expect to see: - more than one year added to average lifespan per year; - medical nanotech capable of repairing most damage; - > human artificial intelligence - molecular nanotechnology (assemblers) - embedded internet connectivity - virtual reality and virtual worlds as good as surrogates - seriously augmented reality - serious space exploitation all the way out asteroid belt I don't think we get 90 years to fart around on getting some of these things. We will need them too badly long before then. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Jun 8 11:31:33 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 04:31:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL In-Reply-To: <901107.66893.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <901107.66893.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C0E2A15.6000207@mac.com> The Avantguardian wrote: > ----- Original Message ---- > >> From: BillK >> To: ExI chat list >> Sent: Sat, June 5, 2010 11:30:29 AM >> Subject: Re: [ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL >> > > >> 2010/6/5 Samantha wrote: >> > > >> Not possible. Those programs and the mentality >> behind them are destroying >> the economy that is the real thing that keeps >> anarchy, and mass destitute >> conditions, at bay. The programs are >> parasitical. They produce nothing >> but only consume. When the host, the >> economy, dies they also die. >> > > To call people on welfare parasites is an unfair characterization. > To imply I did so is unfair. I called government and the programs themselves parasitical. They quite obviously are. They feed on and require a relatively healthy economy to survive. If carried too far they kill the economy. They are doing so today, especially when you count unfunded liabilities. Look up how the federal budget breaks down and see for yourself. > Docile sheep-like consumption is all modern society expects or wants of most individuals whatever the rhetoric might be. > I don't see what this assumption has to do with whether such programs can really help or not. > Society actively discourages them from producing anything by placing high barriers to entry in most businesses and by promoting economies of scale that individual producers cannot compete against. Utter hogwash. The economy is littered with big companies down that were run out of someone's living room not that long ago. The world is changing quickly and existing businesses are often not nimble enough. Little guys steal the cheese. > Furthermore it is not like welfare money disappears into a black hole because the recipients don't hoard it. They spend it on fast food and cheap manufactured goods putting most if not all of it right back into the economy where it inevitably ends up back on the balance sheets of the rich the next fiscal quarter. They spend it on low-level consumables in other words. No new value is created for the value consumed. Economically that is a black hole. It raises the funds of fast food places and cheap goods and some vices but not a whole lot else. > And if these days a good deal of the money flows to China via Wal-Mart, then it is not entirely the fault of the consumer on the dole. > It is largely the fault of a system that penalizes production and rewards mere accumulation of paper whether any real value is created or not. > >> Not entirely but there are >> similarities. Both over-promised at home and >> over extended massively >> abroad. Both played financial games to attempt to >> pretend all is well. >> All dying empires do this. >> > > All empires die but empires can be centuries dying and there are decisions to be made that can either delay or hasten this ones demise. We don't need to be an empire and it wasn't the original idea. > In our favor we are still officially a republic albeit a corrupt one. Utterly corrupt. If you look at the situation honestly we might pass for a not totally out-of-control fascist state (largely so-called "state capitalism" and out of control government power). > And corruption can be cleaned up at least in the short term until such time as the safeguards put into place are again circumvented. It can only be cleaned up by wiping most of the current assumptions and structure of government. No stop gap "corruption fixes" will do a darn thing except raise a bit of dust. > Doomsaying seems to be in fashion these days but if we survived the Great Depression, then we can survive this downturn. Actually, much that was important did not survive the GD intact. We aren't in as good a shape for weathering such an event as we were then. Not in terms of savings, in terms of self-supporting families and farms, in terms of general self-reliance, in terms of respect for freedom. I expect, I am extremely sorry to say, a profound crash in this decade. I will only expect to end up wrong if some very serious tech miracle gives us (western civ) a major shot in the arm. Otherwise we are much too over-extended and face too many very serious challenges. Cheap, plentiful, relatively clean energy would be one such tech miracle. MNT or AGI would be others. Good launch and space exploitation tech would work. But note that all of these except possibly energy tech have a longer than decade likely timeline. > That is not to say that there are not some really important lessons to be learned. We might not be so fortunate next time around. > Trouble is, I think you may have some of the wrong "lessons" in mind and unfortunately, so do most people. So when the stress gets much higher (which it will) they will clamor for precisely the most wrong and some of the most dangerous things. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Tue Jun 8 15:05:34 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 08:05:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 'capitalism' genes was breeding cats Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:00 AM, BillK wrote: > > In case you didn't notice, the 1800s century is the same time that > Keith believes that the UK population evolved 'capitalism' genes. > Obviously wrong. It was the cats organising the economic system for > their own benefit. Heh. For a fact humans who have had cats seem to be happier with them, in spite of them being a nuisance . But it's not exactly true that I think the UK population evolved 'capitalism' genes in the 1800. Rather, I have been impressed by both the work and the conclusions Dr. Gregory Clark on with his analysis of the run up to the industrial revolution. If you have not read his book or the 50 page paper on this, you should. > (What do you mean 'correlation doesn't equal causation'? Sometimes it > does. Keith hasn't found any 'capitalism' genes either). I am not in the business of looking for them, but it wouldn't be hard to find them. Tame foxes differ in gene expression in only about 40 genes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox It took about 20 generations of foxes to breed these hyper tame foxes. I don't think anyone, at least not anyone on this list, doubts that the tameness of these foxes is the result of selective breeding for tame behavior genes. >From the mid 1200s to 1800 is about 20 human generations. The UK has probate records for this period and that is what Dr. Clark used to see if there was a correlation between the number of surviving children and the size of the estate. He found it. The same "more surviving kids for the well off" is probably true for most stable agrarian societies. It is not true for all societies. Clark made the reasonable assumption that some behavior genes would be conducive to accumulating wealth. These are a different set of genes than are likely to be successful in hunter gatherer or waring tribal societies. Because the society was both Malthusian and Darwinian, the genes for behaviors (personality characteristics) that were conducive to accumulating wealth became more common over this long time period. There are independent measures of some of these such as the historical fall in interest rates. There are vast piles of human bones in the UK from thousands of years ago. So if someone wanted to look at the changing mix of genes like they looked at the foxes, the information is there. Keith PS. If anyone is serious about a cat breeding program, look at what it took with foxes. From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 8 15:47:21 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 08:47:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 'capitalism' genes was breeding cats In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > ...On Behalf Of Keith Henson > Subject: Re: [ExI] 'capitalism' genes was breeding cats > > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:00 AM, BillK wrote: > > > > In case you didn't notice, the 1800s century is the same time that > > Keith believes that the UK population evolved 'capitalism' genes. > > Obviously wrong. It was the cats organising the economic system for > > their own benefit... Haaaaahahahahaaaa! {8^D See why I still hang out on ExI? People here come up with ideas like that one. {8-] Keith's notion of a capitalism gene is intriguing. I buy it. The implications are far ranging too. Capitalism is a political notion, so it seems reasonable to me that political leanings are to some extent genetic. No doubt political notions are influenced greatly by environment, but I have long suspected there is a genetic component to our political leanings. If so, most political debate becomes racism. > ...Tame foxes differ in gene expression in only about 40 genes. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox > > It took about 20 generations of foxes to breed these hyper tame foxes...Keith Cool! This reinforces my notion that an organized effort to breed behaviors into cats could be done in a reasonable time span. Twenty generations of cats would fit in a single human lifespan. It is difficult to explain *why* exactly one would *want* a cat who drapes its inert self over one's shoulders, but no more mysterious is this than why it is that so many otherwise sane people feed the useless beasts daily. spike From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue Jun 8 16:55:57 2010 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 09:55:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: <0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike> References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com> <42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:05 PM, spike wrote: > I had a notion that we could build a device which would insert into the > rectum with a water-driven enclosed whirling blade which would frappe the > shit and allow it to be washed out painlessly. ?If done properly I can > imagine a semi-permanently installed device with a water line about the > diameter of a small woman's thumb, with an in-body processing device perhaps > thrice that diameter, reducing discomfort to the rectal sphincter. ?A device > of that size might be able to stay in place without excess discomfort to the > patient, certainly nothing in comparison to the procedure that must be > followed in the event of catastrophic constipation followed by the sometimes > fatal impacted colon. ?Do take my word for it on this one, oy, as a > second-hand observer who never wishes to see that again ever. ### There are many fecal management system on the market, Spike, although none that I know incorporate the roto-rooter option you describe :) Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue Jun 8 17:14:39 2010 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 10:14:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] idea regarding cats In-Reply-To: References: <0128833DF01841708C6B3D530F24B642@spike> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 12:11 AM, John Grigg wrote: > Spike, > > I really like your idea. ?I remember reading about a new and very > expensive breed that resembles lions (they even have manes). ?And as > you might hope, they are very social creatures (especially with > humans). > > Good luck with the feline breeding program. ?I can imagine you as the > founder of a ?modern-day Bene Gesserit with the goal of creating a > super kitty. ?"How can Fluffy singlehandedly fight off packs of big > dogs, purr like an Italian sports car, rescue drowning children from > swimming pools, and be almost the size of a German Shepherd"? > > "How can this be?" ?"For he is the cat Kwisatz Haderach!!!" > > ### Quickat Haderach? Rafal From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 8 17:22:47 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 10:22:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says In-Reply-To: References: <594586.60877.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><4C06D3ED.90402@satx.rr.com><42248.56733.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><0D864CE563F34C0E8E2E79E33747F82C@spike> Message-ID: <1E07C987EEC84998925F324EDE8A749D@spike> > ...On Behalf Of Rafal Smigrodzki > Subject: Re: [ExI] NYT: Happiness May Come With Age, Study Says > > On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:05 PM, spike wrote: > > > I had a notion that we could build a device which would insert into > > the rectum with a water-driven enclosed whirling blade... > > > ### There are many fecal management system on the market, > Spike, although none that I know incorporate the roto-rooter > option you describe :) Rafal Thanks Rafal, I was hoping you or one of the other medics would comment. As with all my ideas, it seems after I finish writing them, the idea is so obvious it must have occurred to others a thousand times, long before I was conceived. We have had immobile or paralyzed people since forever who could use this device, we have had water driven turbines, we have had the need to increase automation of patient care. In this case, there are plenty of people in this world who use assholes as playthings in one way or another. The technology regarding how one can use the orifice must be remarkably advanced. It is unlikely that a stranger to that world would think of anything revolutionary. Regarding the rest of it however, a tip/tilt chair/bed with a wraparound screen, with a user guided virtual reality, now that seems like a great way to entertain convalescents, way better than letting them just walk into life's sunset. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 8 17:38:42 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:38:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] idea regarding cats In-Reply-To: References: <0128833DF01841708C6B3D530F24B642@spike> Message-ID: <4C0E8022.8040506@satx.rr.com> On 6/8/2010 12:14 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: >> "How can this be?" "For he is the cat Kwisatz Haderach!!!" > ### Quickat Haderach? Knickknack Haderach (Give the Cat a Bone) [Give the Cat a Bonobo] From pharos at gmail.com Tue Jun 8 18:06:20 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 19:06:20 +0100 Subject: [ExI] 'capitalism' genes was breeding cats In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/8/10, spike wrote: > Cool! This reinforces my notion that an organized effort to breed behaviors > into cats could be done in a reasonable time span. Twenty generations of > cats would fit in a single human lifespan. It is difficult to explain *why* > exactly one would *want* a cat who drapes its inert self over one's > shoulders, but no more mysterious is this than why it is that so many > otherwise sane people feed the useless beasts daily. > > It's been done, Spike. The breed is called the Ragdoll cat. Because when you pick them up, they flop like a ragdoll. Quote: Ragdoll cats tend to be more interested in humans than some breeds of cats. They are known to run to greet you at the door, follow you from room to room, flop on you, sleep with you, and generally choose to be where you are. Many Ragdolls have been taught to come when called and play fetch. They are gentle cats, and usually play without extending their claws. --------------------- Video here: Oooooohhhhh! Cat videos!! Lovely!!!!! BillK From pharos at gmail.com Tue Jun 8 19:05:20 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 20:05:20 +0100 Subject: [ExI] 'capitalism' genes was breeding cats In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/8/10, Keith Henson wrote: > But it's not exactly true that I think the UK population evolved > 'capitalism' genes in the 1800. Rather, I have been impressed by both > the work and the conclusions Dr. Gregory Clark on with his analysis of > the run up to the industrial revolution. If you have not read his > book or the 50 page paper on this, you should. > > I am not in the business of looking for them, but it wouldn't be hard > to find them. Tame foxes differ in gene expression in only about 40 > genes. > > From the mid 1200s to 1800 is about 20 human generations. The UK has > probate records for this period and that is what Dr. Clark used to see > if there was a correlation between the number of surviving children > and the size of the estate. He found it. The same "more surviving > kids for the well off" is probably true for most stable agrarian > societies. It is not true for all societies. > > Clark made the reasonable assumption that some behavior genes would be > conducive to accumulating wealth. These are a different set of genes > than are likely to be successful in hunter gatherer or waring tribal > societies. > > Because the society was both Malthusian and Darwinian, the genes for > behaviors (personality characteristics) that were conducive to > accumulating wealth became more common over this long time period. > There are independent measures of some of these such as the historical > fall in interest rates. > > There are vast piles of human bones in the UK from thousands of years > ago. So if someone wanted to look at the changing mix of genes like > they looked at the foxes, the information is there. > > In my opinion Clark's connection with genes is not a reasonable assumption. It is more like a 'Just so' story. Neat, but where's the evidence? The argument between nature and nurture is ongoing. With the plagues and the wars and the Renaissance and the Reformation, etc. there was an awful lot of stuff going on over those centuries. I would like to see evidence of human gene expression forming political opinions or behaviour tendencies. I doubt it exists. If it does, then the door opens for gene therapy to 'cure' people of bad opinions and behaviours. I have my list ready! ;) BillK From scerir at libero.it Wed Jun 9 21:00:56 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 23:00:56 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] extropic animation Message-ID: <25636556.2737391276117256813.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3oIiH7BLmg From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 9 21:29:13 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 16:29:13 -0500 Subject: [ExI] extropic animation In-Reply-To: <25636556.2737391276117256813.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> References: <25636556.2737391276117256813.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> Message-ID: <4C1007A9.8060309@satx.rr.com> On 6/9/2010 4:00 PM, scerir wrote: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3oIiH7BLmg I love it! (Not sure exactly why it's *extropic* but it's very cute and quite insightful.) From scerir at libero.it Wed Jun 9 22:04:54 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 00:04:54 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] laws of nature, nature of laws Message-ID: <15090122.2742771276121094328.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> Colloqium at PIRSA "Laws of Nature: Their Nature and Knowability" http://pirsa.org/C10001 Interesting video-lectures. The lecture on QM given by Philip Goyal seems impressive to me. Its a sort of reconstruction of quantum theory based on logic and measurements. It can also support the view that QM is an "operating system" and that "space-times" and all the rest emerge from this operating system, like puppets from the hands of a puppet showman, like the pixels on this screen from Windows .... http://pirsa.org/10050055/ There are many hidden questions (and silent answers) like "is a quaternionic - octonionic - sedenionic QM possible?". Are superquantum (superstrong) correlations possible with a quaternionic QM? On real/complex/quaternionic/octonionic/exotic qm http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week251.html http://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec9.html http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9905037 http://arxiv.org/abs/0810.1923 http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.1761 More lectures by Philip http://pirsa.org/index.php?p=speaker&name=Philip_Goyal From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Jun 9 23:43:46 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 16:43:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 'capitalism' genes was breeding cats Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 5:00 AM, "spike" wrote: snip > Keith's notion of a capitalism gene is intriguing. ?I buy it. ?The > implications are far ranging too. ?Capitalism is a political notion, It may be, but in this case Dr. Clark was considering it as an economic system in which behavioral traits of hard work, willingness to put off rewards, literacy, numeracy and the like were rewarded biologically. ******* The new world after the Neolithic Revolution offered economic success to a different kind of agent than were typical in hunter gatherer society: those with patience, who could wait to enjoy more consumption in the future. Those who liked to work long hours. And those who could perform formal calculations in a world of many types of inputs and outputs of what crop to profitably produce, how many inputs to devote to it, what land to profitably invest in. And we see in England, from at least the middle ages on, that the kind of people who succeeded in the economic system ? who accumulated assets, got skills, got literacy ? were increasing their representation in each generation. Thus it is plausible that through the long agrarian passage leading up to the Industrial Revolution man was becoming biologically more adapted to the modern economic world. ********** >so it > seems reasonable to me that political leanings are to some extent genetic. > No doubt political notions are influenced greatly by environment, but I have > long suspected there is a genetic component to our political leanings. ?If > so, most political debate becomes racism. Hmm. Keith From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Jun 9 23:58:26 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 16:58:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 'capitalism' genes was breeding cats Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 5:00 AM, wrote: snip > In my opinion Clark's connection with genes is not a reasonable assumption. > It is more like a 'Just so' story. ?Neat, but where's the evidence? Let's try the counter argument. If behavior does not come ultimately from genes, then were *does* it come from? snip > I would like to see evidence of human gene expression forming > political opinions or behaviour tendencies. ?I doubt it exists. ?If it > does, then the door opens for gene therapy to 'cure' people of bad > opinions and behaviours. ?I have my list ready! ? ;) Spike made a case for politics that *might* be supported, but I don't know how yet. On the other hand, behavior such as alcoholism is known to be the result of genes, some of them now reasonably well understood. For example, the relative resistance of Asians to alcohol is because of a known variation in the dehydrogenase genes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_dehydrogenase#Alcoholism Keith From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 10 00:23:05 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 19:23:05 -0500 Subject: [ExI] 'capitalism' genes was breeding cats In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C103069.2090004@satx.rr.com> On 6/9/2010 6:58 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > If behavior does not come ultimately > from genes, then were*does* it come from? From a complex interaction between genetic instructions, phenotypic expressions of those instructions in a given environment, and culture (call it an ensemble of memes or culturgens, although that might not be the right model). Damien Broderick From max at maxmore.com Thu Jun 10 02:22:52 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 21:22:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "Imaginary" user interfaces Message-ID: <201006100249.o5A2ngvv000621@andromeda.ziaspace.com> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37580233/ns/technology_and_science-innovation/ From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 10 03:11:21 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 22:11:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] 'capitalism' genes was breeding cats In-Reply-To: <4C103069.2090004@satx.rr.com> References: <4C103069.2090004@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C1057D9.6080201@satx.rr.com> On 6/9/2010 7:23 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: >> If behavior does not come ultimately >> from genes, then were*does* it come from? > > From a complex interaction between genetic instructions, phenotypic > expressions of those instructions in a given environment, and culture example: "New Associations between Diabetes, Environmental Factors Found by Novel Analytic Technique" by Krista Conger May 20, 2010; (Stanford) -- Got diabetes? If so, you probably know that the adult-onset form of the disease can be triggered by, among other things, obesity and a fatty diet. You?re also more likely to develop diabetes if other family members have it. But a new study by researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine suggests that you should also begin looking suspiciously at other aspects of your life ? like your past exposure to certain pesticides or chemicals and even one form of Vitamin E. In fact, the association of some of these so-called ?environmental? cues with diabetes surpasses that of the best genetic markers scientists have identified for the disease. Identifying relationships between a person?s environment (such as tobacco exposure) and specific health repercussions (such as cancer) is nothing new. Epidemiological studies of large groups of people have been doing just that for decades. But they are limited in their ability to assess the hundreds or even thousands of variables that comprise the intricate fabric of our everyday lives. (What?s your risk of heart disease if you smoke sparingly and eat fatty foods, but are also a marathoner?) They?re also not open-ended: The researcher has to begin with presuppositions about possible relationships. (Does Folic Acid prevent birth defects?) In this new study, the scientists relied instead on an unconventional approach that treats environmental variables as ?genes.? That conceptual shift allowed them to use some of the same techniques initially developed to identify the many sections of DNA throughout the genome that might contribute to disease development. Bioinformatics expert Atul Butte, M.D., Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Pediatric Cancer Biology, compared the data generated by the new approach to the amount and types of information gleaned from a DNA microarray. ?This approach catapults us from being forced to ask very simple, directed questions about environment and disease into a new realm in which we can look at many, many variables simultaneously and without bias,? said Butte, who is also director of the Center for Pediatric Bioinformatics at Lucile Packard Children?s Hospital. ?In the future, we'll be able to analyze the effect of genes and environment together, to find, perhaps, that a specific gene increases the risk of a disease only if the person is also drinking polluted well water.? Specifically, in this study, Butte and his coworkers used the technique to identify a previously known association between people with Type-2 Diabetes and a class of organic compounds called polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's), commonly used for many applications until the late 1970's. They also uncovered a strong, but unexpected, relationship between diabetes and high levels of a form of Vitamin E called Gamma Tocopherol, which is prevalent in fruits, vegetables, nuts and milk. The scientists are careful to caution, however, that an association doesn't necessarily mean that Vitamin E or pollutants cause Type-2 Diabetes, and that more research is needed to fully understand these complex relationships. Butte is a senior author of the research published May 20th in the on-line journal PLoS ONE. The genetic studies on which the research is based are called ?genome wide association studies? or GWAS. In a nod to its origin, the scientists coined the term ?environment wide association studies,? or EWAS, for the new technique. They expect that EWAS will be useful in the analysis of many complex diseases. ?We've known for decades that environmental factors play a major role in diseases like diabetes, cancer and heart disease,? said Jeremy Berg, PhD, director of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, which partially supported the work. ?By enabling us to measure the impact of these factors, this new approach will shed light on how genes and the environment influence our health and could provide insights into new ways to control some of our nation?s most serious health problems.? Graduate student Chirag Patel conceived of, designed and executed the computer software for the EWAS. He, Butte and associate professor of medicine Jayanta Bhattacharya, M.D., Ph.D., used existing population studies conducted from 1999 to 2006 by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as part of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The researchers realized that the databases contained a goldmine of information, including the levels of pollutants and vitamins in subjects? blood and urine as well as clinical measurements such as fasting blood sugar levels. In all, the scientists analyzed the relationship of 266 unique environmental variables to the likelihood that a person?s fasting blood sugar level was 126 mg/dL or higher (between 70 and 110 mg/dL is considered normal). Higher-than-normal blood sugar levels after an overnight fast are a telltale sign of diabetes. They adjusted for the subjects? age, gender, body mass index, socioeconomic status and ethnicity. Finally, they grouped related variables into 21 classes ? such as dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls, phthalates, etc. ? similar to how individual genes are assigned to chromosomal units in GWAS. Butte and his colleagues found that people with relatively higher levels of the pesticide-derivative heptachlor epoxide (a chemical whose use stopped in the ?80s but is still prevalent in food, soil and water) in their blood were more likely than those with lower levels to also have high fasting blood sugar levels (Odds Ratio = 1.7). The same was true for those with high levels of PCB's (OR = 2.2) and the Gamma-Tocopherol form of Vitamin E (OR = 1.5). In contrast, high beta-carotene levels were slightly protective (OR = 0.6). Scientists have recently made large strides in measuring genetic associations to complex disease, but are still far from using genes to predict risk for complex chronic diseases or even plan preventive measures. On the other hand, our environmental profile is potentially more modifiable and also may provide a more complete model of disease risk when combined with genetic information. ?Studying relationships between a person?s environment and their disease burden in this manner is going to be far more impactful,? said Butte. ?We can now imagine what it might be to look at everything in the environment, in the same way that we've been doing with the genome for the past decade. Imagine one day wearing a chip on your clothing that assesses your exposure to hundreds or thousands of environmental toxins. You could bring that in to your annual physical and you and your doctor could incorporate the information into discussions about disease risk and prevention.? The researchers are planning to conduct similar EWAS studies focused on other diseases, including cancers. They'll also try to reproduce the data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey studies on specific populations in California. From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Jun 10 03:23:09 2010 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 22:23:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Boston DIY/H+ Summit 2010 after party (Saturday, June 12) Message-ID: Hey all, Mac Cowell and I are putting together an after party for H+ Summit 2010 at Sprout, starting at 6pm on Saturday. For all of you who aren't going to the conference, or even if you are- this is your chance to mingle with the local citizen scientists, and friends of citizen science. This year's theme for the conference is "the rise of citizen science". Details! http://diybio.org/hplusbeer/ "Please join local technologists, hackers, artists, intellectuals, diybiologists, grad students, h-, and other ilk for socializing and discussion in the early evening amongst the charming light manufacturing equipment at Sprout, a local hackerspace. Refreshments (free beer) and snacks will be provided." What is DIYbio? "DIYbio is an organization that aims to help make biology a worthwhile pursuit for citizen scientists, amateur biologists, and DIY biological engineers who value openness and safety. This will require mechanisms for amateurs to increase their knowledge and skills, access to a community of experts, the development of a code of ethics, responsible oversight, and leadership on issues that are unique to doing biology outside of traditional professional settings." http://diybio.org/ What about H+ Summit? "The H+ Summit is a two day event that explores how humanity will be radically changed by technology in the near future. Visionary speakers will explore the potential of technology to modify your body, mind, life, and world. What will it mean to be a human in this next phase of technological development? How can we prepare now for coming changes? We foresee the feasibility of redesigning the human condition and overcoming such constraints as the inevitability of aging, limitations on human and artificial intellects, unchosen psychology, lack of resources, and our confinement to the planet earth. The possibilities are broad and exciting. The H+ Summit will provide a venue to discuss these future scenarios and to hear exciting presentations by the leaders of the ongoing H+ (r)evolution." http://hplussummit.com/ See you guys there! By the way, I'm speaking on Sunday at the conference. It'll be streamed live at 3:10pm EDT. http://hplussummit.com/streaming.html - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 irc: #hplusroadmap on freenode From sondre-list at bjellas.com Thu Jun 10 13:06:06 2010 From: sondre-list at bjellas.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sondre_Bjell=E5s?=) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 15:06:06 +0200 Subject: [ExI] "Imaginary" user interfaces In-Reply-To: <201006100249.o5A2ngvv000621@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006100249.o5A2ngvv000621@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: Thanks for a great article Max! "We definitely envision a system like this replacing all input for mobile devices," said Sean Gustafson This has been said so many times, we're still pretty much dependent on the standard QWERTY-keyboards unfortunately, I wonder how mr. Gustafson envision individuals writing text-based messages? I'm confident that Project Natal for Xbox 360 will take a huge leap towards more natural interfaces and interaction-patterns with devices, hopefully the technology will eventually end up on the PC and Windows Phones as well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XI8tDAytsKo - Sondre 2010/6/10 Max More : > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37580233/ns/technology_and_science-innovation/ > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From max at maxmore.com Thu Jun 10 14:27:18 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 09:27:18 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Good news on heart attacks Message-ID: <201006101427.o5AERPC4018635@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Heart attack rates have dropped in the USA, despite better detection: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37603300/ns/health-heart_health/ Alas, some people -- like the woman in this article -- are doing their utmost to strain against that trend: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37596789/ns/health-womens_health/ Max From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Jun 10 15:23:48 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 08:23:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 'capitalism' genes was breeding cats Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:00 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/9/2010 6:58 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > >> If behavior does not come ultimately >> from genes, then were*does* ?it come from? > > ?From a complex interaction between genetic instructions, phenotypic > expressions of those instructions in a given environment, and culture > (call it an ensemble of memes or culturgens, although that might not be > the right model). There are few here who have done more re the memetic model for human culture, Google "Keith Henson" memetics. But in this case my thoughts ran, no genes, no animal, no behavior. Also, the memetic element in mouse or snake behavior must be close to zero. > example: > > "New Associations between Diabetes, Environmental Factors Found by Novel > Analytic Technique" > by > Krista Conger snip I don't think behavior can be stretched to cover something like diabetes. On the other hand, the _behavior_ of shooting extracted juice from pigs (insulin) into your body to compensate for dead islet cells is the consequence of some combination of genetic and environmental that killed the cells plus the memetic (cultural) knowledge that this behavior will stave off death. Keith From scerir at libero.it Thu Jun 10 16:07:53 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 18:07:53 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] "Imaginary" user interfaces Message-ID: <10535994.2848581276186073249.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> There is another video here, on magic tech, it is a TED video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrtANPtnhyg From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 10 16:58:38 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:58:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Google mess Message-ID: <4C1119BE.5080202@satx.rr.com> So what's the easiest way to switch off or banish the goddamned visual clutter that Google is now shoving in our faces on their search page? Have they lost their minds? The simplicity and clarity of their traditional display was one of their most attractive features. Do kids really now become unhinged without Shiny Things filling every background? Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 10 17:29:33 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 12:29:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <4C1119BE.5080202@satx.rr.com> References: <4C1119BE.5080202@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C1120FD.3020805@satx.rr.com> On 6/10/2010 11:58 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > So what's the easiest way to switch off or banish the goddamned visual > clutter that Google is now shoving in our faces on their search page? Hmm, I think I just did it by ticking Block Images, from View Page Info=>Media. Maybe there's a more elegant way. From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Jun 10 17:15:05 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 10:15:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <4C1119BE.5080202@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <137417.66551.qm@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/10/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > So what's the easiest way to switch > off or banish the goddamned visual clutter that Google is > now shoving in our faces on their search page? Sign out of Google. Or, better yet, delete all cookies that come from *.google.com, then restart your browser to make sure they're gone. Google retains the simple look for "anonymous" users. (Yes, this can be a pain if you're using GMail. But, hey, it's their mail service; integration with the rest of their services is the price you pay, especially if you're not otherwise paying them anything.) From sparge at gmail.com Thu Jun 10 17:49:14 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:49:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <137417.66551.qm@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <4C1119BE.5080202@satx.rr.com> <137417.66551.qm@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- On Thu, 6/10/10, Damien Broderick wrote: >> So what's the easiest way to switch >> off or banish the goddamned visual clutter that Google is >> now shoving in our faces on their search page? > > Sign out of Google. ?Or, better yet, delete all cookies > that come from *.google.com, then restart your browser > to make sure they're gone. ?Google retains the simple > look for "anonymous" users. > > (Yes, this can be a pain if you're using GMail. ?But, > hey, it's their mail service; integration with the rest > of their services is the price you pay, especially if > you're not otherwise paying them anything.) Hmm... I'm not seeing anything close to visual clutter on the main Google page, and I'm signed into my Google account and using GMail in another window. -Dave From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 10 18:48:59 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:48:59 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: References: <4C1119BE.5080202@satx.rr.com> <137417.66551.qm@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C11339B.1060009@satx.rr.com> On 6/10/2010 12:49 PM, Dave Sill wrote: > Hmm... I'm not seeing anything close to visual clutter on the main > Google page, and I'm signed into my Google account and using GMail in > another window. Neither is my goodwife. Weird. Maybe I toggled some ghastly slideshow spacesaver display by mistake. The screen was showing huge vivid unignorable photos from edge to shining edge, of giant toys, trees, playgrounds, etc. Even now that I've banished them there's a blue script line at bottom left: Change background image. Damien Broderick From sparge at gmail.com Thu Jun 10 18:57:42 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 14:57:42 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <4C11339B.1060009@satx.rr.com> References: <4C1119BE.5080202@satx.rr.com> <137417.66551.qm@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C11339B.1060009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/10/2010 12:49 PM, Dave Sill wrote: > >> Hmm... I'm not seeing anything close to visual clutter on the main >> Google page, and I'm signed into my Google account and using GMail in >> another window. > > Neither is my goodwife. Weird. Maybe I toggled some ghastly slideshow > spacesaver display by mistake. The screen was showing huge vivid unignorable > photos from edge to shining edge, of giant toys, trees, playgrounds, etc. > Even now that I've banished them there's a blue script line at bottom left: > Change background image. Google kills background images on home page CNET - Tom Krazit - ?13 minutes ago? Background images were the temporary default look for Google.com before being pulled earlier than expected. Fourteen hours into a 24-hour experiment with background imagery, Google's home page is once again stark white. -Dave From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Jun 11 02:20:32 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 19:20:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <4C1119BE.5080202@satx.rr.com> References: <4C1119BE.5080202@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C119D70.5080905@mac.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > So what's the easiest way to switch off or banish the goddamned visual > clutter that Google is now shoving in our faces on their search page? > Have they lost their minds? The simplicity and clarity of their > traditional display was one of their most attractive features. Do kids > really now become unhinged without Shiny Things filling every background? Hit "Classic Home" in upper right corner. Back to bare bones. - s From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Jun 11 02:20:47 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 19:20:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Gene to behavior Message-ID: If you want to call stuttering a behavior, then it has been mapped to a gene. http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/362/23/2226?query=TOC Keith From spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 11 02:30:01 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 19:30:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <4C119D70.5080905@mac.com> Message-ID: <441736.14463.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/10/10, samantha wrote: From: samantha sjatkins at mac.com Damien Broderick wrote: > >So what's the easiest way to switch off or banish the goddamned visual clutter... ? >Hit "Classic Home"? in upper right corner.? Back to bare bones. - s Oh yeah, right, get some computer guru to?sashay along and just *tell* you how to do it, with a simple keystroke.? Where's the challenge in that?? She shoulda given you some vast complicated recipe, just to make us sweat and ponder. ? (Thanks Samantha, much better.) ? spike ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Jun 11 03:01:49 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 22:01:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <4C119D70.5080905@mac.com> References: <4C1119BE.5080202@satx.rr.com> <4C119D70.5080905@mac.com> Message-ID: <4C11A71D.4040503@satx.rr.com> On 6/10/2010 9:20 PM, samantha wrote: > Hit "Classic Home" in upper right corner. Back to bare bones. 1) Luckily, they quickly chopped it: Google Gets Its White Back TechNewsWorld - Reactions to Google's experiment with colorful scenic imagery on its main page ranged across the love-hate spectrum Thursday morning, but there seemed to be a lot more users congregating on the hate side. 2) I don't see anything at all in the Firefox upper right corner. Maybe it was there before I disabled the damned mess myself. Never mind, but thanks. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Jun 11 03:04:24 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 22:04:24 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <441736.14463.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <441736.14463.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C11A7B8.6050001@satx.rr.com> On 6/10/2010 9:30 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: Gregory! Greg! The Gregster! You've come out from behind that plastic mask! I'd blame Google if I were you. Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 11 03:58:52 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 20:58:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <4C11A7B8.6050001@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <741490.69236.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/10/10, Damien Broderick wrote: From: Damien Broderick Subject: Re: [ExI] Google mess To: "ExI chat list" Date: Thursday, June 10, 2010, 8:04 PM On 6/10/2010 9:30 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: Gregory! Greg! The Gregster! You've come out from behind that plastic mask! I'd blame Google if I were you. Damien Broderick ? Yes, tis I, Gregory, also known as spike.? I have had some serious email problems that defy me.? Every time I hit send/receive, my Microsloth Lookout tries to go out and download everything from the past 2 yrs, some 65,000 messages, starting with the oldest.? So I have had to go out on ATT.net website?to get my email.? Hoping some internet guru can suggest a keystroke fix.? This happened once before, and I bumbled around and fixed it somehow, but it was a couple yrs ago and I failed to record somewhere how I did it.? {8-[? ? My punishment until I get it done is to be known as Gregory. ? Gregory ? }8-[? {8-[ ? If you are feeling kind, do refer to me still as spike. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Jun 11 04:10:36 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 21:10:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <741490.69236.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <4C11A7B8.6050001@satx.rr.com> <741490.69236.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I think Google is trying to imitate the graphics of Bing. John On 6/10/10, Gregory Jones wrote: > > > --- On Thu, 6/10/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > > > From: Damien Broderick > Subject: Re: [ExI] Google mess > To: "ExI chat list" > Date: Thursday, June 10, 2010, 8:04 PM > > > On 6/10/2010 9:30 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > > Gregory! Greg! The Gregster! You've come out from behind that plastic mask! > > I'd blame Google if I were you. > > Damien Broderick > > Yes, tis I, Gregory, also known as spike.? I have had some serious email > problems that defy me.? Every time I hit send/receive, my Microsloth Lookout > tries to go out and download everything from the past 2 yrs, some 65,000 > messages, starting with the oldest.? So I have had to go out on ATT.net > website?to get my email.? Hoping some internet guru can suggest a keystroke > fix.? This happened once before, and I bumbled around and fixed it somehow, > but it was a couple yrs ago and I failed to record somewhere how I did it. > {8-[ > > My punishment until I get it done is to be known as Gregory. > > Gregory > > }8-[? {8-[ > > If you are feeling kind, do refer to me still as spike. From spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 11 04:30:59 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 21:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <198121.87254.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ...> >?... This happened once before, and I bumbled around and fixed it somehow, > but it was a couple yrs ago and I failed to record somewhere how I did it. > {8-[ ..._______________________________________________ Here's one for you: I have a 25 yr old motorcycle, bought it new in 1985, had it ever since, do all the repair and maintenance on it myself, it's never been to the shop, 120k miles on the clock.? Whenever I need to do a job that I have done before on that bike, even if I did it only once and it was 20 yrs ago, I remember exactly how it is done, what bolts need to come off in what order, what the torque should be in replacing what and how, its a snap.? But if I hafta redo a computer or internet procedure, I can't remember it from last week, not even from yesterday.? ? Please, why is it that internet protocols and programming languages cannot be set up intuitively, like mechanical devices, where a few simple universal rules can be applied in so many interesting and different ways, but underneath there is a consistent logic, like machines and mathematics.? Internet protocols seem so goddam arbitrary, frustrating, inconsistent. ? Why? ? spike ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Jun 11 08:03:56 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 01:03:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] IBM's "Mote Runner" Message-ID: The tendrils of the internet are spreading... http://www.popsci.com/gadgets/article/2010-06/ibm-software-could-connect-any-gadget-internet John From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Jun 11 07:36:55 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 00:36:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] swimming in syrup experiment! Message-ID: I wonder what the viscosity level is of the guar syrup... http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040920/full/ne1ws040920-2.html John From pharos at gmail.com Fri Jun 11 09:24:50 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:24:50 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <198121.87254.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <198121.87254.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/11 Gregory Jones wrote: > Here's one for you: I have a 25 yr old motorcycle, bought it new in 1985, had it > ever since, do all the repair and maintenance on it myself, it's never been to the > shop, 120k miles on the clock.? Whenever I need to do a job that I have done before > on that bike, even if I did it only once and it was 20 yrs ago, I remember exactly > how it is done, what bolts need to come off in what order, what the torque should > be in replacing what and how, its a snap.? But if I hafta redo a computer or internet > procedure, I can't remember it from last week, not even from yesterday. > > Please, why is it that internet protocols and programming languages cannot be > set up intuitively, like mechanical devices, where a few simple universal rules > can be applied in so many interesting and different ways, but underneath there > is a consistent logic, like machines and mathematics.? Internet protocols seem > so goddam arbitrary, frustrating, inconsistent. > > Why? > Two reasons, possibly. 1) Your bike is 25 years old. It's the same with cars. (In Europe, anyway). Nowadays, with modern cars and bikes if anything goes wrong, usually the mechanic just plugs it into a diagnostic computer, purses his lips and says 'Oh dear. You need a new swoggle-trifactoriser. They cost ?700 because they're gold plated and have to be specially imported from the Buddhist monks in Tibet that are the only place that makes them'. 2) The Internet protocols grew like Topsy with many people contributing bits here and there, each with their own unique way of doing things. PCs are general purpose. Everything *can* be done ten different ways. I'm surprised that nobody told Damien that he should have installed Linux instead of Windows! ;) BillK From pharos at gmail.com Fri Jun 11 09:44:13 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:44:13 +0100 Subject: [ExI] swimming in syrup experiment! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/11/10, John Grigg wrote: > I wonder what the viscosity level is of the guar syrup... > > http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040920/full/ne1ws040920-2.html > > You mean: Reminds me of running on water: BillK From zero.powers at gmail.com Fri Jun 11 11:04:25 2010 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 04:04:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Flexible nanocircuits drawn with heat Message-ID: "A hot pen that 'draws' nanoscale circuits onto atom-thick sheets of carbon could make flexible electronics devices easier to manufacture...." http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19027-flexible-nanocircuits-can-be-drawn-with-heat.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news It's about time. I've been waiting for my WIMAX brain chip implant for about 20 years now. Maybe they'll actually be able to make it before I retire :P Zero -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zero.powers at gmail.com Fri Jun 11 11:09:00 2010 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 04:09:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Holy Schlamoley! Venter's team creates synthetic life! In-Reply-To: References: <4BF5BD8E.6060704@satx.rr.com> <08B14CF0-884A-4203-AA56-3787E46DD574@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: Thanks for the warm reception folks. I really do miss being able to participate more often. But it's nice to know that I'm remembered. Maybe I'll start a thread about transparent society, that ought to get me all fired up again :P Zero On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:18 PM, John Grigg wrote: > John K Clark wrote: > And welcome back Zero Powers! > >> > > And I will repeat the salutation! But I was hoping you would return > to us only after you had actually developed yourself to the point > where you could change your moniker to "Infinite Powers!" > > John : ) > > On 5/21/10, John Clark wrote: > > It's significant because for the first time humans have complete control > > over every single nucleotide of an organism's DNA. I don't count viruses > as > > organisms. > > > > And welcome back Zero Powers! > > > > John K Clark > > =============== > > > > > > On May 20, 2010, at 6:54 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > > >> On 5/20/2010 5:34 PM, Zero Powers wrote: > >> > >>> Last night, in a dramatic > >>> announcement that led some to accuse him of playing God, > >> > >> Actually he *was* only playing god, because his team just copied an > >> existing genome (other than a few tweaks and unintentional mutations). > >> Weakly godlike at best (as Charlie Stross might put it). > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Jun 11 11:58:25 2010 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado (CI)) Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 08:58:25 -0300 Subject: [ExI] swimming in syrup experiment! References: Message-ID: <070f01cb095d$678e2b10$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> > On 6/11/10, John Grigg wrote: >> I wonder what the viscosity level is of the guar syrup... >> http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040920/full/ne1ws040920-2.html > You mean: > > Reminds me of running on water: > You guys don't watch Mythbusters, do you? http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbusters-swimming-syrup/ http://mythbustersresults.com/swimming-in-syrup From animeotaku at btinternet.com Fri Jun 11 15:34:55 2010 From: animeotaku at btinternet.com (Holly Gray) Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 15:34:55 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: <4C11A71D.4040503@satx.rr.com> References: <4C1119BE.5080202@satx.rr.com> <4C119D70.5080905@mac.com> <4C11A71D.4040503@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <40870.64127.qm@web86504.mail.ird.yahoo.com> My answer to anything that Google may throw at us in future: Greasemonkey. ----- Original Message ---- From: Damien Broderick To: ExI chat list Sent: Friday, 11 June, 2010 4:01:49 Subject: Re: [ExI] Google mess On 6/10/2010 9:20 PM, samantha wrote: > Hit "Classic Home" in upper right corner. Back to bare bones. 1) Luckily, they quickly chopped it: Google Gets Its White Back TechNewsWorld - Reactions to Google's experiment with colorful scenic imagery on its main page ranged across the love-hate spectrum Thursday morning, but there seemed to be a lot more users congregating on the hate side. 2) I don't see anything at all in the Firefox upper right corner. Maybe it was there before I disabled the damned mess myself. Never mind, but thanks. Damien Broderick _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From pharos at gmail.com Sat Jun 12 10:28:27 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 11:28:27 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Regenerative body parts in the works Message-ID: A Canadian researcher is hoping that within ten years, people will be able to regrow tendons, spinal cords or heart valves lost to injury or disease. Dr. Brian Amsden, a chemical engineering professor from Queen?s University, is developing a technique wherein cells from a patient?s body would be placed on a polymer prosthetic that stimulates cell growth. After the cells had established themselves sufficiently, the prosthetic would be implanted in the patient?s body. The polymer would then biodegrade, leaving behind nothing but the patient?s own tissue. ------------------ The military is researching this to repair damaged soldiers, but it is also of great interest to the elderly disabled. BillK From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Jun 12 11:52:05 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 13:52:05 +0200 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <4C082C9A.70800@satx.rr.com> References: <806777.72030.qm@web114420.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4C07B708.5010604@satx.rr.com> <4C082A2B.2000102@mac.com> <4C082C9A.70800@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 4 June 2010 00:28, Damien Broderick wrote: > Really? Well, of course, that Xians and Muslims were and are theists is by > no means the central part of crusades, terror attacks, etc, either, if you > look at underlying motives. > Why, I suspect that their being *mono*theists may have much to do with it. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Jun 12 11:55:03 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 13:55:03 +0200 Subject: [ExI] to install In-Reply-To: <4C082C40.2080307@mac.com> References: <422084.18849.qm@web110409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <3BCC00DD57A44EFAB847E2E365C1C58D@spike> <18850B3925584AABAB9D3BFC4C982CCB@spike> <4C082C40.2080307@mac.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/4 samantha > Both of those have no relationship as stated with any sort of rational > ethics. It is implying that all ethics are arbitrary choices of self or > society and there is no such thing as an ethics grounded in reality. That > is a very dangerous notion. > > I see "rational ethics" as an oxymoron, denying the historical freedom of man, diversity, pluralism, and involving some kind or other of naturalistic fallacy. Rationality belongs to the "be", values belongs to the "ought" field. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bbenzai at yahoo.com Sat Jun 12 20:12:34 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 13:12:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Good news on heart attacks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199053.46348.qm@web114418.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Max More wrote: > > Heart attack rates have dropped in the USA, despite better > detection: > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37603300/ns/health-heart_health/ > > Alas, some people -- like the woman in this article -- are > doing > their utmost to strain against that trend: > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37596789/ns/health-womens_health/ "I'm very healthy. I go to the doctor every three months" Ben Zaiboc From bbenzai at yahoo.com Sat Jun 12 20:27:24 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 13:27:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Google mess In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <917081.95474.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Holly Gray wrote: > My answer to anything that Google may throw at us in > future: Greasemonkey. That's OK if you can find a script to do what you want, or can write your own. My answer: AdblockPlus/Element hider/CustomizeGoogle and/or Scroogle. (on Linux, of course!) AdblockPlus with the Element Hider Helper is a particularly fantastic combination. Dunno what I'd do without those, life would be considerably worse. Ben Zaiboc From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Jun 12 22:37:47 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 15:37:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "Imaginary" user interfaces In-Reply-To: References: <201006100249.o5A2ngvv000621@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <4C140C3B.7030007@mac.com> Sondre Bjell?s wrote: > Thanks for a great article Max! > > "We definitely envision a system like this replacing all input for > mobile devices," said Sean Gustafson > > This has been said so many times, we're still pretty much dependent on > the standard QWERTY-keyboards unfortunately, I wonder how mr. > Gustafson envision individuals writing text-based messages? > > I'm confident that Project Natal for Xbox 360 will take a huge leap > towards more natural interfaces and interaction-patterns with devices, > hopefully the technology will eventually end up on the PC and Windows > Phones as well. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XI8tDAytsKo > > OMG, that looks so goofy. But hey, at least they get exercise. - s From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 13 22:56:21 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:56:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] John W. Campbell in 1942 predicts the future Message-ID: <4C156215.2070206@satx.rr.com> The limits of hopeful prophecy; here's the editor of ASTOUNDING SCIENCE FICTION (later ANALOG) during WWII, in a letter to one of his writers: What was that everyone was saying about the Singularity? :) Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Mon Jun 14 01:22:53 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 18:22:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] honor among parasites In-Reply-To: <189799.12138.qm@web110411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <700825.75882.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? Camping this weekend, woods hiking, very wet spring, lot of bugs this year.? Eating dinner by the campfire, mosquitoes everywhere, noticed a tick on my pants.? As I was about to hurl her useless abdomen?into the fire, a question occurred to me: would a mosquito bite a tick?? Or would there be some bug version of honor among thieves, where the mosquito would spare a fellow blood sucking bastard?? ? I put?the tick into?a matchbox, put her in my truck so I could do the experiment at home where I could set up a camera to document the event, but in the night the tick managed to escape.? My wife is not pleased with this turn of events.? Now I need a new tick (whereas she would prefer to assure that we have lost the one we had.)? If any ExI-amateur scientists manage to capture a tick, do let us make arrangements to mail it to me.? I will either allow her to bite me, or more likely get a?rat at the local pet store to provide the mammalian blood, allow the tick to get engorged, then put the tick into a jar with a?number of hungry mosquitoes. ? Any speculation on what will happen? ? spike ? ? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Jun 14 01:52:29 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 18:52:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] south carolina primary election In-Reply-To: <741490.69236.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <354302.93452.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? I get back from camping and read about the US senate primary in South Carolina with a verrrrry suspicious outcome.? ? http://www.casavaria.com/cafesentido/2010/06/12/6482/how-did-a-man-no-one-ever-heard-of-win-a-senate-primary/ ? An unknown candidate won by a landslide, without money, without party support, without anything.? Apologies in advance for rehashing a dead subject here, but this is serious business.? The voting machines in use there?make no paper trail; they cannot be audited.? ? If we fail to fix this?soon, we are casually inviting?disaster.? If we have a suspicious result like this one on a national level with unverifiable vote machines, we risk a constitutional crisis in a nation with way too many nukes. ? spike ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Jun 14 02:25:21 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 19:25:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] south carolina primary election In-Reply-To: <354302.93452.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <162533.46108.qm@web81502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? >...South Carolina, senate primary, suspicious results... ? For instance, what happens if two weeks before the Nov?2010 election, the conservative incumbent's teenage intern shows up with a semen stain on his tie?? The alternative will be a guy who won under extremely suspicious circumstances. ? Suppose?something weird?happens on one of the races that counts, like the presidency in 2012, and we have a really suspicious looking (but conceivably possible)?result,?where the paperless e-voting?disagrees with the paper absentee ballots.? Then imagine the present occupant of the WH saying that?this is fraud and refuses to vacate the seat.? ? What do we do then? ? This is dangerous as all hell. ? spike ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Mon Jun 14 06:41:09 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 07:41:09 +0100 Subject: [ExI] John W. Campbell in 1942 predicts the future In-Reply-To: <4C156215.2070206@satx.rr.com> References: <4C156215.2070206@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 6/13/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > The limits of hopeful prophecy; here's the editor of ASTOUNDING SCIENCE > FICTION (later ANALOG) during WWII, in a letter to one of his writers: > > toward rebuilding Europe, but with atomic technology coming in, and the > immense population now available, that job will be effectively completed > within 5 years. The time for interplanetary overflow will be at hand. First > explorers, then colonies, then--the old cycle over again. Eventually, > someday in the not-too-remote future, there will be overflow toward other > stellar systems. That was written before the impact of television was realised. Not just television. But before entertainment became the biggest industry in the world. The Singularity was stopped by gossip and sitcoms. BillK From algaenymph at gmail.com Mon Jun 14 07:03:10 2010 From: algaenymph at gmail.com (AlgaeNymph) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 00:03:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] John W. Campbell in 1942 predicts the future In-Reply-To: References: <4C156215.2070206@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C15D42E.8050904@gmail.com> BillK wrote: > That was written before the impact of television was realised. > > Not just television. But before entertainment became the biggest > industry in the world. > The Singularity was stopped by gossip and sitcoms. > This raises the question as to why social drama is more profitable than science documentaries. From bbenzai at yahoo.com Mon Jun 14 12:33:44 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 05:33:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] John W. Campbell in 1942 predicts the future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <578726.66454.qm@web114417.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> AlgaeNymph Wrote: > This raises the question as to why social drama is more > profitable than science documentaries. LOL. Anyone who thinks this is a question needs to get out more, imo. Ben Zaiboc From sparge at gmail.com Mon Jun 14 13:14:26 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 09:14:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] honor among parasites In-Reply-To: <700825.75882.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <189799.12138.qm@web110411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <700825.75882.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/13 Gregory Jones > Any speculation on what will happen? I don't think mosquitoes will be interested in an engorged tick or able to "bite" (pierce) it. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Jun 14 15:22:40 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 08:22:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] honor among parasites In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <620676.72866.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> >I don't think mosquitoes will be interested in an engorged tick or able to "bite" (pierce) it. -Dave ? ? Thanks Dave.? You have looked closely at an engorged tick, ja?? My intuition tells me the mosquito would not bite the tick, but as I think it over carefully I can't figure out why the heck not.? A mosquito is programmed to look for a warm beast, and the blood in a tick would be cool, however I can arrange to warm the tick to mammalian temperatures.? Mosquitoes can penetrate thicker skin than is used to wrap a tick. ? spike ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Jun 14 15:52:25 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 08:52:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] John W. Campbell in 1942 predicts the future Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 5:00 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: snip (Campbell's words) > Incidentally, the time scale: Science-fiction tends to go very wrong on > time-scale, because authors and readers in the field are very timid > about it all. I'm betting on a first landing on the Moon by 1965 at the > latest, Mars by 1970, Venus at or about the same time. If you look at first landings, and include robot vehicles, he wasn't far off. > There will be a > scientific colony on the Moon from 1965 to 1970, consisting of > astronomers, solar specialists, and electronics and atomic engineers. > There will probably be some research chemists, and some map specialists > too, the chemists working on projects more readily conducted under > conditions of total vacuum and low temperature.> Vacuum pumps turned out to be less expensive than rockets. About the same time, AC Clarke wrote into his stories that it would take billions of years to generate artificial minds. Clarke lived into the era where serious progress on this topic was being made. I don't think even the most pessimistic think it will take that long now. > From: AlgaeNymph > > BillK wrote: >> That was written before the impact of television was realised. >> >> Not just television. But before entertainment became the biggest >> industry in the world. >> The Singularity was stopped by gossip and sitcoms. >> > This raises the question as to why social drama is more profitable than > science documentaries. The EP answer would be that it was highly significant to your reproductive success in the EEA to pay close attention to the gossip about the high status people in your tribe. How this worked in the stone age, I don't know. It doesn't seem adaptive in the modern world but then lots of traits from those times are not. Keith From sparge at gmail.com Mon Jun 14 18:31:45 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 14:31:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] honor among parasites In-Reply-To: <620676.72866.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <620676.72866.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/14 Gregory Jones > > > Thanks Dave. You have looked closely at an engorged tick, ja? > Yep. I live on acreage in east Tennessee and we've got dogs. > My intuition tells me the mosquito would not bite the tick, but as I > think it over carefully I can't figure out why the heck not. A mosquito is > programmed to look for a warm beast, and the blood in a tick would be cool, > however I can arrange to warm the tick to mammalian temperatures. > Mosquitoes can penetrate thicker skin than is used to wrap a tick. > Wikipedia says they look for CO2 and octenol--in addition to optical recognition. And ticks may have thin skin--especially when engorged--but it's *very* tough compared to mammal skin. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Jun 14 18:57:48 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:57:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] John W. Campbell in 1942 predicts the future In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C167BAC.7000809@satx.rr.com> On 6/14/2010 10:52 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > About the same time, AC Clarke wrote into his stories that it would > take billions of years to generate artificial minds. No, a million or so in THE CITY AND THE STARS, and it was not your usual AI in a box. "No disembodied intelligence had ever been encountered in the natural Universe; the Empire set out to create one. We have forgotten, with so much else, the skills and knowledge that made this possible. The scientists of the Empire had mastered all the forces of Nature, all the secrets of time and space. As our minds are the by-product of an immensely intricate arrangement of brain cells, linked together by the network of the nervous system, so they strove to create a brain whose components were not material, but patterns embossed upon space itself. Such a brain, if one can call it that, would use electrical or yet higher forces for its operation, and would be completely free from the tyranny of matter. It could function with far greater speed than any organic intelligence; it could endure as long as there was an erg of free energy left in the Universe, and no limit could be seen for its powers. Once created, it would develop potentialities which even its makers could not foresee. "Largely as a result of the experience gained in his own regeneration, Man suggested that the creation of such beings should be attempted. It was the greatest challenge ever thrown out to intelligence in the Universe, and after centuries of debate it was accepted. All the races of the Galaxy joined together in its fulfilment. "More than a million years were to separate the dream from the reality." The billion or more happened after the first disembodied AI went feral and started to chew up the universe, before it was shoved into what sounds very like a black hole. The key place where Campbell went wrong was supposing that nuclear energy would be easy to handle, and ubiquitous (and in 1942 he can't be faulted for not knowing--Fermi's first reactor wasn't critical until December of that year). Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Mon Jun 14 20:26:02 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:26:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] honor among parasites In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <800175.88276.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? > Wikipedia says they look for CO2 and octenol--in addition to optical recognition. And ticks may have thin skin--especially when engorged--but it's very?tough compared to mammal skin. -Dave ? OK cool, I can get some octinol, rather I already have it.? It is the active ingredient in a wasp trap.? Carbon dioxide I can easily make, and pump into the bite chamber (bwaaahahahahahaaaa.)? Octinol is a kind of oily substance, so I could paint that on the tick.? You may be right about the tick having tough skin, but it is worth the experiment just to verify. ? As for the mosquito relying on optical recognition, ja it will be difficult indeed to disguise a tick as a mammal.? Open to suggestion. ? If I can determine that a mosquito will sit on a tick's back and poke and poke with no success, or the mosquito bends her proboscus trying to bite, that makes me want to look at tick skin under the microscope to figure out what makes?that tissue?impermeable.? If we can figure it out, next we try to manipulate genes to make the stuff in quantity.? If it is really tough and really flexible, as it would need to be for it's evolved application, it might be a really cool new material with which to make tickskin gloves or shoes.? The marketing people may need to come up with a different name for it perhaps. ? spike ? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Jun 14 21:28:53 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:28:53 -0500 Subject: [ExI] honor among parasites In-Reply-To: <800175.88276.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <800175.88276.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C169F15.30506@satx.rr.com> On 6/14/2010 3:26 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > As for the mosquito relying on optical recognition, ja it will be > difficult indeed to disguise a tick as a mammal. Couple of silicone boobs, should work like a charm. From spike66 at att.net Mon Jun 14 22:32:30 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 15:32:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] delightfully blammisphous car commercial In-Reply-To: <800175.88276.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <795011.60726.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? {8^D ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvqiOfnEzW8 ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From moulton at moulton.com Tue Jun 15 00:24:09 2010 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:24:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] honor among parasites In-Reply-To: <4C169F15.30506@satx.rr.com> References: <800175.88276.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C169F15.30506@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <1276561449.27950.2233.camel@desktop-linux> On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 16:28 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/14/2010 3:26 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > > > As for the mosquito relying on optical recognition, ja it will be > > difficult indeed to disguise a tick as a mammal. > > Couple of silicone boobs, should work like a charm. Based on the information online some material used in some external breast prosthesis is silicone however other materials are sometimes used and come in a variety of colors and thus are a viable option. The silicon breast implants that I have seen are virtually transparent with very little color and thus are probably not a viable option. Fred From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Jun 15 00:40:26 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:40:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] honor among parasites In-Reply-To: <4C169F15.30506@satx.rr.com> References: <800175.88276.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C169F15.30506@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Damien wrote: >Couple of silicone boobs, should work like a charm. Damien, I would recommend the tick join the Aussie navy where a female can get breast implants as part of their medical benefits. ; ) John On 6/14/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/14/2010 3:26 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > >> As for the mosquito relying on optical recognition, ja it will be >> difficult indeed to disguise a tick as a mammal. > > Couple of silicone boobs, should work like a charm. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Jun 15 00:49:57 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:49:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] John W. Campbell in 1942 predicts the future In-Reply-To: <4C167BAC.7000809@satx.rr.com> References: <4C167BAC.7000809@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Joseph Campbell wrote way back in 1942: >> I think he (and many others) underestimated the cost effectiveness of settling people on other planets and space colonies. It is still very much NOT the way to deal with over-population issues! LOL But a century from now (or sooner) we may be at the point where traveling to Mars, etc., is not much more expensive than a modern-day trip to Europe from the U.S., via airplane or ship. John On 6/14/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/14/2010 10:52 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > >> About the same time, AC Clarke wrote into his stories that it would >> take billions of years to generate artificial minds. > > No, a million or so in THE CITY AND THE STARS, and it was not your usual > AI in a box. > > "No disembodied intelligence had ever been encountered in the natural > Universe; the Empire set out to create one. We have forgotten, with so > much else, the skills and knowledge that made this possible. The > scientists of the Empire had mastered all the forces of Nature, all the > secrets of time and space. As our minds are the by-product of an > immensely intricate arrangement of brain cells, linked together by the > network of the nervous system, so they strove to create a brain whose > components were not material, but patterns embossed upon space itself. > Such a brain, if one can call it that, would use electrical or yet > higher forces for its operation, and would be completely free from the > tyranny of matter. It could function with far greater speed than any > organic intelligence; it could endure as long as there was an erg of > free energy left in the Universe, and no limit could be seen for its > powers. Once created, it would develop potentialities which even its > makers could not foresee. > "Largely as a result of the experience gained in his own regeneration, > Man suggested that the creation of such beings should be attempted. It > was the greatest challenge ever thrown out to intelligence in the > Universe, and after centuries of debate it was accepted. All the races > of the Galaxy joined together in its fulfilment. > "More than a million years were to separate the dream from the reality." > > The billion or more happened after the first disembodied AI went feral > and started to chew up the universe, before it was shoved into what > sounds very like a black hole. > > The key place where Campbell went wrong was supposing that nuclear > energy would be easy to handle, and ubiquitous (and in 1942 he can't be > faulted for not knowing--Fermi's first reactor wasn't critical until > December of that year). > > 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 Tue Jun 15 00:50:58 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:50:58 -0500 Subject: [ExI] honor among parasites In-Reply-To: References: <800175.88276.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C169F15.30506@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C16CE72.5050201@satx.rr.com> On 6/14/2010 7:40 PM, John Grigg wrote: > Damien, I would recommend the tick join the Aussie navy where a female > can get breast implants as part of their medical benefits. ; ) Don't be crude and lewd, John; those are emergency flotation devices. From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Jun 15 01:15:52 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 21:15:52 -0400 Subject: [ExI] honor among parasites In-Reply-To: <1276561449.27950.2233.camel@desktop-linux> References: <800175.88276.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C169F15.30506@satx.rr.com> <1276561449.27950.2233.camel@desktop-linux> Message-ID: <20100614211552.723ismweer8c8okw@webmail.natasha.cc> Okay Fred, I simply had to go hunt for something colorful -- http://spooftimes.com/spooftimes/NewsDetail.aspx?articleId=98b619e0-40c9-42f3-b95c-0472c3d29d7d&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1 Natasha Quoting "Fred C. Moulton" : > On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 16:28 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: >> On 6/14/2010 3:26 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: >> >> > As for the mosquito relying on optical recognition, ja it will be >> > difficult indeed to disguise a tick as a mammal. >> >> Couple of silicone boobs, should work like a charm. > > Based on the information online some material used in some external > breast prosthesis is silicone however other materials are sometimes used > and come in a variety of colors and thus are a viable option. The > silicon breast implants that I have seen are virtually transparent with > very little color and thus are probably not a viable option. > > Fred > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Tue Jun 15 03:17:16 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:17:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] a poignant Singularity story, with dogs Message-ID: <4C16F0BC.7020906@satx.rr.com> http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/cooper_06_10/ "My Father's Singularity," by Brenda Cooper. From estropico at gmail.com Tue Jun 15 07:50:43 2010 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:50:43 +0100 Subject: [ExI] ExtroBritannia: How to think rationally about the future Message-ID: How to think rationally about the future Saturday 3rd July 2010, 2pm - 4pm Speakers: Paul Crowley and Roko Mijic About the talk: Over the past forty years, science has built up a substantial body of experimental evidence that highlights dozens of alarming systematic failings in our capacity for reason. These errors are especially dangerous in an area as difficult to think about as the future of humanity, where deluding oneself is tempting and the "reality check" won't arrive until too late. How can we form accurate beliefs about the future in the face of these considerable obstacles? This talk will outline ways of identifying and correcting cognitive biases, in particular the use of probability theory to quantify and manipulate uncertainty, and then apply these improved methods to try to paint a more accurate picture of what we all have to look forward to in the 21st century. About the speakers: Paul Crowley is a cryptographer and computer programmer whose work includes breaks in ciphers designed by Cisco and by Bruce Schneier. His website is http://www.ciphergoth.org/ Roko Mijic graduated from the University of Cambridge with a BA in Mathematics, and the Certificate of Advanced Study in Mathematics. He spent a year doing research into the foundations of knowledge representation at the University of Edinburgh and holds an MSc in informatics. He is currently an advisor for the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence. Both speakers are contributors to the community website for refining the art of human rationality, http://LessWrong.com/ There's no charge to attend this meeting, and everyone is welcome. There will be plenty of opportunity to ask questions and to make comments. Discussion will continue after the event, in a nearby pub, for those who are able to stay. Why not join some of the UKH+ regulars for a drink and/or light lunch beforehand, any time after 12.30pm, in The Marlborough Arms, 36 Torrington Place, London WC1E 7HJ. To find us, look out for a table where there's a copy of the book "The Singularity Is Near" displayed. About the venue: Room 416, Birkbeck College, Torrington Square, London WC1E 7HX (map: http://www.bbk.ac.uk/maps) Room 416 is on the fourth floor (via the lift near reception) in the main Birkbeck College building, in Torrington Square (which is a pedestrian-only square). Torrington Square is about 10 minutes walk from either Russell Square or Goodge St tube stations. From sparge at gmail.com Tue Jun 15 11:04:42 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:04:42 -0400 Subject: [ExI] delightfully blammisphous car commercial In-Reply-To: <795011.60726.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <800175.88276.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <795011.60726.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/14 Gregory Jones > > {8^D > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvqiOfnEzW8 > It's been removed. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 15 14:48:06 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] delightfully blammisphous car commercial In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <501459.28165.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 6/15/10, Dave Sill wrote: ? It's been removed. -Dave ? ? Doh! ? It showed the faithful?worshipping a soccer ball.? I thought it was hilarious, but the catholics were extremely not amused.? {8^D? I found it interesting that they were selling cars, but most of the ad has nothing to do with cars, just an eye-grabbing concept: a cult that worships soccer, then it cuts to a car ad.? I think there is some world championship going on in that particular sport currently, so it was timely.? I remember the soccer bit, but not the car, as in what kind of car it was.? In that sense it was?edgy?but?ineffective advertisement.? ? s ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Tue Jun 15 15:13:08 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:13:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] delightfully blammisphous car commercial In-Reply-To: <501459.28165.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <501459.28165.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/15 Gregory Jones > > It showed the faithful worshipping a soccer ball. I thought it was > hilarious, but the catholics were extremely not amused. {8^D I found it > interesting that they were selling cars, but most of the ad has nothing to > do with cars, just an eye-grabbing concept: a cult that worships soccer, > then it cuts to a car ad. I think there is some world championship going on > in that particular sport currently, so it was timely. I remember the soccer > bit, but not the car, as in what kind of car it was. In that sense it > was edgy but ineffective advertisement. > It was Hyundai. I saw that ad, not as a commercial, but because of the controversy. Here's a story about it: http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/autos/hyundai-pulls-world-cup-ad-after-catholic-outcry/19516045/ -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 15 15:15:59 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:15:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] south carolina primary election In-Reply-To: <162533.46108.qm@web81502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <736116.52991.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? This time-bomb is ticking away: ? http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/15/clyburn-claims-hacking-greenes-surprise-win-sc-senate-race/ ? --- On Sun, 6/13/10, Gregory Jones wrote: From: Gregory Jones Subject: Re: [ExI] south carolina primary election To: "ExI chat list" Date: Sunday, June 13, 2010, 7:25 PM ? >...South Carolina, senate primary, suspicious results... ? For instance, what happens if two weeks before the Nov?2010 election...This is dangerous as all hell. ? spike ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 15 15:04:49 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:04:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] delightfully blammisphous car commercial In-Reply-To: <501459.28165.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <919382.59760.qm@web81505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? --- On Tue, 6/15/10, Dave Sill wrote: ? It's been removed. -Dave ? ? We will hafta settle for this: ? http://www.wlwt.com/news/23900484/detail.html?hpt=C2 {8^D ? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 15 16:07:41 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:07:41 -0500 Subject: [ExI] south carolina primary election In-Reply-To: <736116.52991.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <736116.52991.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C17A54D.3050203@satx.rr.com> On 6/15/2010 10:15 AM, Gregory Jones wrote: > This time-bomb is ticking away: > http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/15/clyburn-claims-hacking-greenes-surprise-win-sc-senate-race/ Gotta love the confident ignorance of FOX comments: "In Australia, where voting is mandatory (you are fined if you do not vote the names on the ballot are in alphabetical order and studies show that the first name on the ballot gets 30% of the vote due to its position." This is known technically as the "donkey vote." It has to be taken into consideration, but it's rarely critical. Why? Because, in fact, of course, as wiki says, in Oz "The donkey vote has been estimated at between 1 and 2% of the vote." In the US, where people *choose* to put themselves out to vote, the donkey vote is surely smaller than that. As all the psephologists have pointed out, it isn't even in the ballpark to explain Greene's victory. Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 15 17:05:28 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] south carolina primary election In-Reply-To: <4C17A54D.3050203@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <561087.83680.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? > This time-bomb is ticking away: > http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/15/clyburn-claims-hacking-greenes-surprise-win-sc-senate-race/ ? --- On Tue, 6/15/10, Damien Broderick wrote: ...This is known technically as the "donkey vote." It has to be taken into consideration, but it's rarely critical... ? Agreed, the donkey vote is negligible, but this actually reinforces my point.? We have a case of a disputed vote which really does look suspicious as all hell, in an election using machines that cannot be audited.? This was?a merciful warning shot across the bow, since this election was only a primary, so all the contestants are of the same party, in a state no one ever heard of anyway.? ? But what if this happens in a?national election, in a country with a?celebrated history of armed resistance to the government, when that government had the option of making paper-receipt?machine ballots and deliberately failed to choose it, when people are already extremely distrustful of the government and eeeeverybody has guns?? ? This bodes ill. ? spike ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dan_ust at yahoo.com Tue Jun 15 18:08:54 2010 From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:08:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] south carolina primary election In-Reply-To: <561087.83680.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <561087.83680.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <324228.90931.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Will you remain neutral? And why should this matter again? Basically, I see democracy -- rightfully, I think (or I'd change my mind) -- as merely a way of pretending the rule have a say in how they're ruled. It's a nice illusion for many -- and works especially well for political elites who badger those uppity types with vote tallies as if these actually measured anything important. Also, there seems to be the notion that somehow in the past -- maybe the distant past, maybe in someone's lifetime -- that somehow democracy worked and produced good results, but today this has been corrupted. Isn't the truth more that things have always been corrupt? The more astounding thing for me is how much corruption there's always been and yet there's almost no rebellion. (To me, this is not a good sign. It's an extremely bad one. It means, to me, almost everyone will tolerate abuse of power as well as readily accept fair tales about history and civics. To me, that's much more dangerous than living in a society of well armed people who are [heathily] distrustful of their rulers.) Regards, Dan From: Gregory Jones To: ExI chat list Sent: Tue, June 15, 2010 1:05:28 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] south carolina primary election > This time-bomb is ticking away: > http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/15/clyburn-claims-hacking-greenes-surprise-win-sc-senate-race/ --- On Tue, 6/15/10, Damien Broderick wrote: ...This is known technically as the "donkey vote." It has to be taken into consideration, but it's rarely critical... Agreed, the donkey vote is negligible, but this actually reinforces my point.? We have a case of a disputed vote which really does look suspicious as all hell, in an election using machines that cannot be audited.? This was?a merciful warning shot across the bow, since this election was only a primary, so all the contestants are of the same party, in a state no one ever heard of anyway.? But what if this happens in a?national election, in a country with a?celebrated history of armed resistance to the government, when that government had the option of making paper-receipt?machine ballots and deliberately failed to choose it, when people are already extremely distrustful of the government and eeeeverybody has guns?? This bodes ill. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bbenzai at yahoo.com Tue Jun 15 18:22:32 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:22:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] delightfully blammisphous car commercial In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <319049.8340.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvqiOfnEzW8 "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Innocean Americas" Um, what are adverts for, again? Talk about self-defeating! Is this just another example of people who simply /don't get/ the internet? (or, just maybe, a fiendishly clever attempt to get more exposure via the inevitable paradoxical effects of net censorship? - I think there's a name for this, but I don't remember it atm.) Spike, or anyone else who's seen this, can you give us a description? I'm always happy to learn about 'delightfully blammisphous' things! Ben Zaiboc From sparge at gmail.com Tue Jun 15 18:58:57 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:58:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] delightfully blammisphous car commercial In-Reply-To: <319049.8340.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <319049.8340.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > > > Spike, or anyone else who's seen this, can you give us a description? I'm > always happy to learn about 'delightfully blammisphous' things! > Did you read the Daily Finance link I posted? The ad was spoof of a church that worships soccer. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Jun 16 00:57:13 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 17:57:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] a poignant Singularity story, with dogs In-Reply-To: <4C16F0BC.7020906@satx.rr.com> References: <4C16F0BC.7020906@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: I loved the story and this is how I imagine a "slow take-off" singularity. But as this excellent tale showed, there will be winners and losers in such a world. John On 6/14/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/cooper_06_10/ > > "My Father's Singularity," by Brenda Cooper. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From mlatorra at gmail.com Wed Jun 16 02:17:34 2010 From: mlatorra at gmail.com (Michael LaTorra) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 20:17:34 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Benford's Law Message-ID: "Benford's Law is the observation that most ?real-world? data is not uniformly distributed - in fact, the probability that the first digit is a ?1? is almost one-third, rather than the expected one-ninth. The reason for this is that the *logarithm* of most real-world data is uniformly distributed. I find this mildly fascinating." - David Dalrymple http://blog.davidad.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 16 05:47:21 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:47:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] COSMOS sf freebie Message-ID: <4C186569.8030506@satx.rr.com> Have I url'd this delightfully silly and funny story previously? The current COSMOS online editor has taken to jumbling up the order of free download stories: All The Wrong Places by Val Nolan "I saw it," he said. "The Higgs boson. It was here, in the bar." Damien Broderick From giulio at gmail.com Wed Jun 16 09:16:20 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 11:16:20 +0200 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven Message-ID: YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven http://giulioprisco.blogspot.com/2010/06/yes-hard-core-transhumanist-splinter.html FYC: Some comments to an anti-transhumanist, anti-uploading rant on the New Atlantis blog, and a call to arms. From algaenymph at gmail.com Wed Jun 16 09:20:42 2010 From: algaenymph at gmail.com (AlgaeNymph) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 02:20:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C18976A.5000005@gmail.com> Giulio Prisco wrote: > FYC: Some comments to an anti-transhumanist, anti-uploading rant on > the New Atlantis blog, and a call to arms. > Why don't we ever have a (figurative) call to arms? From giulio at gmail.com Wed Jun 16 09:29:40 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 11:29:40 +0200 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <4C18976A.5000005@gmail.com> References: <4C18976A.5000005@gmail.com> Message-ID: Let's have one, figurative or not. Let's form a real transhumanist org pushing for real transhumanist outcomes. Too bad the Extropy Institute was closed. On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:20 AM, AlgaeNymph wrote: > Giulio Prisco wrote: >> >> FYC: Some comments to an anti-transhumanist, anti-uploading rant on >> the New Atlantis blog, and a call to arms. >> > > Why don't we ever have a (figurative) call to arms? > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Jun 16 09:40:36 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 11:40:36 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Suspended-animation cold sleep achieved in lab Message-ID: Suspended-animation cold sleep achieved in labStarship freezer podules (well, medical apps) foreseen By Lewis Page? Get more from this author Top boffins in the States believe that they may be on the track of a way to place living human beings into suspended animation, allowing them to survive long periods effectively frozen before being "reanimated" with no ill effects. Dr Mark Roth, based at a Seattle cancer laboratory, got interested in suspended animation after looking at several cases where this has occurred spontaneously in humans. One well-known case is that of Canadian toddler Erica Nordby, who wandered outside in the winter of 2001 wearing only her nappy. In the bitter cold her heart stopped beating for two hours and her body temperature plunged to just 16?C* before she was rescued, warmed - and came miraculously back to life, despite having literally frozen to death. In another case a Japanese man, Mitsutaka Uchikoshi, fell asleep on a snowy mountainside in 2006. He was found 23 days later with a core body temperature of just 22?C*. He too was successfully reanimated having suffered no appreciable ill effects. "There are many examples in the scientific literature of humans who appear frozen to death. They have no heartbeat and are clinically dead. But they can be reanimated," says Dr Roth. Roth and his colleagues wondered how it is that some people can enter a state of frozen suspended animation and then recover from it safely, whereas in general such a change of body temperature is deadly. The scientists now think they may be on the track of an answer, having learned how to perform the same trick reliably with other lifeforms; in this case yeasts and nematode worms. Yeasts and worms, like humans, will normally simply die if they are chilled down past a certain point. But Roth and his colleagues have found that if the little creatures are starved of oxygen before turning on the cold, they will go into suspended animation from which they recover on warming and go on to live normal yeasty or wormy lives. Here's an illustrative vid from the team: "We wondered if what was happening with the organisms in my laboratory was also happening in people like the toddler and the Japanese mountain climber," says Roth. "Before they got cold did they somehow manage to decrease their oxygen consumption? Is that what protected them? Our work in nematodes and yeast suggests that this may be the case, and it may bring us a step closer to understanding what happens to people who appear to freeze to death but can be reanimated." The idea here is not so much to place people into deep freeze in order to endure lengthy interstellar voyages, a staple idea in science fiction but unlikely in the near future (humanity is struggling even to assemble a Mars mission right now). Rather, Roth and his colleagues think that their work might lead to techniques that would let paramedics or doctors "buy time" for severely injured or ill patients by putting them into suspended states like those achieved by Nordby and Uchikoshi. Then, once the underlying problem had been fixed, they could be reanimated. Full details of the research are published online ahead of print in the journal *Molecular Biology of the Cell*, here(subscription link). ? *Normal adult core body temperature is 37?C, a trifle lower for kids. Any variation of much more than a degree is cause for serious concern; several degrees' sustained variation is a probably fatal medical emergency of one kind or another. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/11/suspended_animation_in_lab/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seculartranshumanist at gmail.com Wed Jun 16 12:17:06 2010 From: seculartranshumanist at gmail.com (Joseph Bloch) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 08:17:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: <4C18976A.5000005@gmail.com> Message-ID: A transhumanist organization built around real-world, practical outcomes? Count me in. Joseph On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 5:29 AM, Giulio Prisco wrote: > Let's have one, figurative or not. Let's form a real transhumanist org > pushing for real transhumanist outcomes. Too bad the Extropy Institute > was closed. > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:20 AM, AlgaeNymph wrote: >> Giulio Prisco wrote: >>> >>> FYC: Some comments to an anti-transhumanist, anti-uploading rant on >>> the New Atlantis blog, and a call to arms. >>> >> >> Why don't we ever have a (figurative) call to arms? >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jun 16 12:41:02 2010 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 12:41:02 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] honor among parasites In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <435000.29099.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> On 6/14/2010 7:40 PM, John Grigg wrote: "Damien, I would recommend the tick join the Aussie navy where a female can get breast implants as part of their medical benefits. ; )" And Damien replied:"Don't be crude and lewd, John; those are emergency flotation devices." Actually, there's probably a more compelling reason for those breast implants - the plastic surgery budget doesn't just cover treating battle wounds, it also has to cover training plastic surgeons. While a plastic surgeon may want to train in the military so as to gain first-rate skills in dealing with violent injuries, they also want to train in skills that will be useful to them in civilian life. Doing breast implants is a very valuable skill for plastic surgeons, and people in the military are generally too young to have more than a tiny rate of breast cancer. So, you'll find a bunch of operations performed sporadically just to maintain the skills and training needed by the surgeons. Likewise, even the most mercenary of hospitals will offer a small amount of pro bono work in order to keep up a willing supply of volunteers for junior surgeons to train on. Tom From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Wed Jun 16 12:50:19 2010 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 12:50:19 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] Suspended-animation cold sleep achieved in lab In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <27181.93562.qm@web27006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Whatever happened to the buzz around DADLE, a synthetic leu-encephalin that could induce hibernation in mammal species that didn't normally hibernate? I think this briefly got a mention in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, and apparently some organ transplant people were looking at its tissue effects. I know taking a nap for a few months like a bear does for winter isn't as exciting, but it makes interplanetary travel a lot easier, and might buy a terminal illness patient a few months if there's something (like a new treatment, or the birth of a grandchild) you believe is imminent. Tom From ismirth at gmail.com Wed Jun 16 13:19:55 2010 From: ismirth at gmail.com (Isabelle Hakala) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 09:19:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Suspended-animation cold sleep achieved in lab In-Reply-To: <27181.93562.qm@web27006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <27181.93562.qm@web27006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I doubt that hibernation would stop any illness from progressing, since the cellular processes would still be running... I believe freezing would though! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Isabelle Hakala "Any person who says 'it can't be done' shouldn't be interrupting the people getting it done." "Do every single thing in life with love in your heart." On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Tom Nowell wrote: > Whatever happened to the buzz around DADLE, a synthetic leu-encephalin that > could induce hibernation in mammal species that didn't normally hibernate? I > think this briefly got a mention in the Journal of the British > Interplanetary Society, and apparently some organ transplant people were > looking at its tissue effects. > > I know taking a nap for a few months like a bear does for winter isn't as > exciting, but it makes interplanetary travel a lot easier, and might buy a > terminal illness patient a few months if there's something (like a new > treatment, or the birth of a grandchild) you believe is imminent. > > Tom > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 dan_ust at yahoo.com Wed Jun 16 14:55:22 2010 From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 07:55:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Benford's Law In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <491797.27033.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Yeah, I first heard about this in connection with catching embezzlers. People who faked books often will use a completely random distribution in the accounts, when the real world distro tends to fit Benford's Law. Regards, Dan From: Michael LaTorra To: WTA Talk ; ExI chat list Sent: Tue, June 15, 2010 10:17:34 PM Subject: [ExI] Benford's Law "Benford's Law is the observation that most ?real-world? data is not uniformly distributed - in fact, the probability that the first digit is a ?1? is almost one-third, rather than the expected one-ninth. The reason for this is that the *logarithm* of most real-world data is uniformly distributed. I find this mildly fascinating." - David Dalrymple http://blog.davidad.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Jun 16 15:37:50 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 08:37:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1041.35585.qm@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Would this be the Foresight Institute, SIAI, or something along those lines? --- On Wed, 6/16/10, Joseph Bloch wrote: > A transhumanist organization built > around real-world, practical outcomes? > > Count me in. > > Joseph > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 5:29 AM, Giulio Prisco > wrote: > > Let's have one, figurative or not. Let's form a real > transhumanist org > > pushing for real transhumanist outcomes. Too bad the > Extropy Institute > > was closed. > > > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:20 AM, AlgaeNymph > wrote: > >> Giulio Prisco wrote: > >>> > >>> FYC: Some comments to an anti-transhumanist, > anti-uploading rant on > >>> the New Atlantis blog, and a call to arms. > >>> > >> > >> Why don't we ever have a (figurative) call to > arms? From natasha at natasha.cc Wed Jun 16 16:43:26 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 11:43:26 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning forcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <1041.35585.qm@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <1041.35585.qm@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4BC6164849A645FD88E0B488775309E1@DFC68LF1> Extropy. Nothing gets it like Extropy. Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 10:38 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning forcyber-heaven Would this be the Foresight Institute, SIAI, or something along those lines? --- On Wed, 6/16/10, Joseph Bloch wrote: > A transhumanist organization built > around real-world, practical outcomes? > > Count me in. > > Joseph > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 5:29 AM, Giulio Prisco > wrote: > > Let's have one, figurative or not. Let's form a real > transhumanist org > > pushing for real transhumanist outcomes. Too bad the > Extropy Institute > > was closed. > > > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:20 AM, AlgaeNymph > wrote: > >> Giulio Prisco wrote: > >>> > >>> FYC: Some comments to an anti-transhumanist, > anti-uploading rant on > >>> the New Atlantis blog, and a call to arms. > >>> > >> > >> Why don't we ever have a (figurative) call to > arms? _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From scerir at libero.it Wed Jun 16 17:34:59 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 19:34:59 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] Benford's Law Message-ID: <18184735.330491276709699973.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> Michael quoted: : "Benford's Law is the observation that most ?real-world? data is not uniformly distributed [...]" Terry Tao made several mathematical points here http://terrytao.wordpress.com/2009/07/03/benfords-law-zipfs-law-and-the-pareto- distribution/ Lubos also wrote something http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/05/first-digit-is-most-likely-one-benfords. html and the ArXiv has a recent paper about that, saying that the "law" seems general and significant http://arxiv.org/abs/1005.0660 From animeotaku at btinternet.com Wed Jun 16 15:57:50 2010 From: animeotaku at btinternet.com (Holly Gray) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:57:50 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: <4C18976A.5000005@gmail.com> Message-ID: <170289.98455.qm@web86502.mail.ird.yahoo.com> I find myself wishing that we could, but, in the current democracy, we need some form of shiny front organization or we'll be relegated to being the lunatic fringe that quite a bit of the public still see us as. ----- Original Message ---- From: Giulio Prisco To: ExI chat list Sent: Wednesday, 16 June, 2010 10:29:40 Subject: Re: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven Let's have one, figurative or not. Let's form a real transhumanist org pushing for real transhumanist outcomes. Too bad the Extropy Institute was closed. On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:20 AM, AlgaeNymph wrote: > Giulio Prisco wrote: >> >> FYC: Some comments to an anti-transhumanist, anti-uploading rant on >> the New Atlantis blog, and a call to arms. >> > > Why don't we ever have a (figurative) call to arms? > _______________________________________________ > 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 From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Jun 16 20:07:20 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 13:07:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <170289.98455.qm@web86502.mail.ird.yahoo.com> References: <4C18976A.5000005@gmail.com> <170289.98455.qm@web86502.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C192EF8.5030609@mac.com> Holly Gray wrote: > I find myself wishing that we could, but, in the current democracy, we need some form of shiny front organization or we'll be relegated to being the lunatic fringe that quite a bit of the public still see us as. > > Shiny fronts get shiny by rubbing away and covering up all that makes such a thing actually great or having any chance of greatness. Real successes are build by very real and gritty people dedicated to what they are doing. In point of fact we are lunatics. But with a bit more actual movement we are the good kind of lunatics that you can't distinguish from genius except on the basis of what we actually accomplish. Let's worry less about how we look to the world and more about molding reality in the image of our ideals. - samantha From natasha at natasha.cc Wed Jun 16 20:36:14 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:36:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <170289.98455.qm@web86502.mail.ird.yahoo.com> References: <4C18976A.5000005@gmail.com> <170289.98455.qm@web86502.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20100616163614.p0hihrggg8wogk0k@webmail.natasha.cc> I must have been born with a confidence gene because I never considered myself as part of a fringe, or what one speaker at the Humanity+ Summit called freaks weird, or what RU Sirius dismissed as not being hip like the cyberpunk folks, or what anti-transhumanists like Mark Gubrub or Dale Carrico write, of even some of Mike Treder?s strange comments. I always have considered transhumanism to be sophisticated, keening intelligent, great sense of humor, deeply caring about humanity and awake. Certainly there are some transhumanists who are difficult or na?ve, or who wear "H+" without understanding its values, but for me it is home. I shine and so do you. Natasha Quoting Holly Gray : > I find myself wishing that we could, but, in the current democracy, > we need some form of shiny front organization or we'll be relegated > to being the lunatic fringe that quite a bit of the public still see > us as. > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Giulio Prisco > To: ExI chat list > Sent: Wednesday, 16 June, 2010 10:29:40 > Subject: Re: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups > yearning for cyber-heaven > > Let's have one, figurative or not. Let's form a real transhumanist org > pushing for real transhumanist outcomes. Too bad the Extropy Institute > was closed. > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:20 AM, AlgaeNymph wrote: >> Giulio Prisco wrote: >>> >>> FYC: Some comments to an anti-transhumanist, anti-uploading rant on >>> the New Atlantis blog, and a call to arms. >>> >> >> Why don't we ever have a (figurative) call to arms? >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 16 21:11:15 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 14:11:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <20100616163614.p0hihrggg8wogk0k@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> >...I always have considered transhumanism to be sophisticated, keening intelligent, great sense of humor, deeply caring about humanity and awake.? Certainly there are some transhumanists who are difficult or na?ve, or who wear "H+" without understanding its values, but for me it is home...I shine and so do you...Natasha ? ? Well said, Natasha thanks.? I agree.? The central point of transhumanism is the notion that it is physically possible to upload sentience into another substrate.? I sure cannot figure out why not.? We know that there are plenty of examples in nature of a form of sentience in beasts, behaviors that demonstrate natural evolved intelligence, even if not exactly analogous to human thought.? We have seen videos of ants being attacked by predators for instance, and demonstrating what looks to me exactly like human fear, all taking place in a central nervous system that could scarcely be called analogous to a mammalian brain. ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiJgsPUYahs ? The ant's brain is an object that most of us would agree could in theory be simulated on a computer, and if so, why not a grasshopper's brain, and if that, why not a mouse brain, etc.? Those who say in principle humans cannot upload sound too much like the well-meaning armchair philosophers who argued in 1900 that humans can never go to the moon. ? I recognize that there are identity paradoxes, old?questions to which I see no progress being made or having been made ever, but regardless of that we forge on toward the goal of uploading, for we know all too well the alternative. ? spike --- On Wed, 6/16/10, natasha at natasha.cc wrote: From: natasha at natasha.cc Subject: Re: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Date: Wednesday, June 16, 2010, 1:36 PM I must have been born with a confidence gene because I never considered myself as part of a fringe, or what one speaker at the Humanity+ Summit? called freaks weird, or what RU Sirius dismissed as not being hip like the cyberpunk folks, or what anti-transhumanists like Mark Gubrub or Dale Carrico write, of even some of Mike Treder?s strange comments. I always have considered transhumanism to be sophisticated, keening intelligent, great sense of humor, deeply caring about humanity and awake.? Certainly there are some transhumanists who are difficult or na?ve, or who wear "H+" without understanding its values, but for me it is home. I shine and so do you. Natasha Quoting Holly Gray : > I find myself wishing that we could, but, in the current democracy,? we need some form of shiny front organization or we'll be relegated? to being the lunatic fringe that quite a bit of the public still see? us as. > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Giulio Prisco > To: ExI chat list > Sent: Wednesday, 16 June, 2010 10:29:40 > Subject: Re: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups? yearning for cyber-heaven > > Let's have one, figurative or not. Let's form a real transhumanist org > pushing for real transhumanist outcomes. Too bad the Extropy Institute > was closed. > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:20 AM, AlgaeNymph wrote: >> Giulio Prisco wrote: >>> >>> FYC: Some comments to an anti-transhumanist, anti-uploading rant on >>> the New Atlantis blog, and a call to arms. >>> >> >> Why don't we ever have a (figurative) call to arms? >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 16 21:35:53 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:35:53 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> On 6/16/2010 4:11 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > The central point of transhumanism is the notion that it is physically > possible to upload sentience into another substrate. Spike, I think you're getting several things garbled together here. The question Mark Gubrub raises (and who he, anyway?) isn't about migrating *sentience* but *identity* or "selfhood*--as you note at the end of your post. And saying, as both he and you do, that this notion is the "central core" of >H or H+ seems very odd to me. I regard myself as a transhumanist (I was using the word "transhuman" in the '60s and '70s), yet I have deep reservations about many representations of uploading, teleportation, copying, etc. If it becomes possible through genomic and proteomic advances to halt the decay of the human body, and even to rejuvenate it to optimal health, while retaining and expanding memory and augmenting other functions, the resulting condition seems to me clearly to be a kind of *enhanced humanity* or >H or H+. People so preserved from degeneration would not be immortal, of course, because accidents and malign designs can obliterate anyone. This ultimate vulnerability is probably why you ended by writing > I recognize that there are identity paradoxes, old questions to which I > see no progress being made or having been made ever, but regardless of > that we forge on toward the goal of uploading, for we know all too well > the alternative. Yes, the alternative is dissolution and death. But one of the prime identity problems is that some proposed methods of "uploading" do require the obliteration of an original identity and its reconstruction "on a different substrate". Guilio and many others assert that in a world where this is possible, people will quickly lose their qualms and accept copying as equivalent to migration. No doubt. I don't accept that, as it happens, but I don't agree that this makes me a non- or anti-transhumanist. But of course if I get booted out of the club on these grounds, I won't be especially upset, or pine. It's just a label... Damien Broderick From natasha at natasha.cc Wed Jun 16 22:12:11 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:12:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> Quoting Damien Broderick : > On 6/16/2010 4:11 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > >> The central point of transhumanism is the notion that it is physically >> possible to upload sentience into another substrate. It's not the central core. It a supposition. The central core of transhumanism is to enhance ourselves and to improve the human condition by reshaping our biology for the purpose of not dying and unfixing our existence to our biology. What we will become is unknown. Uploading is one avenue, and not the only one. We don't have to upload to exist indefinitely. > Yes, the alternative is dissolution and death. But one of the prime > identity problems is that some proposed methods of "uploading" do > require the obliteration of an original identity and its reconstruction > "on a different substrate". I'm not sure the "obliteration" of original identity is a given. > Guilio and many others assert that in a > world where this is possible, people will quickly lose their qualms and > accept copying as equivalent to migration. No doubt. I don't accept > that, as it happens, but I don't agree that this makes me a non- or > anti-transhumanist. I'm not sure people will migrate in this way, but for those who want to, it ought to be valued as an option. The fact that you do not want to do this definitely does not make you anti-transhumanist! In fact, there ought to be diversity of evolution and the core of transhumanism is that we get some control on our evolution and shape ourselves - not be sequestered to any one person's vision of what that evolution could be. And, if morphological freedom is to be a valid salvo for self-directed evolution, then you choose what you want to be come. > But of course if I get booted out of the club on these grounds, I won't > be especially upset, or pine. It's just a label... This isn't a club. Nevertheless, we ought to engage diversity and even promote it. Natasha From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 16 22:59:55 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 17:59:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> On 6/16/2010 5:12 PM, natasha at natasha.cc wrote: >> But of course if I get booted out of the club on these grounds, I won't >> be especially upset, or pine. It's just a label... > This isn't a club. Drat, did I say "club"? I meant "voted off the island." Wait, there isn't an island? Actually, to all intents and purposes transhumanism *is* a club, or rather a sort of loose federation of clubs where like-minded clumps of neophilic, technophilic people (called "oddballs" by most of the population) hang out together. It's not a political party or movement or tendency or fraction, it isn't yet a formal philosophy or set of design principles, it certainly isn't what the lazy journos call it, a *cult*. What it is, I suppose, is what Sartre called existentialism before he went Maoist--it's a humanism. Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 16 22:37:26 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:37:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <867593.66487.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 6/16/10, Damien Broderick wrote: ? >> The central point of transhumanism is the notion that it is physically >> possible to upload sentience into another substrate. >...Spike, I think you're getting several things garbled together here. The question Mark Gubrub raises (and who he, anyway?) isn't about migrating *sentience* but *identity* or "selfhood*--as you note at the end of your post. ? Ja agreed, there are two different things here.? One, the one on the conceivable technological horizon, is silicon based intelligence.? Beyond that, Si-based human level (or above) intelligence, and still further beyond that, not necessarily anywhere near our tech horizon, is the notion of us as individual identities, being able to upload.? But my motive isn't really individual preservation, as much as I would like that to happen.? Rather I envision a far future in which all the metals in our solar system have been converted to computronium. ? A talented and well-loved sci-fi?writer collected and edited a number of essays about the far future, imaginatively intitled "Year Million."? Wait, that was you.? OK good, let me talk a little about what I envision for a million years hence.? This seems so inevitable, I have a hard time imagining any alternative: sentience will recognize that sentience is a good thing, so more of it is better, and the best that can be is to maximize the total scentience by every means possible.? To me, that means all the metal, everything that isn't hydrogen or helium,?in the solar system converted to scentient matter, using all the available energy the sun so copiously and wastefully pours out,?to do as much thinking as possible.??Scentience wants?more more more until no more is possible, and that means an M-Brain,?which to me is the essence of transhumanism. ? spike? ? ? From: Damien Broderick Subject: Re: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven To: "ExI chat list" Date: Wednesday, June 16, 2010, 2:35 PM On 6/16/2010 4:11 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > The central point of transhumanism is the notion that it is physically > possible to upload sentience into another substrate. Spike, I think you're getting several things garbled together here. The question Mark Gubrub raises (and who he, anyway?) isn't about migrating *sentience* but *identity* or "selfhood*--as you note at the end of your post. And saying, as both he and you do, that this notion is the "central core" of >H or H+ seems very odd to me. I regard myself as a transhumanist (I was using the word "transhuman" in the '60s and '70s), yet I have deep reservations about many representations of uploading, teleportation, copying, etc. If it becomes possible through genomic and proteomic advances to halt the decay of the human body, and even to rejuvenate it to optimal health, while retaining and expanding memory and augmenting other functions, the resulting condition seems to me clearly to be a kind of *enhanced humanity* or >H or H+. People so preserved from degeneration would not be immortal, of course, because accidents and malign designs can obliterate anyone. This ultimate vulnerability is probably why you ended by writing > I recognize that there are identity paradoxes, old questions to which I > see no progress being made or having been made ever, but regardless of > that we forge on toward the goal of uploading, for we know all too well > the alternative. Yes, the alternative is dissolution and death. But one of the prime identity problems is that some proposed methods of "uploading" do require the obliteration of an original identity and its reconstruction "on a different substrate". Guilio and many others assert that in a world where this is possible, people will quickly lose their qualms and accept copying as equivalent to migration. No doubt. I don't accept that, as it happens, but I don't agree that this makes me a non- or anti-transhumanist. But of course if I get booted out of the club on these grounds, I won't be especially upset, or pine. It's just a label... 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 max at maxmore.com Wed Jun 16 22:49:38 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 17:49:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning forcyber-heaven Message-ID: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Spike wrote: >The central point of transhumanism is the notion that it is >physically possible to upload sentience into another substrate. I I think it's a serious error to say that. Transhumanism is a philosophy that seeks to continually overcome human limits, including mortality and the cognitive and emotional limits imposed by the human constitution as it naturally evolved. Personally, I think that uploading is feasible in principle and I don't have any personal identity based objections to it, but it is only one possible path in the future. You can be (and remain) a transhumanist if you expect uploading to be impossible or deadly or if it turns out not to be feasible. 'nuff said. I see that Damien and Natasha both made similar points. Let's be careful not to identify transhumanism essentially with any one path or technology. Max ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher The Proactionary Project Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From natasha at natasha.cc Wed Jun 16 23:23:54 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 19:23:54 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> For me, it is a philosophy with princples and is definitely a movement. Natasha Quoting Damien Broderick : > On 6/16/2010 5:12 PM, natasha at natasha.cc wrote: > >>> But of course if I get booted out of the club on these grounds, I won't >>> be especially upset, or pine. It's just a label... > >> This isn't a club. > > Drat, did I say "club"? I meant "voted off the island." Wait, there > isn't an island? > > Actually, to all intents and purposes transhumanism *is* a club, or > rather a sort of loose federation of clubs where like-minded clumps of > neophilic, technophilic people (called "oddballs" by most of the > population) hang out together. It's not a political party or movement > or tendency or fraction, it isn't yet a formal philosophy or set of > design principles, it certainly isn't what the lazy journos call it, a > *cult*. What it is, I suppose, is what Sartre called existentialism > before he went Maoist--it's a humanism. > > 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 Wed Jun 16 23:44:09 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:44:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <867593.66487.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <867593.66487.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C1961C9.4090005@satx.rr.com> On 6/16/2010 5:37 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > let me talk a little about what I envision for a million years hence. > This seems so inevitable, I have a hard time imagining any alternative: > sentience will recognize that sentience is a good thing, so more of it > is better, and the best that can be is to maximize the total scentience > by every means possible. To me, that means all the metal, everything > that isn't hydrogen or helium, in the solar system converted to > scentient matter, using all the available energy the sun so copiously > and wastefully pours out, to do as much thinking as > possible. Scentience wants more more more until no more is possible, > and that means an M-Brain, which to me is the essence of transhumanism. Various people have expressed this sort of ambition/expectation in rapturous terms. I've posted some such quotes here in years gone by. One was the now-dead British sf writer J. G. Ballard, usually regarded as a grimly dystopian cynical chap, from his 1959 story `The Waiting Grounds': ======= Deep Time: ... I saw the Milky Way, a wheeling carousel of fire, and Earth's remote descendants, countless races inhabiting every stellar system in the galaxy. The dark intervals between the stars were a continuously flickering field of light, a gigantic phosphorescent ocean, filled with the vibrating pulses of electromagnetic communication pathways. To cross the enormous voids between the stars they have progressively slowed their physiological time, first ten, then a hundred fold, so accelerating stellar and galactic time... [T]he slow majestic rotation of the universe itself is at last visible. Deep Time: ...Now they have left the Milky Way... have extended their physiological dependence upon electronic memory banks which store the atomic and molecular patterns within their bodies, transmit them outward at the speed of light, and later reassemble them. Deep time: ...Now, too, they have finally shed their organic forms and are composed of radiating electromagnetic fields, the primary energy substratum of the universe, complex networks of multiple dimensions, alive with the constant tremor of the sentient messages they carry, bearing the life ways of the race. To power these fields, they have harnessed entire galaxies riding the wave fronts of the stellar explosions out toward the terminal helixes of the universe. Deep Time: ...They are beginning to dictate the form and dimensions of the universe... The universe is now almost filled by the great vibrating mantle of ideation, a vast shimmering harp which has completely translated itself into pure wave form, independent of any generating source. As the universe pulses slowly, its own energy vortices flexing and dilating, so the force fields of the ideation mantle flex and dilate in sympathy, growing like an embryo within the womb of the cosmos, a child which will soon fill and consume its parent. =============== and me, 20 years or so later: ========== The galaxies wheeled in the immensity of cosmic night, stars spending their substance in an orgy of radiance, sucking hydrogen from the frozen void and spewing back neutrinos, X rays, light, radio noise, the megaparsec pulses of gravitation, and finally the ores and dense evanescent metals forged in their bellies, hurled out in the cataclysm of stellar explosion; and in the midst of spendthrift fury, on the tiny motes of rock and soil and ocean that were the planets, life trod forth blinking from the slimy pools of its birth, ate hungrily of the prodigal outpourings of its suns, and changed under that same lash into forms strange and wild and beautiful, diverse beyond number, swarmed and preyed upon each another's flesh and cooperated in the intricate dance of shifting ecologies; and grew wise, at last, wise and murderous and choked with dreams, yearning for the unnamable, taming that very energy which mindlessly had brought them into being; and killed with it, and healed and built with it, went beyond it to now unimagined energies created in the convoluted structure of brains and ganglia complex beyond precedent; and came, finally, to command their own brutality and greatness... The wise beings strode from star to star, galaxy to galaxy, but not to rape and pillage. That eon of conquest was now no more than a regretted episode in their immense history. They went in joy and respect into the glory that extended, it seemed, beyond limit. Eyes of flesh were now eyes of fire, yet still flesh; bodies met in the passion of love, and in those meetings made new bodies to populate the multicosm and cherish all that lay and moved within it. They no longer died; death was a clumsy expedient of random evolution, and they had taken evolution into their own charge. Ennui, too, was vanished?that specter which once had seemed to spoil the promise of utopia?for how is boredom possible in a universe rich with other souls? So they went to the curving edges of the universe, learned its physical limits and measured and cherished them, learning the infinity within themselves... Already more than forty billion years had passed since the first one-celled creatures struggled for life in their soupy ponds. The wise ones had altered themselves so radically that none of their early planet-bound ancestors could have recognized them. They had merged in gestalt unities huge as stars, their senses extending across the entire radiation scale and into the domain of pure psychic energies. Even now their evolution was not complete; the metamorphoses continued. Only the essential qualities of humanity remained unaltered: love, joy, creation, reverence. The expansion of the spacetime manifold achieved its greatest dimension, faltered; the long contraction began. Stars dimmed and died, or faded to a steady ember glow. The entity that was Sentience welcomed into its totality the few remaining isolated members of the cosmic fellowship. Purpose and consciousness infused every energy structure in the multicosm. A hundred billion years after it had coalesced from incandescent gas, the universe had become a single sentient organism... =========== Could happen that way. But I think that goes waaaaay beyond *human*ism, trans- or post-. Still, it might form part of our hopes, our meta-goals... Looking at such vistas, I almost feel, sometimes, like shouting back at the mockers, "YEAH, it's the fucking Rapture of the Nerds, bozos--and? What's yer point?" Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 17 00:28:24 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 19:28:24 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> On 6/16/2010 6:23 PM, natasha at natasha.cc wrote: > For me, it is a philosophy with princples and is definitely a movement. Leaving aside the movement aspect for a moment: a perspective, a set of interpretative principles and principles of action, tends be regarded as a *formal philosophy* only after it has been canonized in one or more major texts. What are these in the case of Transhumanism? FM-2030's books, for example, do not seem to be embraced, studied, taught, disputed by many people. THE SINGULARITY IS NEAR is not a philosophy text. It might be argued that looking for *books* in the 21st century is entirely missing the point--that >H or H+ is articulated sufficiently in the discussions and colloquia associated with, say, the Extropy Institute of old and its listserv, and the various groups naming themselves as such like the World Transhumanist Association or Humanityplus... But I'm not sure that's sufficient. I seem to recall various efforts to pull together a text titled TRANSHUMANISM, and that somesuch volumes already exist in Italian (and are fought over vehemently and even poisonously there), but I don't know of any canonical text in English. Is there one (or more)? Amazon lists *Designer Evolution: A Transhumanist Manifesto* (2005, Prometheus) by Simon Young, which has as Part 3 "Transhumanism as a Totalized Philosophical System." Anyone here read it? And there's dear old *Great Mambo Chicken*, which is very much less than a philosophy although it was a hell of a ride way back in the day. Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 17 00:41:25 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 17:41:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <4C1961C9.4090005@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <796988.61956.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 6/16/10, Damien Broderick wrote: ? >...Could happen that way. But I think that goes waaaaay beyond *human*ism, trans- or post-. Still, it might form part of our hopes, our meta-goals... Damien Broderick ? Ja!? Our vision of the *end game* really does directly affect the way we play.? Talk to any hardline environmentalist about *long term* vision, a million years down the road.? Is her vision different than yours?? It certainly differs from mine.? In my vision, sentience will maximize itself.? The maximum sentience configuration is what I am imagining.? ? Transhumanism has a lot of addition elements, such as life extension, progress, self improvement?and so forth, but my main interest is in establishing our mind-children, as Moravek termed it, with every atom and every photon somehow participating in the activity of thinking and creating. ? spike ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Jun 17 01:23:36 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 21:23:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc> Quoting Damien Broderick : > On 6/16/2010 6:23 PM, natasha at natasha.cc wrote: > >> For me, it is a philosophy with principles and is definitely a movement. > > Leaving aside the movement aspect for a moment: > > a perspective, a set of interpretative principles and principles of > action, tends be regarded as a *formal philosophy* only after it has > been canonized in one or more major texts. Extropy. > What are these in the case of Transhumanism? FM-2030's books, for > example, do not seem to be embraced, studied, taught, disputed by many > people. THE SINGULARITY IS NEAR is not a philosophy text. FM was not a philosopher and did not write about "transhumanism." He was not interested in a "movement". > It might be argued that looking for *books* in the 21st century is > entirely missing the point--that >H or H+ is articulated sufficiently > in the discussions and colloquia associated with, say, the Extropy > Institute of old and its listserv, and the various groups naming > themselves as such like the World Transhumanist Association or > Humanityplus... > > But I'm not sure that's sufficient. I seem to recall various efforts to > pull together a text titled TRANSHUMANISM, and that some such volumes > already exist in Italian (and are fought over vehemently and even > poisonously there), but I don't know of any canonical text in English. > Is there one (or more)? Amazon lists *Designer Evolution: A > Transhumanist Manifesto* (2005, Prometheus) by Simon Young, which has > as Part 3 "Transhumanism as a Totalized Philosophical System." Anyone > here read it? And there's dear old *Great Mambo Chicken*, which is very > much less than a philosophy although it was a hell of a ride way back > in the day. _Great Mombo Chicken And the Transhuman Condition_ was not a book about the philosophy of transhumanism. Regis? scope was focused on Ettinger, cryonicists and Silicon Valley, Keith Henson and Dora's head, etc. But since it was published in 1991, he was fully aware of _The Journal of Transhumanist Thought_, and what he didn?t want to focus on. He didn't even want to because he had his journalism was focused on a specific story. I am not a fan of this book and find it a cheap shot at trying to propose a culture that was already formed. FM didn't like it either. In fact he was pretty darn pissed at Regis for a numer of reasons. Natasha From algaenymph at gmail.com Thu Jun 17 01:25:45 2010 From: algaenymph at gmail.com (AlgaeNymph) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:25:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> <20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <4C197999.4030100@gmail.com> natasha at natasha.cc wrote: > I am not a fan of this book and find it a cheap shot at trying to > propose a culture that was already formed. FM didn't like it either. > In fact he was pretty darn pissed at Regis for a number of reasons. Such as? From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 17 01:33:07 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:33:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Good article on the Deepwater Oil Spill. In-Reply-To: <4C197999.4030100@gmail.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> <20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C197999.4030100@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4C197B53.7070207@mac.com> For understanding a bit more technically what happened and is going on this is the best I have found so far. http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6609#more - samantha From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 17 01:52:01 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:52:01 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> <20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <4C197FC1.3020109@satx.rr.com> On 6/16/2010 8:23 PM, natasha at natasha.cc wrote: >> a perspective, a set of interpretative principles and principles of >> action, tends be regarded as a *formal philosophy* only after it has >> been canonized in one or more major texts. > Extropy. I never know what is meant by this word, used this way. I realize you disapprove of "Extropianism" but at least that word makes a sort of clumsy sense: the doctrine and activity of trying to maximize *extropy* which is something like the opposite of entropy. But I keep feeling that speaking of Extropy as a movement or philosophy is like talking about Energy the same way. It doesn't seem to work in English. In any event, the question I was raising was: what are the major texts of transhumanism? Ah, do you mean the retired journal *Extropy*? Or is there now a book with that title? You mention _The Journal of Transhumanist Thought_ which I'm ashamed to admit I've never heard of before. Waaaiiit a minute: I now see a version of this cited at But that site implies that it expired in 2003, and the link is defunct. This one is also expired, alas. I find linked only one 2003 essay by Max, on democracy and transhumanism. I'm not sure all of that amounts to a major text for a new philosophy. I hope there's a big book on the way somewhere, consolidating this lost material. Damien Broderick From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Jun 17 02:04:33 2010 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 21:04:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C197FC1.3020109@satx.rr.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> <20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C197FC1.3020109@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:52 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > But that site implies that it expired in 2003, and the link > > There's some stuff here: http://web.archive.org/web/20020326184137/http://www.lucifer.com/~exi/ideas/journal/previous/index.html - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 17 02:09:56 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 21:09:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> <20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C197FC1.3020109@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C1983F4.2080205@satx.rr.com> On 6/16/2010 9:04 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > There's some stuff here: > http://web.archive.org/web/20020326184137/http://www.lucifer.com/~exi/ideas/journal/previous/index.html I kept getting Not in Archive. From max at maxmore.com Thu Jun 17 02:10:19 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 21:10:19 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy Message-ID: <201006170210.o5H2ATX8023507@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Transhumanism is not yet a philosophy? Have I switched to an alternate universe? Wait... what... huh? Max From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 17 02:44:03 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 21:44:03 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <201006170210.o5H2ATX8023507@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006170210.o5H2ATX8023507@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <4C198BF3.6020102@satx.rr.com> On 6/16/2010 9:10 PM, Max More wrote: > Transhumanism is not yet a philosophy? > > Have I switched to an alternate universe? > > Wait... what... huh? I assume you disagree with my earlier proposition: "a perspective, a set of interpretative principles and principles of action, tends be regarded as a *formal philosophy* only after it has been canonized in one or more major texts." Have you read the book I cited, Max?* If so, what did you think of it? Are there any other foundational texts in print you'd recommend? Or do you say that the Principles of Extropy suffice? (Even though there seem to be more transhumanists who are not Extropians than those who are.) *Designer Evolution: A Transhumanist Manifesto (2005, Prometheus) by Simon Young I'm not trying to be difficult; this seems to me rather important, in the domain of discussion outside this list. Damien Broderick From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 17 05:12:13 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 22:12:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <796988.61956.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <796988.61956.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C19AEAD.1010404@mac.com> Gregory Jones wrote: > > > --- On *Wed, 6/16/10, Damien Broderick //* wrote: > > >...Could happen that way. But I think that goes waaaaay beyond > *human*ism, trans- or post-. Still, it might form part of our hopes, > our meta-goals... Damien Broderick > > Ja! Our vision of the *end game* really does directly affect the way > we play. Talk to any hardline environmentalist about *long term* > vision, a million years down the road. Is her vision different than > yours? It certainly differs from mine. In my vision, sentience will > maximize itself. The maximum sentience configuration is what I am > imagining. > > Transhumanism has a lot of addition elements, such as life extension, > progress, self improvement and so forth, but my main interest is in > establishing our mind-children, as Moravek termed it, with every atom > and every photon somehow participating in the activity of thinking and > creating. > > Is thinking and creating all there is? Is it enough for you to be happy? Why involve every atom and photon? That seems rather pointlessly absolutist to me. And it will never ever happen anyway without breaking the speed of light barrier. What about the 96% of all that is that isn't atoms and photons? - s -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 17 06:14:19 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:14:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <4C19AEAD.1010404@mac.com> Message-ID: <222179.76772.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 6/16/10, samantha wrote: Gregory Jones wrote: --- On Wed, 6/16/10, Damien Broderick wrote: ? >...every atom and every photon somehow participating in the activity of thinking and creating. ? > Is thinking and creating all there is?... ? Ja! ? >? Is it enough for you to be happy?... ? Thinking and creating makes me happy.? The computronium would think about ways to be happy, and create new ways to be happy and have fun.? Compare the world we have now to the one that was 300 years ago.? Why is it so much better now?? Because we have information, we have so many cool things that the old ones didn't have. ? >?? Why involve every atom and photon? ? I see no point in wasting them.? I don't like to see things dead.? I want everything alive, as alive as it can be, thinking, playing, creating fun!? Life is good, fun is good, so more of it is better, and as much as can be had is best. ? ?>? That seems rather pointlessly absolutist to me... ? It seems rather pointfully absolutist to me.? {8-] ? >?? And it will never ever happen anyway without breaking the speed of light barrier... ? Hmm, I don't propose anything illegal.? Obeying the known natural laws, my endgame vision is using everything we have to maximize sentience. ? ? >?? What about the 96% of all that is that isn't atoms and photons?? - s We lose that.? For now.? Unless or until all that computronium figures out how to make use of it to create more computronium, in which case the fun is multiplied by a factor of 25. ? Look at it this way.? If we consider all the real thinking going on in this solar system is happening in the minds of humans, and there are about 6e9 of us now, and on average we are about 70 kg each, that's about 4e11 kg participating in human level sentience.? The mass of the earth is about 6e24 kg, so less than 1 part in 10^13, less than a tenth of a part per trillion is really having fun, and there is probably about another couple orders of magnitude of metals in the solar system outside of earth, so one part in a quadrillion in the solar system is participating in human thought. ? Most of the sunlight that falls on the earth is wasted, but lets ignore that painful fact for very conservative estimates.? The radius of the earth is about 6400 km, so area of an earth sized?disc is about 1.3e8 km^2, and out here at 8 light minutes, the area of a sphere of that radius would be about 2.8e17, so about 1 photon in every 2^e9, less than half a part per billion emitted by the sun, ever hits the earth. ? So what if we could increase our energy use by 2 billion and our amount of?matter participating in thought by 10 trillion?? Wouldn't we have fun with that?? Wouldn't that be like having 10 trillion?Anders Sandbergs, 10?teraAmaras, 10 teraMax?? Oh my,?would that sim?whoop ass, or what?? ? And even that scenario vastly underestimates the case, because the mass of a human is?appallingly underutilized in thinking and enjoying.? Some of our mass is just hair, nails, flab, stuff we don't need.? Most of our mass is stuff we don't need, or wouldn't need if we were not preoccupied with feeding ourselves to maintain tissue that we don't need.? If we put everything to work, progress could proceed jillions of times faster, better, cheaper.? We could figure out ways to go get that other 96% and all the rest of the galaxy, and all the other galaxies too, for there is no point in wasting all that energy, just shining out into cold dead empty space. ? This is my transhuman endgame vision, the vision that guides everything I do, everything I think, everything I am and hope to become. ? spike ? ? ? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giulio at gmail.com Thu Jun 17 09:55:13 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:55:13 +0200 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning forcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: While I agree with all that Max says here, I do think uploading has some kind of "special status" in transhumanism. It is a quick bumper-sticker-like compatibility check: if one considers uploading as feasible and desirable, (s)he is probably positively attuned to transhumanism, otherwise (s)he is probably not. There are exceptions to both cases of course, but I think this generally holds. The correlation between uploading and transhumanism is not 100% accurate, but very strong. The feasibility of uploading follows naturally from recognizing the brain as a device which obeys the laws of physics, performs computations based on its previous state and current input, and uses the results of such computations to act upon its environment and update its state. This, which I consider self-evident, is not related to any specific computational technology and implementation on any specific substrate. The desirability of uploading follows naturally from Transhumanism as a philosophy that seeks to continually overcome human limits, including mortality and the cognitive and emotional limits imposed by the human constitution as it naturally evolved On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:49 AM, Max More wrote: > Spike wrote: > >> The central point of transhumanism is the notion that it is physically >> possible to upload sentience into another substrate. ?I > > I think it's a serious error to say that. Transhumanism is a philosophy that > seeks to continually overcome human limits, including mortality and the > cognitive and emotional limits imposed by the human constitution as it > naturally evolved. Personally, I think that uploading is feasible in > principle and I don't have any personal identity based objections to it, but > it is only one possible path in the future. You can be (and remain) a > transhumanist if you expect uploading to be impossible or deadly or if it > turns out not to be feasible. > > 'nuff said. I see that Damien and Natasha both made similar points. > > Let's be careful not to identify transhumanism essentially with any one path > or technology. > > Max > > > > ------------------------------------- > Max More, Ph.D. > Strategic Philosopher > The Proactionary Project > Extropy Institute Founder > 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 > From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Thu Jun 17 11:14:47 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:14:47 +0200 Subject: [ExI] south carolina primary election In-Reply-To: <324228.90931.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <561087.83680.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <324228.90931.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/15 Dan > Also, there seems to be the notion that somehow in the past -- maybe the > distant past, maybe in someone's lifetime -- that somehow democracy worked > and produced good results, but today this has been corrupted. Isn't the > truth more that things have always been corrupt? > I think there are two angles, one the proverbial "golden age myth", the second the fact that most revolutions work at best in their doing, but end up disappointing when they should be celebrating their ultimate success. In this respect, democracy in the strictest sense is in good company with practically any other political ideal (which of course does not mean that western democracies in their current form would be the final, eternal form of government for all ages to come). In a broader sense, however, democracy refers to the fact that political doctrines should and do nowadays legitimate themselves through some kind of reference to self-determination and popular sovereignty. From the US Declaration of Independence to the Iranian costitution, from Mein Kampf to the Soviet 1977 charta to National Liberation Fronts propaganda in the sixties, you would be hard pressed to find any regime or movement suggesting that you should rejoice of being a colony of a foreign power or that you should obey an individual owing to your being his private property. Even though, now that I think of it, Saudi Arabia comes pretty close to the latter... :-) -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Thu Jun 17 12:46:42 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:46:42 +0200 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 17 June 2010 02:28, Damien Broderick wrote: > a perspective, a set of interpretative principles and principles of action, > tends be regarded as a *formal philosophy* only after it has been canonized > in one or more major texts. We do not have Holy Scriptures, nor the equivalent of Das Kapital or Mein Kampf, but I should contend that several books on transhumanism or of transhumanists do exist, even though most of them may not be really covering in their entirety "life, universe and everything in the transhumanist view". See the Universal Transhumanist Bibliography at http://www.transumanisti.it/8.asp. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seculartranshumanist at gmail.com Thu Jun 17 12:49:00 2010 From: seculartranshumanist at gmail.com (Joseph Bloch) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 08:49:00 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning forcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 5:55 AM, Giulio Prisco wrote: > While I agree with all that Max says here, I do think uploading has > some kind of "special status" in transhumanism. I must disagree. Transhumanism embraces a number of disparate technologies, and to say that any one of them is of some unique nature is a fallacy that will serve only to weaken the diversity that is one of Transhumanism's great strengths. Uploading per se is no more special vis-a-vis Transhumanism than radical lfie extension, mind-machine interfacing, genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, etc. What I think is a better indicator of Transhumanist inclinations is not acceptance of any particular technology, but what one is willing to do with that technology. The will to move beyond the limitations of the human condition, to go trans- humanity, is the key, I think. What we should be doing is working to get to a point where we can *try* uploading and a hundred other things besides. If that particular thing doesn't float your boat, then focus on some other enterprise that has Transhumanist potential, but spend your time pursuing your own interest, and let others focus on their own, all under the same big Transhumanist umbrella. Joseph From giulio at gmail.com Thu Jun 17 13:48:53 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 15:48:53 +0200 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: We do have major texts. But they propose different interpretations of transhumanism, fundamentally compatible (I think) but with important differences in interpretation and focus. On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > a perspective, a set of interpretative principles and principles of action, > tends be regarded as a *formal philosophy* only after it has been canonized > in one or more major texts. From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Jun 17 14:43:35 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 09:43:35 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Good article on the Deepwater Oil Spill. In-Reply-To: <4C197B53.7070207@mac.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com><4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com><20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc><4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com><20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc><4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com><20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc><4C197999.4030100@gmail.com> <4C197B53.7070207@mac.com> Message-ID: Thanks Samantha. I suppose this situation touches all of us and in different ways. I was in the Merchant Marines in the 70s and I worked with oil rings in the Gulf. We especially worked with cleaning up left over pipes after we moved a rig to a new drilling site. It was exceedingly dangerous work and when the hurricane season hit, we had 30' swells and serious problems to overcome. Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of samantha Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 8:33 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] Good article on the Deepwater Oil Spill. For understanding a bit more technically what happened and is going on this is the best I have found so far. http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6609#more - samantha _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Jun 17 15:10:38 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:10:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C197FC1.3020109@satx.rr.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com><20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C197FC1.3020109@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <96FDD5F6618F4FF598E4262EE6657514@DFC68LF1> Damien wrote: "In any event, the question I was raising was: what are the major texts of transhumanism?" Good question. Damien, you know about the Transhumanist Reader (or Transhumanism Reader), right? But, your question causes me to wonder what is a major text? How long does a body of writing have to be to be considered significant? How many pages is a book? What about a manifesto? Would a manifesto be considered a worthy text on transhumanism? What about publishing? Should a text be published to be considered a "major text"? Probably. The "Transhumanist Statement" and the "Extropic Art Manifesto" were published in 1997 by NASA/ESA. Natasha From max at maxmore.com Thu Jun 17 15:40:49 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:40:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Transhumanism as a philosophy Message-ID: <201006171540.o5HFeupL004794@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Damien: I expressed my puzzlement rather abruptly last night as I escaped the computer for the day. Sorry about that. My puzzlement was due to (a) the suggestion that transhumanism could not be a philosophy in the absence of a "major text" (presumably a book), and (b) your citing as one of the standout sources Great Mambo Chicken. On the latter -- I thought GMC was a peculiar book that gave a highly distorted view of transhumanism. For instance, spending so much space on Bob Truax (if I remember correctly) but nothing on FM-2030. Regarding (a): The requirement of a major book for a philosophy to be thought to exist does seem rather 18th or 19th century. Certainly, such a "major text" is, even today, useful and valuable. That's why we are putting together The Transhumanist Reader. (And, no, I haven't read Simon Young's book.) However, surely that's not necessary. There are many articles and papers (and talks) that together clearly constitute a philosophy. (In a parallel manner, I would say that a philosophy of *humanism* would still exist, even if there weren't books such as Lamont's The Philosophy of Humanism.) You do mention the Principles of Extropy. Of course there are plenty of others, including several more of my own. Especially relevant: Transhumanism: Toward a Futurist Philosophy (and the Free Inquiry version, "On Becoming Posthuman"), and "A Letter to Mother Nature". Plenty of other relevant pieces exist, such as Bostrom's Letter From Utopia (an explicitly philosophical piece), essays from the Global Spiral debate, and so on and on. Although it's rather dated, there's a list here: http://www.aleph.se/Trans/Cultural/Philosophy/index-2.html#general It seems that you take it that a philosophy can't be said to exist unless there is at least one definitive major stand alone text. That's where I disagree. It seems very clear to me that a philosophy of transhumanism (one with several variations) does exist. Once we get The Transhumanist Reader out, perhaps you will no longer have any doubt that there is a philosophy of transhumanism. Onward! Max From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 17 15:45:20 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:45:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Dark doubts In-Reply-To: <222179.76772.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <222179.76772.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C1A4310.3070804@satx.rr.com> On 6/17/2010 1:14 AM, Gregory Jones wrote: > > What about the 96% of all that is that isn't atoms and photons? - s > > We lose that. For now. Unless or until all that computronium figures > out how to make use of it to create more computronium, in which case the > fun is multiplied by a factor of 25. Maybe it's not even there: Doubts about universe's dark side Thursday, 17 June 2010 by Heather Catchpole Cosmos Online SYDNEY: Errors in the way physicists estimate the effects of dark matter and dark energy on the leftover heat from the Big Bang has thrown their existence into doubt, say British scientists. Physicists' general model of the universe includes two 'dark' concepts. Dark energy is a force that explains the way that galaxies accelerate away from each other, while dark matter was postulated to explain the observations that galaxies have more mass than can be accounted for by stars and gas. Evidence for the 'dark side' comes primarily from studies of the Cosmic Background Radiation (CMB), the leftover 'glow' from the Big Bang, which has been analysed in detail by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), a NASA satellite telescope launched in 2001 that provided the first full-sky map of the CMB. Large errors in WMAP data Now, some scientists say errors in the WMAP data may be larger than expected. This would mean that there is no need to include dark matter and dark energy in models of the cosmos. Their results have been accepted for publication in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. Results still need to be proven "If our results prove correct then it will become less likely that dark energy and exotic dark matter particles dominate the universe," says astronomer Tom Shanks from Durham University, in England. "So the evidence that the Universe has a 'dark side' will weaken." WMAP data shows ripples in the CMB that are linked to the composition of the universe, thought to be roughly 4% normal matter to 22% dark matter and 74% dark energy. Dark matter a result of telescope adjustment? "Big ripples in the CMB imply a cold dark matter component for the Universe. Our question is whether the large size of these ripples can be caused by the WMAP telescope over-smoothing the CMB data due to optical effects," Shanks told Cosmos. Shanks and graduate student Utane Sawangwit were also part of a team that last year found other data that supports doubts about dark matter (Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Dec 2009). Data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, 2.5 metre telescope in New Mexico that is mapping one-quarter of the sky, showed that photons travelling through clusters of galaxies aren't red-shifted in their wavelengths by the clusters' gravity as much as the standard dark matter model predicts. "If our result is repeated in new surveys of galaxies in the Southern Hemisphere then this could mean real problems for the existence of dark energy," says Sawangwit. Dark matter model still strong, experts say But Australian astronomer Geraint Lewis says the dark matter model "hasn't fallen over yet". "It's not a religious creed - it should be tested, but it has held up every time someone has taken a swing at it," he says. Evidence for dark energy also comes from other areas of astronomy, such as the High-Z supernova search, he points out. "Even if the CMB is out, it might make us more uncertain but I don't think there is enough slop [in the WMAP data] to make dark matter and dark energy go away," he says. From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 17 15:33:49 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 08:33:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Good article on the Deepwater Oil Spill. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <319820.37812.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/17/10, Natasha Vita-More wrote: ? >...?I was in the Merchant Marines in the 70s and I worked with oil rigs in the Gulf.? ? Indeed?? This is so cool Natasha!? I woulda never guessed you were an oilperson.? Have you an online autobiography? ? >...is the best I have found so far.? http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6609#more?- samantha ? Ja this is a good explanation and a good source.? I?check out the Oildrum occasionally.? It's a good informative site, strictly moderated, balanced, sane, on topic, seldom wacky. ? spike ? ? ? ? ? From: Natasha Vita-More Subject: Re: [ExI] Good article on the Deepwater Oil Spill. To: "'ExI chat list'" Date: Thursday, June 17, 2010, 7:43 AM Thanks Samantha. I suppose this situation touches all of us and in different ways.? I was in the Merchant Marines in the 70s and I worked with oil rings in the Gulf.? We especially worked with cleaning up left over pipes after we moved a rig to a new drilling site.? It was exceedingly dangerous work and when the hurricane season hit, we had 30' swells and serious problems to overcome.??? Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of samantha Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 8:33 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] Good article on the Deepwater Oil Spill. For understanding a bit more technically what happened and is going on this is the best I have found so far.? http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6609#more - samantha _______________________________________________ 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 bbenzai at yahoo.com Thu Jun 17 15:47:18 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 08:47:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 20 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <94825.71367.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Stefano Vaj mused: > In a broader sense, however, democracy refers to the fact > that political > doctrines should and do nowadays legitimate themselves > through some kind of > reference to self-determination and popular sovereignty. > From the US > Declaration of Independence to the Iranian costitution, > from Mein Kampf to > the Soviet 1977 charta to National Liberation Fronts > propaganda in the > sixties, you would be hard pressed to find any regime or > movement suggesting > that you should rejoice of being a colony of a foreign > power or that you > should obey an individual owing to your being his private > property. > > Even though, now that I think of it, Saudi Arabia comes > pretty close to the > latter... :-) All Islamic states are precisely the latter. Muslims are explicitly the slaves of Allah, and sharia strictly enforces this. Ben Zaiboc From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Jun 17 16:22:57 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:22:57 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Good article on the Deepwater Oil Spill. In-Reply-To: <319820.37812.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <319820.37812.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7A7901F1AA74481EA804DCAA11E19A40@DFC68LF1> Spike - I'm not an oilperson. I was a staunch feminist in the 1970s and broke through some gender barriers. One was to get the largest oil shipping company in the US to hire me (they did not have women on the boats.) I travelled to several locations, not just the Gulf. I wrote about my experiences in some magazine, don't remember which one. Was in one hurricane which was a horribel experience but not really a worthy of a tale to tell. But what was more intersting than working in the Gulf, was my utilizing the Merchant Marines as a way to travel on boats to Brazil so I could get into the Amazon Jungle. I performed a project titled "Green" outside of Manhaus, when it was a little village, and before the big industrialization of the Amazon. NOW, this is a worthy tale worth telling at some point in time. Bio is here (but it needs updating) http://www.natasha.cc/cv.htm Natasha Vita-More _____ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Gregory Jones Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 10:34 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Good article on the Deepwater Oil Spill. --- On Thu, 6/17/10, Natasha Vita-More wrote: >... I was in the Merchant Marines in the 70s and I worked with oil rigs in the Gulf. Indeed? This is so cool Natasha! I woulda never guessed you were an oilperson. Have you an online autobiography? >...is the best I have found so far. http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6609#more - samantha Ja this is a good explanation and a good source. I check out the Oildrum occasionally. It's a good informative site, strictly moderated, balanced, sane, on topic, seldom wacky. spike From: Natasha Vita-More Subject: Re: [ExI] Good article on the Deepwater Oil Spill. To: "'ExI chat list'" Date: Thursday, June 17, 2010, 7:43 AM Thanks Samantha. I suppose this situation touches all of us and in different ways. I was in the Merchant Marines in the 70s and I worked with oil rings in the Gulf. We especially worked with cleaning up left over pipes after we moved a rig to a new drilling site. It was exceedingly dangerous work and when the hurricane season hit, we had 30' swells and serious problems to overcome. Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org ] On Behalf Of samantha Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 8:33 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] Good article on the Deepwater Oil Spill. For understanding a bit more technically what happened and is going on this is the best I have found so far. http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6609#more - samantha _______________________________________________ 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 thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 17 16:35:30 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:35:30 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <201006171540.o5HFeupL004794@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006171540.o5HFeupL004794@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <4C1A4ED2.4040602@satx.rr.com> On 6/17/2010 10:40 AM, Max More wrote: > My puzzlement was due to (a) the suggestion that transhumanism could not > be a philosophy in the absence of a "major text" (presumably a book), My expression was "a *formal philosophy*", which traditionally has been instantiated in a corpus of books and papers (even existentialism, which was high on action). > and (b) your citing as one of the standout sources Great Mambo Chicken. No no no. I mentioned that (sorry I wasn't clearer) as an instance of the sort of book that *did* exist--lightweight and impressionistic. The various sources you cite do aggregate to form an argument, so perhaps that is indeed sufficient. But many of them do not seem to me to have the character of *philosophical* exchange--which absence might be regarded as a damned good thing, admittedly. Damien Broderick From scerir at libero.it Thu Jun 17 16:37:35 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:37:35 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] no-cloning Message-ID: <2152353.508141276792655882.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> It seems that John Baez et al. have shown there is a "no-cloning" (perfect copying) theorem also for the classical domain (classical mechanics). There are several problems, like to define what "classical" means, and what does it mean in terms of classical informations. See points 15) and 16) and 17) of this web-page: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/this.week.html From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 17 19:52:57 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:52:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Dark doubts In-Reply-To: <4C1A4310.3070804@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <498820.79138.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/17/10, Damien Broderick wrote: ? ? From: Damien Broderick Subject: [ExI] Dark doubts To: "ExI chat list" Date: Thursday, June 17, 2010, 8:45 AM On 6/17/2010 1:14 AM, Gregory Jones wrote: >? >???What about the 96% of all that is that isn't atoms and photons?? - s > > We lose that.? For now... Maybe it's not even there: Doubts about universe's dark side Thursday, 17 June 2010 by Heather Catchpole Cosmos Online SYDNEY: Errors in the way physicists estimate the effects of dark matter and dark energy on the leftover heat from the Big Bang has thrown their existence into doubt, say British scientists... ? ? Hmmm, OK but have ha' me doots about their doots.? Read on please sir: ? >Physicists' general model of the universe includes two 'dark' concepts... ? Ja, at least two. ? >...Dark energy is a force that explains the way that galaxies accelerate away from each other, while dark matter was postulated to explain the observations that galaxies have more mass than can be accounted for by stars and gas... ? An then the article goes on to discuss primarily the first, but not the second.? I can find almost nothing in the article that says much about the second concept, even tho that is the one I find by far the most compelling for the existence of dark matter.? Evidence for dark matter wasn't initially from anisotropy in the cosmic background radiation.? The astro-physics community didn't really even start getting really serious about that until about?1991 (after the launch and?data came back from the Cosmic Background Explorer satellite COBE (another Lockheed Martin product (for which the?CG and balance metrology effort was performed by your humble servant.))) ? >Evidence for the 'dark side' comes primarily from studies of the Cosmic Background Radiation (CMB), the leftover 'glow' from the Big Bang, which has been analysed in detail by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), a NASA satellite telescope launched in 2001 that provided the first full-sky map of the CMB... ? WMAP schMAP.? COBE provided a full-sky map of the CMB a decade earlier.? But I digress. ? To me there is a stronger line of evidence for dark matter, or rather a line of evidence for which there are fewer alternate explanations than the surprisingly low entropy in the cosmic background radiation (a finding which is really cool and interesting for sure.) ? The other concept the article mentions but doesn't talk about is the?anomalous mass distribution of galaxies.? Forget inflation models for a moment, forget that the universe appears to be right on the edge between open and closed.? Something might be way terribly wrong with all our notions on that.? But we can look at stars in a galaxy, and measure the rate at which the stars on one side are coming, and how fast the stars on the other side are going, subtract out the relative velocity of the galaxy with respect to the observer and we?see an interesting sight.? The velocity falls off more gradually than we would expect, if we assume all the matter is visible?in the form of stars.? The velocity distribution indicates there is one hell of a lot of matter in there somewhere that isn't shining and isn't blocking light.? What we see is not what we get. ? That being said, I argue that we?are not necessarily forced to postulate some?exotic mysterious dark stuff, no weirdinos or bizarrons needed.? The extra matter can be plain old familiar matter, mostly cold hydrogen, with?perhaps?a bit of?metal mixed in (he said hopefully.)? Then there is something waaay wrong with our notions?galaxy formation, but?not with our instruments.? ? Cosmology is a giant crossword?puzzle.??We have all gotten blocked?where we know either this word or that word?must be wrong.? Well, it could be that both those are right, and another nearby word?that was never suspect is wrong instead.? Fix that, and everything fits.??Likewise with cosmology, we must keep an open mind, and always recheck everything.? ? The?bug-in-galaxy-formation-theory?explanation?easier for me?to believe than the alternate explanation offered by the Shanks group.? I am not tossing my astronomy texts into the trash yet. ? Stay tuned, and keeeeep looking up.? {8-] ? Is this a cool time to be alive, or what?? {8^D ? spike ? ? ? ? ? From: Damien Broderick thespike at satx.rr.com ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 17 21:20:46 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Dark doubts In-Reply-To: <498820.79138.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <771115.59340.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/17/10, Gregory Jones wrote: ? The astro-physics community didn't really even start getting really serious about that until about?1991 (after the launch and?data came back from the Cosmic Background Explorer satellite COBE (another Lockheed Martin product (for which the?CG and balance metrology effort was performed by your humble servant.)))... spike ? ? Oops I was wrong about the date, it was about Spring of 1992, about late April or May (because it was after Yugoslavian independence which was in mid April 1992)?when the COBE?data was announced. ?I started looking to get back into the metrology biz when I heard it. ? We all have moments in our lives we remember with sparkling crystal clarity.? Most of these are actually negative events: grandma calls telling you grandpa has passed away, you get bad news from the medics, you have an accident, etc, but sometimes these moments?are really good positive events.? The COBE results were one of those crystaling moments.? That rocked my world in 1992. ? My friend at Lockheed was Wayne Brown, PhD in astrophysics, smart as all hell, Anders Sandberg smart, super focused guy,?but really nice, kind and gentle at the same time, gay but never suggestive or aggressive, quiet, modest and good.? A?few weeks before, he and I were at lunch talking about the cosmic background radiation.??I argued that there was a good chance it would be well below the measurement threshold of?COBE; we wouldn't really get any useful data other than an upper limit. ?I?offered my intuitive handwaving arguments of why I thought so, based on scaling of an explosion all the way up to big bang scale. ? But?Wayne argued to the contrary, that the anisotropy could be into the measurable range, and he gave his reasons, but?with actual?equations and reasoning.? Wayne was so good about that, thinking clearly,?treating me with respect, like I was in his league, like I was his equal.? Do let me assure you I wasn't in his league, not even in his?division.? But that was his way.? Flattering it was. ? Spring 1992, a?few weeks after that lunch,?Wayne popped into my office with "Spiiiiike!? The COBE results are back and YOOOOOU were wrong pal!? So was I.? But yoooou were more wrong than I was!" ? {8^D ? One couldn't have made Wayne happier if one had handed him ten thousand dollars.? Seldom have I been happier about being wrong.? ? In retrospect of 18 years, I am still amazed that the background anisotropy is as high as it is, and I?am still unable?write you an equation to explain why I am astounded.? Astronomy is that way, filled to overflowing with amaaaaazing truth. ? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Jun 17 22:06:41 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 15:06:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <222179.76772.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <222179.76772.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C1A9C71.10003@mac.com> Gregory Jones wrote: > > > --- On *Wed, 6/16/10, samantha //* wrote: > > > > Gregory Jones wrote: >> >> >> --- On *Wed, 6/16/10, Damien Broderick //* >> wrote: >> >> >...every atom and every photon somehow participating in the >> activity of thinking and creating. >> >> > > > Is thinking and creating all there is?... > > Ja! > Are you thinking or creating per se when playing with your child or doing many of the things you do and enjoy every day? I don't think you can say that all you love to do or experience is thinking or creating. > > > > Is it enough for you to be happy?... > > Thinking and creating makes me happy. The computronium would > think about ways to be happy, and create new ways to be happy and > have fun. Compare the world we have now to the one that was 300 > years ago. Why is it so much better now? Because we have > information, we have so many cool things that the old ones didn't > have. > > Thinking and creating make you happy but I doubt very much they are the only things that make you happy. There are many many ways to have fun, enjoy, experience, be. Some things are not that much better now than they were before simply because they did not require modern tech to be wonderfully enjoyable then or now. > > Why involve every atom and photon? > > I see no point in wasting them. I don't like to see things dead. > I want everything alive, as alive as it can be, thinking, playing, > creating fun! Life is good, fun is good, so more of it is better, > and as much as can be had is best. > What do you mean "waste"? The universe is utterly beautiful and most of it is not busy thinking and creating as far as we can tell. I don't consider that a "waste" particularly. Now and then I have to remind myself "Go outside. The graphics are utterly mind blowing!" :) > > > That seems rather pointlessly absolutist to me... > > It seems rather pointfully absolutist to me. {8-] > Nice throwaway without addressing what I am talking about. > > > > And it will never ever happen anyway without breaking the > speed of light barrier... > > Hmm, I don't propose anything illegal. Obeying the known natural > laws, my endgame vision is using everything we have to maximize > sentience. > If you cannot do superluminal communication and travel then there is no way that any statement of harnessing every atom and all energy of the universe for thinking and creating makes sense. This is part of why I say that the statement itself smells a bit funny. > > > > > What about the 96% of all that is that isn't atoms and > photons? - s > > We lose that. For now. Unless or until all that computronium > figures out how to make use of it to create more computronium, in > which case the fun is multiplied by a factor of 25. > > Look at it this way. If we consider all the real thinking going > on in this solar system is happening in the minds of humans, and > there are about 6e9 of us now, and on average we are about 70 kg > each, that's about 4e11 kg participating in human level > sentience. The mass of the earth is about 6e24 kg, so less than 1 > part in 10^13, less than a tenth of a part per trillion is really > having fun, and there is probably about another couple orders of > magnitude of metals in the solar system outside of earth, so one > part in a quadrillion in the solar system is participating in > human thought. > Sure. I have no problem with getting as much room for creation, thought, experience, consciounsness and so on as possible. Or for expanding the possibilities we can explore as much as possible. But I don't believe that requires changing everything in our light cone to computronium. Maybe we decide to do that and maybe not. > > Most of the sunlight that falls on the earth is wasted, but lets > ignore that painful fact for very conservative estimates. The > radius of the earth is about 6400 km, so area of an earth > sized disc is about 1.3e8 km^2, and out here at 8 light minutes, > the area of a sphere of that radius would be about 2.8e17, so > about 1 photon in every 2^e9, less than half a part per billion > emitted by the sun, ever hits the earth. > > So what if we could increase our energy use by 2 billion and our > amount of matter participating in thought by 10 trillion? > Wouldn't we have fun with that? Wouldn't that be like having 10 > trillion Anders Sandbergs, 10 teraAmaras, 10 teraMax? Oh > my, would that sim whoop ass, or what? > Sure, it could be grand indeed. But we might just as well become lotus eaters once we use all the energy of the local star. Time will tell. The fact that no other species appears to have done so or be doing so gives me a bit of pause as to whether this simple vision is the only or best or the one post singularity species generally take. > > > And even that scenario vastly underestimates the case, because the > mass of a human is appallingly underutilized in thinking and > enjoying. Some of our mass is just hair, nails, flab, stuff we > don't need. Most of our mass is stuff we don't need, or wouldn't > need if we were not preoccupied with feeding ourselves to maintain > tissue that we don't need. If we put everything to work, progress > could proceed jillions of times faster, better, cheaper. We could > figure out ways to go get that other 96% and all the rest of the > galaxy, and all the other galaxies too, for there is no point in > wasting all that energy, just shining out into cold dead empty space. > Actually a lot of that useless mass is full of very yummy nerves and so on. :) Yes, you can do better in a theoretical future computational space. But where do you take a breath and enjoy and fully appreciate what is? If you only keep running to more and More and yet MORE do you remember to smell the roses fully before you digitize them? > > This is my transhuman endgame vision, the vision that guides > everything I do, everything I think, everything I am and hope to > become. > > And I largely share it with some caveats and occasional need to ask questions as to what is really meant and what we really want and why. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dynetis at hotmail.com Thu Jun 17 23:12:58 2010 From: dynetis at hotmail.com (=?iso-8859-1?B?Suly9G1lIGF1Y3Vu?=) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 01:12:58 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Concerning mind uploading Message-ID: Good morning or evening or whatever, everyone. I'm fascinated by mind uploading ever since I heard about it (and even since a little before actually), but the more I think about it, the more I think it's not made for us (or we are not made for it). This idea of moving our mind away from our usuals, thousands years old bodies, raises a lot of issues, especially considering that the development of our mind was closely related, and even determined, by our bodies. If uploading technology comes before it's possible to build human shaped containers, having to get used to a differently shaped will be a hell of an ordeal (even with boosted neuronal plasticity, or its silicon-based equivalent), with lots of psychological consequences. Imagine living without limbs. Imagine "living" in a box. Imagine having to deal with the fact that you're not in your body anymore, which might mean for you and/or for others that you left some part of your identity behind (physical appearance has a tremendous impact of how we define ourselves and how others define us). The solution might be heavy virtual reality, in order, actually, to *forget* theses changes. I'm not sure those who hope to get uploaded want it in ordrer to be able to play Second Life for the rest of eternity. In case we're able to be uploaded to high quality human-like containers, there are still some issues on the way. Spike mentioned that apart the brain, the rest of the body is useless, energy-consuming meat (correct me if I misinterpreted your words). But such a dichotomy doesn't fit to reality. An example: our experience of emotions (something one wouldn't want to lose in the process of uploading, I guess) depends powerfully of the physiological states these emotions arise in the body. Removes the body and you'll probably remove a essential part of our emotional system. Following the same idea, let's talk about sex. It's a powerful drive for humans, and it depends a lot of our sexual glands. Without glands, no sexual arousal as far as I know. Well, I didn't experienced it myself, but it's a key part of the hormonal mechanisms involved in sexual arousal, among other things. Actually, removing the body would remove most of our usual motivational drive, and it doesn't sound very exciting (one could argue these primitive biological drive will be replace by purely-intellectual motivations, and we sometimes experience that even if our flesh shells, but I'm not convinced this problem can be considered as solved as such). Well, yeah, those missing inputs could be simulated. I guess once we'll be able to upload ourselves, we'll have enough knowledge about the brain to accurately simulate some inputs, leading the way to simulating emotions (and top notch VR). But it's not a simple solution. In such a debate, there is no such thing as a magic answer to the incredible problems that will emerge once mankind we'll be able to really play with it's minds. We'll see great things but some gloomy stuffs too. The better scenario could involve highly advanced genetics engineering and biological knowledge, allowing to grow enhanced human bodies (let's say, slow aging, stronger, and so on), in which we could upload. A fully biological container, with all it's usual inputs and it's usual shape. Some kind of long lasting youth in an improved body. But it's bringing us very far away before that kind of feats becomes possible. To summarise, I think that straying too far from what humans are might be very uncomfortable, even unbearable (without absurds amounts of simulated substitutes). I'm all in favor for enhancement and as I said, I'm also very interested by uploading, but there's also a lot of nightmarish scenarios coming to my mind when I envision it. PS: I apologize if my english has flaws, I'm working daily on improving it. ;) _________________________________________________________________ Surfez encore plus vite: t?l?chargez Internet Explorer 8. http://www.microsoft.com/belux/fr/windows/internet-explorer/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 17 23:19:35 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:19:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <4C1A9C71.10003@mac.com> Message-ID: <375885.31376.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/17/10, samantha wrote: ? > Is thinking and creating all there is?... ? Ja! ? >...Are you thinking or creating per se when playing with your child or doing many of the things you do and enjoy every day?? I don't think you can say that all you love to do or experience is thinking or creating...? ? Ja, Samantha after reading your post I realized I didn't make it clear enough what I was envisioning would be going on in that M-Brain.??Feeling is thinking.??The simulated existence?would be a superset of everything we?experience?here and now,?more and better, in every way.? We could simulate all the joys of playing with a child for instance, and I for one would spend plenty of my existence doing exactly that (if the term "I" has any meaning in this context.)? Nearby orbiting nodes could simulate the child, the flower, the unexpected bug, the gentle?breeze, the sunshine.? The simulated joy would be as real as that which we now feel, if not moreso.? ? If we do it right, plenty of the simulated beings would seldom (if ever) need to?trouble themselves, or even be?aware that they are sims, and not flesh and blood carbon beings (if the term "themselves" has any meaning in this context.) ? spike ? ? ? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 17 23:50:43 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:50:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Concerning mind uploading In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C1AB4D3.7070407@satx.rr.com> On 6/17/2010 6:12 PM, J?r?me aucun wrote: > The better scenario could involve highly advanced genetics engineering > and biological knowledge, allowing to grow enhanced human bodies (let's > say, slow aging, stronger, and so on), in which we could upload. A fully > biological container, with all it's usual inputs and it's usual shape. > Some kind of long lasting youth in an improved body. .But it's bringing > us very far away before that kind of feats becomes possible This is the premise of a series of recent popular science fiction novels by John Scalzi, begun with OLD MAN'S WAR. > PS: I apologize if my english has flaws, I'm working daily on improving > it. ;) Damn sight better than the French of most of us here, I'd guess. :) Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Jun 18 00:01:17 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:01:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <375885.31376.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <375885.31376.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C1AB74D.8040009@satx.rr.com> On 6/17/2010 6:19 PM, Spike Jones wrote: >Nearby orbiting nodes could > simulate the child, the flower, the unexpected bug, the gentle breeze, > the sunshine. The simulated joy would be as real as that which we now > feel, if not moreso. > If we do it right, plenty of the simulated beings would seldom (if ever) > need to trouble themselves, or even be aware that they are sims Spike, my brother--it pains me to say this, but that proposition about simming a child seems to me to be fundamentally depraved. I'd find it hard to justify my denunciation (except for the assumption that any program capable of rewarding a real consciousness in reciprocal relationship with it would have to *be* an equal consciousness) but that is my response. Contra argument: we might all be in a simulation right now, we might all be counters and look-up tables, blah blah, and even if we're not we are just quantum computations within a Seth Lloyd universe that is a Really Big Quantum Computation. Reply: yeah, and Descartes allegedly flung cats out of his upstairs window to perish when they struck the ground because his philosophy made much the same claim about them. Damien Broderick From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Thu Jun 17 23:53:08 2010 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:53:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Dark doubts In-Reply-To: <771115.59340.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <771115.59340.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <782955.55600.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> ? From: Gregory Jones >To: ExI chat list >Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 2:20:46 PM >Subject: Re: [ExI] Dark doubts > > > > >--- On Thu, 6/17/10, Gregory Jones wrote: > > >In retrospect of 18 years, I am still amazed that the background anisotropy is as high as it is, and I?am still unable?write you an equation to explain why I am astounded.? Astronomy is that way, filled to overflowing with amaaaaazing truth. > >spike > I had no idea you were involved in COBE, Spike. Much respect. There are also?various Hubble pics online that show light being distorted by dark matter when galaxy clusters collide. Here is a pretty one: ? http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/sao/astronomynews/2007S1/DarkMatterRing.jpg ? When I first saw this picture, I thought it was a nebula, but then I noticed those points of light embedded in it are not stars but entire galaxies. That would be a huge cloud of gas, millions of light years across. Then I read the story. ? http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2007/17/full/ ? Seems pretty convincing to me that galaxies are swimming in something that has enough mass to bend light and, as you pointed out,?cause stars in the?disk of galaxies to violate Kepler's Laws. ? ? Stuart LaForge ? "For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love."-Carl Sagan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 00:10:07 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:10:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <96FDD5F6618F4FF598E4262EE6657514@DFC68LF1> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> <20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C197FC1.3020109@satx.rr.com> <96FDD5F6618F4FF598E4262EE6657514@DFC68LF1> Message-ID: Stefano Vaj wrote: >See the Universal Transhumanist Bibliography at http://www.transumanisti.it/8.asp. Is there an English translation? Or at least a good translation website that you would recommend? John On 6/17/10, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > Damien wrote: > > "In any event, the question I was raising was: what are the major texts of > transhumanism?" > > Good question. Damien, you know about the Transhumanist Reader (or > Transhumanism Reader), right? > > But, your question causes me to wonder what is a major text? How long does > a body of writing have to be to be considered significant? How many pages is > a book? What about a manifesto? Would a manifesto be considered a worthy > text on transhumanism? What about publishing? Should a text be published to > be considered a "major text"? Probably. > > The "Transhumanist Statement" and the "Extropic Art Manifesto" were > published in 1997 by NASA/ESA. > > Natasha > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Jun 18 00:42:38 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:42:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Dark doubts In-Reply-To: <782955.55600.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <771115.59340.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <782955.55600.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C1AC0FE.1050401@satx.rr.com> On 6/17/2010 6:53 PM, The Avantguardian wrote: > Seems pretty convincing to me that galaxies are swimming in something > that has enough mass to bend light and, as you pointed out, cause stars > in the disk of galaxies to violate Kepler's Laws. Unless some MOND is correct: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 18 01:09:31 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:09:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Dark doubts In-Reply-To: <4C1AC0FE.1050401@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <428513.62954.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/17/10, Damien Broderick wrote: ? >...cause stars?in the disk of galaxies to violate Kepler's Laws. Unless some MOND is correct: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics Damien Broderick ? Nope, no sir Dr. Broderick, there is just noooo daaaaam way the MONDs are correct, nope, not no way, not no how.? Do put it right out of your mind please forthwith, for god could never be so cruel as to pull something like that on us, no.? ? There is some kind of dark stuff in there causing the anomaly. ? spike ? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Jun 18 01:30:34 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 20:30:34 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Dark doubts In-Reply-To: <428513.62954.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <428513.62954.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C1ACC3A.4060309@satx.rr.com> On 6/17/2010 8:09 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > there is just noooo daaaaam way the MONDs are correct, nope, not no way, > not no how. Do put it right out of your mind please forthwith, for god > could never be so cruel as to pull something like that on us, no. You're right, I forgot to factor god in. But wait--god *is* cruel, just look around. Back to the drawing board... How about something wild like this: Looks like god might be messin wit us... From spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 18 01:40:49 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:40:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <4C1AB74D.8040009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <547486.91341.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/17/10, Damien Broderick wrote: ? From: Damien Broderick thespike at satx.rr.com ... On 6/17/2010 6:19 PM, Spike Jones wrote: >> Nearby orbiting nodes could?simulate the child... >Spike, my brother--it pains me to say this, but that proposition about simming a child seems to me to be fundamentally depraved... ? Depraved?? But I never had in mind doing *that* with the child.? Although it isn't immediately clear to me how we would stop that sort of thing.? We can't stop it even in the meat worl...? uh, the uh, physical world. >assumption that any program capable of rewarding a real consciousness in reciprocal relationship with it would have to *be* an equal consciousness)... ? I don't see the problem here.? The child sim would be an equal consciousness in a sense. ? You bring up an interesting class of questions however.??Do let me ponder it and post about it again later. ? spike? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Jun 18 02:23:17 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:23:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <547486.91341.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <547486.91341.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C1AD895.5090503@satx.rr.com> On 6/17/2010 8:40 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > >assumption that any program capable of rewarding a real consciousness > > in reciprocal relationship with it would have to *be* an equal > > consciousness)... > I don't see the problem here. The child sim would be an equal > consciousness in a sense. Only "in a sense"? What sense is that? Hmm. Possibly I misread you when you stated earlier: "If we do it right, plenty of the simulated beings would seldom (if ever) need to trouble themselves, or even be aware that they are sims, and not flesh and blood carbon beings" I read this as something like "they would be philosophical zombies, to be switched on or off and manipulated at whim." I regard devoting one's love and care to a doll or toy, pretending that it is a person, to be a kind of depravity (with at least oneself suffering from it).* Obviously this proves only that I am an olde farte who can't get with the program, as with my conviction that a copy is not an original (yawn). *I'm not referring to masturbation with a sex doll. Damien Broderick From msd001 at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 02:43:00 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 22:43:00 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <4C1AB74D.8040009@satx.rr.com> References: <375885.31376.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1AB74D.8040009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 8:01 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Really Big Quantum Computation. Reply: yeah, and Descartes allegedly flung > cats out of his upstairs window to perish when they struck the ground > because his philosophy made much the same claim about them. Schrodinger tried to make some statement using a cat too. Or was that two cats? No, it was one cat in two states. Well, it was within one geographic and political region despite being both alive and dead. What a dubious experiment. I think the real story is that he accidentally killed his girlfriend's cat and the whole 'experiment' is a ruse to keep her guessing about the fate of the poor pet. "Seriously as long as you don't open the box to look the cat is alive. Yes; and possibly also dead. As long as you don't 'collapse the wave function' and become 'entangled' with a dead cat, all is well." :) http://xkcd.com/45/ From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 03:06:37 2010 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 22:06:37 -0500 Subject: [ExI] [Cosmic Engineers] Re: YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Jan Klauck wrote: > > --- quoting Giulio Prisco > YES! Let's form hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for > cyber-heaven. Let's put some vision, imagination and FUN back into > transhumanism. Let's re-affirm the bold, fresh, uncompromising and > energizing transhumanism of Hans Moravec and Max More. > --- > > Wasn't OCE meant as such a group? Then you started this Turing Church > (nice name, BTW). How many more splinter groups do you intend to > start? Jan, thank you for bringing this up. My transhumanist friends and I wondered about this too. WTA has had political problems like crazy since inception- after all, it was perhaps created under idle speculation that "those damned extropians" were too radical. I continue to hear political issues throughout the community from one group or another, and then groups start splintering off, and it happens again, and again. On many nights with my room mates, this discussion has come up and we've made pacts to start a transhuman tech team that doesn't have all the other bullshit that past organizations have had. You know, to be isolated from whatever other troubles inflict the current groups. - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 03:57:07 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 20:57:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] [Cosmic Engineers] Re: YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Bryan Bishop wrote: On many nights with my room mates, this discussion has come up and we've made pacts to start a transhuman tech team that doesn't have all the other bullshit that past organizations have had. You know, to be isolated from whatever other troubles inflict the current groups. >>> Good luck! John : ) On 6/17/10, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Jan Klauck > wrote: >> >> --- quoting Giulio Prisco >> YES! Let's form hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for >> cyber-heaven. Let's put some vision, imagination and FUN back into >> transhumanism. Let's re-affirm the bold, fresh, uncompromising and >> energizing transhumanism of Hans Moravec and Max More. >> --- >> >> Wasn't OCE meant as such a group? Then you started this Turing Church >> (nice name, BTW). How many more splinter groups do you intend to >> start? > > Jan, thank you for bringing this up. My transhumanist friends and I > wondered about this too. WTA has had political problems like crazy > since inception- after all, it was perhaps created under idle > speculation that "those damned extropians" were too radical. I > continue to hear political issues throughout the community from one > group or another, and then groups start splintering off, and it > happens again, and again. On many nights with my room mates, this > discussion has come up and we've made pacts to start a transhuman tech > team that doesn't have all the other bullshit that past organizations > have had. You know, to be isolated from whatever other troubles > inflict the current groups. > > - Bryan > http://heybryan.org/ > 1 512 203 0507 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From arthur.breitman at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 03:28:12 2010 From: arthur.breitman at gmail.com (Arthur Breitman) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:28:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:23 PM, wrote: > For me, it is a philosophy with princples and is definitely a movement. > > May I submit a word who could be more fitting than movement, philosophy, club, etc. "Spirit", much like in "the spirit of enlightenment". Although I believe transhumanism may be all of the above, the word spirit is sufficiently underused to be drafted for the purpose of describing transhumanism. My own vision of this spirit is a bowl of spaghetti, an apparently loose collection of ideas who, on a closer look, are all tied together. More specifically, at its core, ideas relating human nature transforming into its own ideal, in particular through the use of technology. Oh and since this is my first post on the list, that'll be my introduction :) Arthur > > > Quoting Damien Broderick : > > On 6/16/2010 5:12 PM, natasha at natasha.cc wrote: >> >> But of course if I get booted out of the club on these grounds, I won't >>>> be especially upset, or pine. It's just a label... >>>> >>> >> This isn't a club. >>> >> >> Drat, did I say "club"? I meant "voted off the island." Wait, there >> isn't an island? >> >> Actually, to all intents and purposes transhumanism *is* a club, or >> rather a sort of loose federation of clubs where like-minded clumps of >> neophilic, technophilic people (called "oddballs" by most of the >> population) hang out together. It's not a political party or movement >> or tendency or fraction, it isn't yet a formal philosophy or set of >> design principles, it certainly isn't what the lazy journos call it, a >> *cult*. What it is, I suppose, is what Sartre called existentialism >> before he went Maoist--it's a humanism. >> >> Damien Broderick >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 18 04:13:56 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:13:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <279245.49729.qm@web81502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/17/10, Arthur Breitman wrote: ? ? >Oh and since this is my first post on the list, that'll be my introduction :) >Arthur Welcome Arthur!? Do feel free to tell us something about Arthur if you wish, such as where are you from and where are you going, etc. ? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giulio at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 05:39:34 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 07:39:34 +0200 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: Welcome Arthur! I have also used the term "spirit" occasionally to describe what glues transhumanists together, and in the same sense. It is a good word. 2010/6/18 Arthur Breitman : > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:23 PM, wrote: >> >> For me, it is a philosophy with princples and is definitely a movement. >> > > May I submit a word who could be more fitting than movement, philosophy, > club, etc. "Spirit", much like in "the spirit of enlightenment". Although I > believe transhumanism may be all of the above, the word spirit is > sufficiently underused to be drafted for the purpose of describing > transhumanism. > My own vision of this spirit is a bowl of spaghetti, an apparently loose > collection of ideas who, on a closer look, are all tied together. More > specifically, at its core, ideas relating human nature transforming into its > own ideal, in particular through the use of technology. > Oh and since this is my first post on the list, that'll be my introduction > :) > Arthur From spike66 at att.net Fri Jun 18 06:08:16 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:08:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Dark doubts In-Reply-To: <782955.55600.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <55017.31203.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/17/10, The Avantguardian wrote: ? I had no idea you were involved in COBE, Spike. Much respect. I had no idea you were involved in COBE, Spike. Much respect. ? Waaait, Avant, do let me clarify.? I was involved with COBE only as a weight and balance metrologist, not as one of the designers.? But I have a good COBE story for you. ? COBE was running behind after a redesign.? The people who always get rushed at the end when the program is out of money and out of calendar are the test engineers.? So we needed to get an all-up vehicle center of gravity, a two transverse axis measurement, since COBE was a spinner (a slow spinner, about a rev per minute.)? I designed the test setup, and convinced the management we could pick off a third axis by tilting the entire spacecraft slightly, then recording the differences in weights measured by the three load cells, then calculating the longitudinal axis CG geometrically.? They didn't like the idea of tilting the thing, sounded dangerous, but I assured them to could be done safely, and they were out of money and calendar to do it the right way, so they allowed me to do it my way. ? On the day of the test, I?had the management?sign overtime permits for all the technicians, for I expected that to be a looong day, a long day indeed, and I wanted to git-r-dun that day, because we wanted to get the bird down to Vandenberg for launch integration into?a Delta forthwith, trying to make up schedule. ? The day of the measurement, these techs were FLYING!? I never saw them so focused, or work so fast.??I was delighted?of course.??That?afternoon, they seemed to get ever more intense.? I said, "Guys, there is no need to rush.? I have overtime permits for everyone here."? The tech lead?said "Overtime?my ass!? We are trying to get this bird out of here?so we can go watch the game!"? I said "What game?"? Everything came to a stop, they all stared.? "The?world series, third game.? Baseball.??Have you ever heard of the SAN FRANCISCO?GIANTS or the OAKLAND RAIDERS?? Spike, what planet are you from?"? Me, "Oh well, I don't read the?sports pages.? Big game, huh?"? They, "Ahhhh, yes, big game.? Lets MOVE boys!" ? I thought?that?job?would take us until about 7 or 8 that evening if all went well, but we finished by 3pm, the techs bolted, the Air?Force guys?were right there,?and spirited the bird off to Moffett Field.? I signed all the inspection papers,?packed up my gear, went back to my office, saw the?Charlie 130?climbing out from Moffett?just as I?arrived in the parking lot?to my office at?5 pm.? I went in, sat down, started writing the metrology report.? Just then, the earthquake hit, the Loma Prieta catastrophe.? ? That was October 17, 1989.? Had not the world series been going on that day, the technicians would have proceeded at their normal pace, and?COBE would have been perched on three flimsy bipods when the Loma Prieta?quake hit.? The shaking was intense enough, the bird would have ended?in a smoldering ruin on the cleanroom floor.? My career would have?ended in?smoldering ruin on the cleanroom floor.? My career went on for another 20 years, all because of a baseball game. ? spike????? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giulio at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 06:11:12 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 08:11:12 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [Cosmic Engineers] Re: YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Bryan, In this case the line along which the splinter is cut is not political. Well, in some sense it is, because everything related to people is, but it is not explicitly political. Instead, it is defined by taking transhumanism seriously, including its more radical and apparently far-out aspects. Some transhumanists take immortality, mind uploading and the limitless evolution of our species in a great cosmic adventure seriously, and some "transhumanists" don't. G. On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 5:06 AM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Jan Klauck wrote: >> >> --- quoting Giulio Prisco >> YES! Let's form hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for >> cyber-heaven. Let's put some vision, imagination and FUN back into >> transhumanism. Let's re-affirm the bold, fresh, uncompromising and >> energizing transhumanism of Hans Moravec and Max More. >> --- >> >> Wasn't OCE meant as such a group? Then you started this Turing Church >> (nice name, BTW). How many more splinter groups do you intend to >> start? > > Jan, thank you for bringing this up. My transhumanist friends and I > wondered about this too. WTA has had political problems like crazy > since inception- after all, it was perhaps created under idle > speculation that "those damned extropians" were too radical. I > continue to hear political issues throughout the community from one > group or another, and then groups start splintering off, and it > happens again, and again. On many nights with my room mates, this > discussion has come up and we've made pacts to start a transhuman tech > team that doesn't have all the other bullshit that past organizations > have had. You know, to be isolated from whatever other troubles > inflict the current groups. > > - Bryan > http://heybryan.org/ > 1 512 203 0507 > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cosmic Engineers" group. > To post to this group, send email to cosmic-engineers at googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cosmic-engineers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cosmic-engineers?hl=en. > > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 07:54:39 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 00:54:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] [Cosmic Engineers] Re: YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning for cyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Giulio Prisco wrote: In this case the line along which the splinter is cut is not political. Well, in some sense it is, because everything related to people is, but it is not explicitly political. Instead, it is defined by taking transhumanism seriously, including its more radical and apparently far-out aspects. Some transhumanists take immortality, mind uploading and the limitless evolution of our species in a great cosmic adventure seriously, and some "transhumanists" don't.. >>> I think another way which transhumanists (perhaps unconsciously) divide themselves, is that of those who ardently desire to achieve indefinite lifespan (sometimes even without the desire for cryonic suspension), and those who see this option as realistically only being open to the currently very young or unborn. I wonder how many people who have been on this list will be making it... John From bbenzai at yahoo.com Fri Jun 18 09:17:10 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:17:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Concerning mind uploading In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <395650.4971.qm@web114410.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Hi, J?r?me. I've heard quite a few people express the same doubts about uploading. I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding about what life as an upload would presumably be like. Nobody is proposing that an upload would be a 'disembodied mind', with no inputs or outputs, a purely mental existence. I think of it this way: Currently, humans have a brain that is linked to a body that exists in an environment. These links are all via neurons, transmitting signals to and from the body's sense organs, muscles and endocrine glands. This means that absolutely every sensation we ever have comes into the brain as neural signals, and absolutely every action we ever make starts out as signals from the brain. We are a brain-in-a-box now. We always have been. So, the experience of being and acting in any environment, 'real' or 'simulated', is completely dependent on the signals coming in to and going out from the brain. This makes no difference to whether the brain is biological or electronic (or anything else), and it makes no difference whether the body and environment are 'real' or 'simulated'. An upload's mind will run on some kind of computer, and will have inputs and outputs just like a biological brain. The great thing is that those inputs and outputs could be linked to the 'real world', or to a 'simulation' (I'm putting these terms in quotes because I think that we'll find the distinction becomes increasingly blurred), and the fidelity will be something that we can constantly improve, up to and beyond what we currently experience. If you wanted, your simulated body could be an exact copy of your original biological one, and you could live in a simulated world indistinguishable from this current one. Or you could inhabit a robotic body in the 'real world'. Or any combination. There's no theoretical reason why an upload couldn't inhabit a biological body (although I see little point in this), in which case you probably wouldn't even notice the difference. Only an x-ray scan would reveal that there was a computer in your head (or somewhere) instead of a couple of pounds of cholesterol-rich jelly. I fully expect that life as an upload will be much, *much* more rich, intense and satisfying than life as a biological human. And that's apart from the other advantages, such as taking backups, not dying from stupid things like heart attacks, being able to access and alter your own thought processes directly, etc. Ben Zaiboc From bbenzai at yahoo.com Fri Jun 18 09:52:08 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:52:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Simulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <228528.77269.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Damien Broderick (among others) wrote things such as: > Spike, my brother--it pains me to say this, but that > proposition about > simming a child seems to me to be fundamentally depraved. > > Descartes > allegedly flung cats out of his upstairs window to perish > when they > struck the ground because his philosophy made much the same > claim about > them. Maybe the problem is the word "Simulation". Some people take it to mean 'not real', and some take it to mean 'reconstructed', or something close to that. If we are living in a simulation does that take anything away from the experience of living? In what sense is a simulated environment not an environment? I took Spike's example of a simulated child to be a 'child simulation'. In other words, an actual child, just not a biological one. It would be just as real as any child, and would be growing up, learning about the world, and about becoming a person. Perhaps we need a different word to describe these kinds of simulation, to distance the concept from the negative, or 'false' connotations. Ben Zaiboc From bbenzai at yahoo.com Fri Jun 18 10:07:52 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 03:07:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] cyber-heaven meets dark matter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <264086.96470.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> I'm sure this must have been suggested before, but could there be a link between the missing mass and the missing aliens? Is it too far-fetched to suggest that maybe all the extra mass we can't see is composed of a staggeringly huge number of alien civilisations making super-efficient use of the energy of their local star/brown dwarf/black hole/whatever? Then the question becomes: Why is there any visible matter at all? Maybe it's for incubating new kids on the block, like us. There must be some kind of test for this idea, like the average rate at which visible stuff becomes invisible? Or is this just back into Drake Equation territory again? (=sheer guesswork). I wonder if anyone has ever looked for stars just disappearing? Ben Zaiboc From giulio at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 11:33:21 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:33:21 +0200 Subject: [ExI] ASIM2010-1 First Online Workshop on Advancing Substrate Independent Minds Message-ID: A very interesting online workshop on Mind Uploading -- The First Online Workshop on Advancing Substrate Independent Minds, ASIM2010-1, was held in Teleplace on June 5, 2010. It was a very intense workshop with 10 talks and lively discussions... ASIM2010-1 First Online Workshop on Advancing Substrate Independent Minds http://giulioprisco.blogspot.com/2010/06/asim2010-1-first-online-workshop-on.html From sparge at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 14:36:05 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:36:05 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Dark doubts In-Reply-To: <55017.31203.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <782955.55600.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <55017.31203.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Great story, Spike! Thanks. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 14:56:10 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 07:56:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist Message-ID: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:54 AM, John Grigg wrote: > Giulio Prisco wrote: >> In this case the line along which the splinter is cut is not >> political. Well, in some sense it is, because everything related to >> people is, but it is not explicitly political. > >> Instead, it is defined by taking transhumanism seriously, including >> its more radical and apparently far-out aspects. Some transhumanists >> take immortality, mind uploading and the limitless evolution of our >> species in a great cosmic adventure seriously, and some >> "transhumanists" don't.. >>>> > > I think another way which transhumanists (perhaps unconsciously) > divide themselves, is that of those who ardently desire to achieve > indefinite lifespan (sometimes even without the desire for cryonic > suspension), and those who see this option as realistically only being > open to the currently very young or unborn. This reminds me of the split between people who want to go into space themselves and the ones who feel they have no chance and still support going as something for a generation or two in the future. I think in addition to those who "ardently desire to achieve indefinite lifespan" there are a substantial number who are repelled by the infinite boredom of being dead. > I wonder how many people who have been on this list will be making it... This "ur-transhumanist" has been signed up for 25 years now. Might not make it, but it won't be for a lack of trying. Keith From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 15:35:02 2010 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:35:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [neuro] [FV] Optogenetics + fMRI = circuit reconstruction! In-Reply-To: <20100618130602.GK1964@leitl.org> References: <20100618130602.GK1964@leitl.org> Message-ID: Global and local fMRI signals driven by neurons defined optogenetically by type and wiring http://designfiles.org/papers/neuro/Global%20and%20local%20fMRI%20signals%20driven%20by%20neurons%20defined%20optogenetically%20by%20type%20and%20wiring.pdf http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v465/n7299/full/nature09108.html "Despite a rapidly-growing scientific and clinical brain imaging literature based on functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) using blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD)1 signals, it remains controversial whether BOLD signals in a particular region can be caused by activation of local excitatory neurons2. This difficult question is central to the interpretation and utility of BOLD, with major significance for fMRI studies in basic research and clinical applications3. Using a novel integrated technology unifying optogenetic4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 control of inputs with high-field fMRI signal readouts, we show here that specific stimulation of local CaMKII?-expressing excitatory neurons, either in the neocortex or thalamus, elicits positive BOLD signals at the stimulus location with classical kinetics. We also show that optogenetic fMRI (ofMRI) allows visualization of the causal effects of specific cell types defined not only by genetic identity and cell body location, but also by axonal projection target. Finally, we show that ofMRI within the living and intact mammalian brain reveals BOLD signals in downstream targets distant from the stimulus, indicating that this approach can be used to map the global effects of controlling a local cell population. In this respect, unlike both conventional fMRI studies based on correlations14 and fMRI with electrical stimulation that will also directly drive afferent and nearby axons, this ofMRI approach provides causal information about the global circuits recruited by defined local neuronal activity patterns. Together these findings provide an empirical foundation for the widely-used fMRI BOLD signal, and the features of ofMRI define a potent tool that may be suitable for functional circuit analysis as well as global phenotyping of dysfunctional circuitry." ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Eugen Leitl Date: Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 8:06 AM Subject: [neuro] [FV] Optogenetics + fMRI = circuit reconstruction! To: tt at postbiota.org, info at postbiota.org, neuro at postbiota.org ----- Forwarded message from Peter Passaro ----- From: Peter Passaro Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 05:41:34 -0700 (PDT) To: foundation-volunteers Subject: [FV] Optogenetics + fMRI = circuit reconstruction! User-Agent: G2/1.0 Reply-To: foundation-volunteers at googlegroups.com Extremely interesting new paper on using optogenetic stimulation and fMRI combined to do circuit analysis in rat cortex thalamus. Macro scale circuit analysis in live animals should now be viable to complete within just a few years. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v465/n7299/full/nature09108.html -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foundation-volunteers" (http://neuralprostheses.org) group. To post to this group, send email to foundation-volunteers at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to foundation-volunteers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foundation-volunteers?hl=en ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl leitl http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A ?7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE _______________________________________________ neuro mailing list neuro at postbiota.org http://postbiota.org/mailman/listinfo/neuro -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From sparge at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 17:21:30 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:21:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Simulation In-Reply-To: <228528.77269.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <228528.77269.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 5:52 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Perhaps we need a different word to describe these kinds of simulation, to > distance the concept from the negative, or 'false' connotations. "Virtual"/"virtual reality" is better, but carries its own baggage. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 17:34:48 2010 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:34:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Simulation In-Reply-To: <228528.77269.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <228528.77269.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Maybe the problem is the word "Simulation". ?Some people take it to mean 'not real', and some take it to mean 'reconstructed', or something close to that. Here's one problem that you might not be thinking about- how could a simulation (inside of the reality that we live in and to some extent haven't yet experienced) ever fundamentally replace the reality that it is running within? " ... And more, I would say that the so-called virtual realities are misnamed: they should be called something like "simulated experiences." Because they aren't real, and can never be so, any more than a map can be the territory. And more, for the same reason that a map is necessarily less detailed than the territory that it describes, a virtual reality can only ever be a pale shadow of the real thing. Such constructs might prove amusing, or even useful and illuminating, but how could they ever take the place of the essential reality that they represent? ..." - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From sparge at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 17:55:52 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:55:52 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Simulation In-Reply-To: References: <228528.77269.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > > > Here's one problem that you might not be thinking about- how could a > simulation (inside of the reality that we live in and to some extent > haven't yet experienced) ever fundamentally replace the reality that > it is running within? > If, by "replace" you mean "serve as a substitute for", then I think it's pretty easy to imagine a virtual reality that's as rich as the one that we can only assume is real. If you mean literally replacing the universe with a virtual reality, I don't think that's possible or desirable. Who are you quoting here? > > " ... And more, I would say that the so-called virtual realities are > misnamed: they should be called something like "simulated > experiences." Because they aren't real, and can never be so, any more > than a map can be the territory. Virtual realities/simulated experiences are as real as anything, they're just not tangible by those outside them. > And more, for the same reason that a > map is necessarily less detailed than the territory that it describes, > a virtual reality can only ever be a pale shadow of the real thing. > Nonsense. I could, for example, take a salt crystal and construct a virtual reality based on it that incorporates vast complexity that isn't there in the real crystal. Such constructs might prove amusing, or even useful and illuminating, > but how could they ever take the place of the essential reality that > they represent? ..." > It won't happen overnight, and it won't be the product of one person/team/corporation, but I don't see any limit to the richness possible in VR. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 18:14:27 2010 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:14:27 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Simulation In-Reply-To: References: <228528.77269.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Dave Sill wrote: > If, by "replace" you mean "serve as a substitute for", then I think it's > pretty easy to imagine a virtual reality that's as rich as the one that we > can only assume is real. I am sure there are many levels of richness and detail that we can either now or one day simulate, yeah. > If you mean literally replacing the universe with a virtual reality, I don't > think that's possible or desirable. What it sounds like to me- sometimes- is that there are in fact advocates of virtual realities that would want to replace the universe with a virtual reality. And yes, that's probably impossible; but failing that, I get the distinct feeling that some people want to at least act like there isn't a universe and reality beyond the virtual reality. Now, this isn't to say that a simulation, virtual reality, virtual environment, etc., isn't interesting, useful, or a wonderful way to explore our developing reality, but it's definitely not the same thing, right? > ?Who are you quoting here? David Zindell. http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/nonfiction/intdz.htm >> " ... And more, I would say that the so-called virtual realities are >> misnamed: they should be called something like "simulated >> experiences." Because they aren't real, and can never be so, any more >> than a map can be the territory. > > Virtual realities/simulated?experiences are as real as anything, they're > just not tangible by those outside them. I agree, however I think he was talking about people who confuse the map for the territory that it represents (like when you assume that because a city layout is a certain way in Second Life, the city in meatspace must therefore be the same way, but when you groundtruth it, you find that it's not true). >> And more, for the same reason that a >> map is necessarily less detailed than the territory that it describes, >> a virtual reality can only ever be a pale shadow of the real thing. > > Nonsense. I could, for example, take a salt crystal and construct a virtual > reality based on it that incorporates vast complexity that isn't there in > the real crystal. Do you understand why (or how) the map is not the territory? >> Such constructs might prove amusing, or even useful and illuminating, >> but how could they ever take the place of the essential reality that >> they represent? ..." > > It won't happen overnight, and it won't be the product of one > person/team/corporation, but I don't see any limit to the richness possible > in VR. Me either. I don't think that he was arguing against the richness of detail in simulations, however. - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From sparge at gmail.com Fri Jun 18 18:27:17 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 14:27:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Simulation In-Reply-To: References: <228528.77269.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > Do you understand why (or how) the map is not the territory? > Of course. It never occurred to me confuse the two. I also don't freak out when I see a photo of my mother, who's dead, and wonder why she's there and suddenly small, flat, and possibly just a head. Even videos don't momentarily confuse me into thinking she's back among the living. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Jun 18 19:19:10 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:19:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Simulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <554682.12937.qm@web81608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Fri, 6/18/10, Dave Sill wrote: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote:? And more, for the same reason that a map is necessarily less detailed than the territory that it describes, a virtual reality can only ever be a pale shadow of the real thing. Nonsense. I could, for example, take a salt crystal and construct a virtual reality based on it that incorporates vast complexity that isn't there in the real crystal.Heading off a perceived miscommunication: A virtual reality *that takes the same amount of resources in the real world as the reality it simulates* is necessarily less detailed than said real world.? You could construct that virtual reality, but the computronium (the most optimally efficient computing medium physically possible) would necessarily take up more than just that salt crystal's worth. At least, I believe that to be the point being made.? (Not stating agreement or disagreement.? Just trying to clarify.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Jun 18 19:26:55 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:26:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Simulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <191137.71908.qm@web81604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Fri, 6/18/10, Bryan Bishop wrote: > Such constructs might prove amusing, or even useful and > illuminating, > but how could they ever take the place of the essential > reality that > they represent? ..." Someone needs to reread Descartes' seminal work on how, exactly, this can happen - and in theory could be happening today. (Granted, his work is more well known for proving that it is impossible to logically prove or disprove this condition. It's also couched in more mystical than technological speak - not surprising, given when it was written. That aside, it does show how this could happen.) From msd001 at gmail.com Sat Jun 19 00:45:07 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 20:45:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] cyber-heaven meets dark matter In-Reply-To: <264086.96470.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <264086.96470.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 6:07 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > There must be some kind of test for this idea, like the average rate at which visible stuff becomes invisible? ?Or is this just back into Drake Equation territory again? (=sheer guesswork). ?I wonder if anyone has ever looked for stars just disappearing? In my area that usually means they were just airplanes in the first place. Also, particularly dim stars are visible with peripheral vision but not when viewed directly. I wonder how much obvious stuff is in the blind spot right in front of us? From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Jun 19 01:27:27 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 20:27:27 -0500 Subject: [ExI] cyber-heaven meets dark matter In-Reply-To: References: <264086.96470.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C1C1CFF.4060302@satx.rr.com> On 6/18/2010 7:45 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: >> There must be some kind of test for this idea, like the average rate at which visible stuff becomes invisible? Or is this just back into Drake Equation territory again? (=sheer guesswork). I wonder if anyone has ever looked for stars just disappearing? > In my area that usually means they were just airplanes in the first place. > > Also, particularly dim stars are visible with peripheral vision but > not when viewed directly. > > I wonder how much obvious stuff is in the blind spot right in front of us? Sir, your humor is dry! It is dry to the point of dessication. It is anhydrous. Its pan is dead. Your whimsy is so dry that it might be mistaken by the careless for mental deficiency. More, I say! Appreciatively, Damien Broderick From bbenzai at yahoo.com Sat Jun 19 07:20:19 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 00:20:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <703338.2720.qm@web114413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> samantha wrote: > > we might just as > well become lotus > eaters once we use all the energy of the local > star.???Time will tell.??? I don't understand this statement. What has energy use got to do with apathy? > > > Actually a lot of that useless mass is full of very yummy > nerves and so > on.? :) Yes, you can do better in a theoretical future > computational > space.???But where do you take a breath and > enjoy and fully appreciate > what is?? If you only keep running to more and More > and yet MORE do you > remember to smell the roses fully before you digitize them? You take a breath and enjoy and fully appreciate what is inside the computational space you are in right now. Why shouldn't an upload's computational space be at least as capable? I don't see much point in the whole enterprise if this isn't true. Those yummy nerves and so on can be even yummier in upload-space! The digitised roses can be at least as nice-smelling as the real ones, and if you consider the mass used by a rose, and the mass used by a digital representation of that rose, down to such a fine level that our human senses are left waaay behind, you can see that we could get a whole forest of roses, of all kinds, even ones that don't or couldn't exist in the 'real world', in the space of a single biological rose. And you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. The point is that if we upload, we won't leave anything behind, at all. We open up a huge space of possibilities that include everything we are already familiar with. ? ? (Spike): > >?This is my transhuman endgame vision, the vision that > > guides?everything I do, everything I think, everything > > I am and hope to?become. > >? ? ? > > And I largely share it with some caveats and occasional > need to ask > questions as to what is really meant and what we really > want and why.? > Of course. We all have a vision, or we wouldn't be here, and we all need to keep asking the questions. Ben Zaiboc From max at maxmore.com Sat Jun 19 15:28:15 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 10:28:15 -0500 Subject: [ExI] 'The grandaddy of all gushers'? Not this spill Message-ID: <201006191528.o5JFSOl6027542@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Interesting perspectives on the current disaster compared to previous environmental disasters in the USA. Of course I knew about the Dust Bowl, but had never heard of the Johnstown Flood or the Lakeview Gusher. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37793584/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times/ BP should have been using something like the Proactionary Principle -- the company's operations, at least in this case (and probably others) completely lacked any foresight in planning. It seems that BP failed to plan ways of stopping oil leaks from deep water. Max From bret at bonfireproductions.com Sat Jun 19 15:04:55 2010 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (bret at bonfireproductions.com) Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 10:04:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning forcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <20100619100455.skt8yg57i80gcsw8@webmail.creationstorm.com> Quoting Giulio Prisco : > It is a quick bumper-sticker-like compatibility check: if one > considers uploading as feasible and desirable, (s)he is probably > positively attuned to transhumanism, otherwise (s)he is probably not. Hello all, it was such a pleasure seeing some of you last weekend at the H+ Summit - certainly if you are ever in my backyard again, please look me up. On this point, now that I have read the thread. I think it is important to note on what Giulio has said here as something else. By saying uploading is feasible, you are essentially agreeing to Dualism in the mind-body problem. You may as well have a bumpersticker that says so, since uploading in the you-go-not-a-copy sense is only going to be possible if Dualism is true - correct? There is a website called commonsensemedia.org that helps parents make decisions on what their kids watch. My kids have not seen the movie "9" yet, in fact I almost wrote a review with the title "WARNING: CONTAINS DUALISM". So there are indeed Transhumanists that think the movement of self is rife with as yet unaddressable issues. And as far as not adhering to a specific technology, (where my bumper-sticker would just say "I agree with Max") I do implore people to also not attach Transhumanism to any specific spiritual element. Such an attachment would effectively close the door on the rest of the undecided population that has maybe only heard of Transhumanism peripherally. Although our ideas have not turned them (yet), any spiritual element would be a threat and send them running. One of Transhumanisms strengths is that it is not religious. ~]3 From giulio at gmail.com Sat Jun 19 16:26:42 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 18:26:42 +0200 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning forcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <20100619100455.skt8yg57i80gcsw8@webmail.creationstorm.com> References: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <20100619100455.skt8yg57i80gcsw8@webmail.creationstorm.com> Message-ID: Hi Bret, "By saying uploading is feasible, you are essentially agreeing to Dualism in the mind-body problem" Not so, quite the contrary indeed. Wikipedia: "In philosophy of mind, dualism is a set of views about the relationship between mind and matter, which begins with the claim that mental phenomena are, in some respects, non-physical." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism_(philosophy_of_mind) If mental phenomena are non-physical, they cannot be understood by looking at the physical brain. In this case uploading, based on scanning the brain and copying/pasting the information encoded in the brain, would not work. But if we consider mental phenomena as physical, and the conscious mind as an emergent property of the brain's physics, then mental phenomena can be fully understood, reverse engineered, and improved upon by science. In this case there is no reason (in principle) why uploading should not work. So, saying uploading is feasible is not agreeing to dualism. On the contrary, saying uploading is NOT feasible (in principle) IS agreeing to dualism. G. On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 5:04 PM, wrote: > Quoting Giulio Prisco : >> >> It is a quick bumper-sticker-like compatibility check: if one >> considers uploading as feasible and desirable, (s)he is probably >> positively attuned to transhumanism, otherwise (s)he is probably not. > > > Hello all, it was such a pleasure seeing some of you last weekend at the H+ > Summit - certainly if you are ever in my backyard again, please look me up. > > On this point, now that I have read the thread. I think it is important to > note on what Giulio has said here as something else. > > By saying uploading is feasible, you are essentially agreeing to Dualism in > the mind-body problem. You may as well have a bumpersticker that says so, > since uploading in the you-go-not-a-copy sense is only going to be possible > if Dualism is true - correct? > > There is a website called commonsensemedia.org that helps parents make > decisions on what their kids watch. My kids have not seen the movie "9" yet, > in fact I almost wrote a review with the title "WARNING: CONTAINS DUALISM". > So there are indeed Transhumanists that think the movement of self is rife > with as yet unaddressable issues. > > And as far as not adhering to a specific technology, (where my > bumper-sticker would just say "I agree with Max") I do implore people to > also not attach Transhumanism to any specific spiritual element. > > Such an attachment would effectively close the door on the rest of the > undecided population that has maybe only heard of Transhumanism > peripherally. Although our ideas have not turned them (yet), any spiritual > element would be a threat and send them running. One of Transhumanisms > strengths is that it is not religious. > > ~]3 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Jun 19 17:43:57 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 12:43:57 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groupsyearning forcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <20100619100455.skt8yg57i80gcsw8@webmail.creationstorm.com> References: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <20100619100455.skt8yg57i80gcsw8@webmail.creationstorm.com> Message-ID: <8B60D08DA6B648898FA312A93814D1B2@DFC68LF1> Bret wrote: "...I do implore people to also not attach Transhumanism to any specific spiritual element. "Such an attachment would effectively close the door on the rest of the undecided population that has maybe only heard of Transhumanism peripherally. Although our ideas have not turned them (yet), any spiritual element would be a threat and send them running. One of Transhumanism's strengths is that it is not religious." I don't agree. Spirituality and religiosity are not synonymous. And it is a mistake to group spirituality and religiousness as one thingy. We need more metaphysics, a spirited sensibility, and caution about what and who antagonizes transhumanism. We don't need to be turnkeys on people's affinity toward personal need for physiological comfort. Zen is highly beneficial, and Buddhism has value, as do many belief systems that do not directly antagonize us. Who cares if someone drinks the blood of Christ isn't pestering us. Just life and let live. (Unless they are trouble makers.) Natasha Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of bret at bonfireproductions.com Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 10:05 AM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groupsyearning forcyber-heaven Quoting Giulio Prisco : > It is a quick bumper-sticker-like compatibility check: if one > considers uploading as feasible and desirable, (s)he is probably > positively attuned to transhumanism, otherwise (s)he is probably not. Hello all, it was such a pleasure seeing some of you last weekend at the H+ Summit - certainly if you are ever in my backyard again, please look me up. On this point, now that I have read the thread. I think it is important to note on what Giulio has said here as something else. By saying uploading is feasible, you are essentially agreeing to Dualism in the mind-body problem. You may as well have a bumpersticker that says so, since uploading in the you-go-not-a-copy sense is only going to be possible if Dualism is true - correct? There is a website called commonsensemedia.org that helps parents make decisions on what their kids watch. My kids have not seen the movie "9" yet, in fact I almost wrote a review with the title "WARNING: CONTAINS DUALISM". So there are indeed Transhumanists that think the movement of self is rife with as yet unaddressable issues. And as far as not adhering to a specific technology, (where my bumper-sticker would just say "I agree with Max") I do implore people to also not attach Transhumanism to any specific spiritual element. Such an attachment would effectively close the door on the rest of the undecided population that has maybe only heard of Transhumanism peripherally. Although our ideas have not turned them (yet), any spiritual element would be a threat and send them running. One of Transhumanisms strengths is that it is not religious. ~]3 _______________________________________________ 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 Jun 19 18:22:37 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:22:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning forcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <554054.53955.qm@web81502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? From: Giulio Prisco giulio at gmail.com ... >>"By saying uploading is feasible, you are essentially agreeing to Dualism in the mind-body problem" >Not so, quite the contrary indeed. >Wikipedia: ...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism_(philosophy_of_mind) >...So, saying uploading is feasible is not agreeing to dualism. On the contrary, saying uploading is NOT feasible (in principle) IS agreeing to dualism...G. ? Oh my goodness, well said, Giulio.? I hadn't crystalized it this succinctly, but your comment goes right to the heart of the matter.? If we recognize that our brains are machines, which operate on physical laws, chemistry, Newtonian physics, etc, then it stands to reason that our brains can in principle be simulated.??No matter how I look at it, I can't really imagine otherwise, and this is an important point indeed. ? It is possible that we may?eventually find that in order to?think?our thoughts and feel our feelings, it really does require a machine of enormous size and mindboggling complexity, such as a human.??Recognize that even the smallest person here is enormous and stunningly complex.? ? It is possible that such a machine does need to be this big and complicated to do the things we do and feel the things we feel, but I believe to the contrary, because we humans have a design criterion that we must start out smaller than we are, and grow by a factor of about 20.? This design criterion is analogous to requiring a submarine that can fly.? If you manage to build one,?it will be neither a good airplane nor a good sub.??Freed from that requirement, the task is much easier.? Likewise, the design constraints of having to be born smaller (even if still enormous) makes for a difficult design constraint indeed. ? Freed from just the one constraint of our having to be born and having to very die shortly thereafter, we should be able to create a thinking, feeling machine, with enormous capacity. ? spike ? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Jun 19 18:27:17 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 13:27:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearningforcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com><20100619100455.skt8yg57i80gcsw8@webmail.creationstorm.com> Message-ID: Nicely said G. Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Giulio Prisco Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 11:27 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearningforcyber-heaven Hi Bret, "By saying uploading is feasible, you are essentially agreeing to Dualism in the mind-body problem" Not so, quite the contrary indeed. Wikipedia: "In philosophy of mind, dualism is a set of views about the relationship between mind and matter, which begins with the claim that mental phenomena are, in some respects, non-physical." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism_(philosophy_of_mind) If mental phenomena are non-physical, they cannot be understood by looking at the physical brain. In this case uploading, based on scanning the brain and copying/pasting the information encoded in the brain, would not work. But if we consider mental phenomena as physical, and the conscious mind as an emergent property of the brain's physics, then mental phenomena can be fully understood, reverse engineered, and improved upon by science. In this case there is no reason (in principle) why uploading should not work. So, saying uploading is feasible is not agreeing to dualism. On the contrary, saying uploading is NOT feasible (in principle) IS agreeing to dualism. G. On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 5:04 PM, wrote: > Quoting Giulio Prisco : >> >> It is a quick bumper-sticker-like compatibility check: if one >> considers uploading as feasible and desirable, (s)he is probably >> positively attuned to transhumanism, otherwise (s)he is probably not. > > > Hello all, it was such a pleasure seeing some of you last weekend at > the H+ Summit - certainly if you are ever in my backyard again, please look me up. > > On this point, now that I have read the thread. I think it is > important to note on what Giulio has said here as something else. > > By saying uploading is feasible, you are essentially agreeing to > Dualism in the mind-body problem. You may as well have a bumpersticker > that says so, since uploading in the you-go-not-a-copy sense is only > going to be possible if Dualism is true - correct? > > There is a website called commonsensemedia.org that helps parents make > decisions on what their kids watch. My kids have not seen the movie > "9" yet, in fact I almost wrote a review with the title "WARNING: CONTAINS DUALISM". > So there are indeed Transhumanists that think the movement of self is > rife with as yet unaddressable issues. > > And as far as not adhering to a specific technology, (where my > bumper-sticker would just say "I agree with Max") I do implore people > to also not attach Transhumanism to any specific spiritual element. > > Such an attachment would effectively close the door on the rest of the > undecided population that has maybe only heard of Transhumanism > peripherally. Although our ideas have not turned them (yet), any > spiritual element would be a threat and send them running. One of > Transhumanisms strengths is that it is not religious. > > ~]3 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sun Jun 20 07:59:10 2010 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 09:59:10 +0200 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearningforcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <20100619100455.skt8yg57i80gcsw8@webmail.creationstorm.com> Message-ID: Transhumanism will win on the market, or will be crushed by the market forces. So, do not worry much, build strategies act rationally if you want to prevail with your vision. - Thomas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bret at bonfireproductions.com Sun Jun 20 14:52:02 2010 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (bret at bonfireproductions.com) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 09:52:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groupsyearning forcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <8B60D08DA6B648898FA312A93814D1B2@DFC68LF1> References: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <20100619100455.skt8yg57i80gcsw8@webmail.creationstorm.com> <8B60D08DA6B648898FA312A93814D1B2@DFC68LF1> Message-ID: <20100620095202.9io2hh1fk0okwgo8@webmail.creationstorm.com> Quoting Natasha Vita-More : > Bret wrote: > > "...I do implore people to also not attach Transhumanism to any specific > spiritual element. > I don't agree. Spirituality and religiosity are not synonymous. And it is a > mistake to group spirituality and religiousness as one thingy. (snip) > > Who cares if someone drinks the blood of Christ isn't pestering us. Just > life and let live. (Unless they are trouble makers.) Hi Natasha! I agree with your not agreeing :). What I meant by specific, is that a group banding together, in a religious sense, and using the Transhumanist "brand" if you will, could be damaging - once a group identifies in this manner, it becomes a threat to other religions. While people are willing to identify with any compatible group, adding a religious (not necessarily spiritual/personal) overhead will make Transhumanism incompatible with certain groups. They will feel like they need to make a choice. As it stands, you could be any religion or none, and still maintain a transhumanist viewpoint. Once a religious label is in play, people will probably discard it in favor of their religion. I don't think we can afford that. Meanwhile - metaphysics, Zen and Buddhism are certainly welcome, right? This open-ness relies on not having a religious predisposition as a whole? ~]3 From bbenzai at yahoo.com Sun Jun 20 14:54:23 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 07:54:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 25 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <890194.36105.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Natasha Vita-More" declaimed: > We need more metaphysics Gaaahh, no! We don't need more metaphysics, we need less. Ideally none at all. We need more physics, certainly. But what is 'meta' to physics? (trick question). Physics: good. Philosophy: good. Metaphysics: double-plus baad. Ben Zaiboc From bret at bonfireproductions.com Sun Jun 20 15:15:14 2010 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (bret at bonfireproductions.com) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:15:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning forcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: References: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <20100619100455.skt8yg57i80gcsw8@webmail.creationstorm.com> Message-ID: <20100620101514.upmmoewuck84c8go@webmail.creationstorm.com> Quoting Giulio Prisco : > So, saying uploading is feasible is not agreeing to dualism. On the > contrary, saying uploading is NOT feasible (in principle) IS agreeing > to dualism. Hi Giulio! hahaha - ok yes and no - please bear with me, because I agree with you, because we have skipped one part of my remark, and I am not being clear I don't think: Agreeing to everything you said and the definition - Dualism also holds that the mind and body are separate. If we can copy the brain into another medium, and then that medium can simulate a copy of our consciousness, then they are indeed separate: If we are agreeing that that is the context we refer to as "uploading" - having two copies of the original mind being "run" in two separate mediums (one biological, the original brain, the other synthetic, some sort of "computer) - this has now shown that dualism is true, since the second mind is not running in a biological substrate. So the mind and body would then be separate - knowable, but separate. Would they not? At the very best epiphenomenalism, mental being a cause of the physical - but that is still distinct. Anyway. These are the things I consider when we talk about uploading. Some people get concerned about the technology, I think that is an eventuality - but this is getting to be a very, very long bumper sticker! Cheers, ~]3 From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 20 15:30:24 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:30:24 -0500 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 25 In-Reply-To: <890194.36105.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <890194.36105.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C1E3410.5080100@satx.rr.com> On 6/20/2010 9:54 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > what is 'meta' to physics? Ontology and epistemology. > (trick question). Well, no, not really. Damien Broderick From max at maxmore.com Sun Jun 20 15:34:21 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:34:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 25 Message-ID: <201006201534.o5KFYTlm026058@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Ben: Metaphysics is one of the major branches of philosophy, so I'm puzzled when you say philosophy is good, but metaphysics "double--plus baad". Do you mean all of philosophy minus metaphysics is good? Or do you mean "metaphysics" in some non-standard way? (For instance: In the way New Agers talk of "metaphysical"?) Max >Physics: good. >Philosophy: good. >Metaphysics: double-plus baad. > >Ben Zaiboc From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jun 20 15:20:07 2010 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 15:20:07 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <921675.54246.qm@web27004.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Damien wrote: "In any event, the question I was raising was: what are the major texts of transhumanism?" Well, Max and Natasha have mentioned links to core texts of transhumanism as a formal philosophy. For transhumanism as a movement, philosophy is probably the last place to look. If you ask many people on this list or at transhumanist conventions/meetings what inspired them to look into topics that led them to transhumanism, the number one source will probably be science fiction, closely followed by works of popular futurology that introduced a technology transhumanists hold dear and treated it seriously. Films and games also add media exposure to ideas outside of everyday society, and inspire people to look into what's behind the superficial idea. Therefore, our routes into transhumanism are many and varied. As such, there are no "core texts", and "major texts" are only those read by a decent proportion of transhumanists in a given social circle. In order to determine the major texts, you're best off either running a survey asking which books people have read, or collecting people's stories as to how they discovered transhumanism. Tom From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Sun Jun 20 15:38:47 2010 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 15:38:47 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] FM-2030 (was Re: transhumanist as a philosophy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <926126.22668.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Natasha wrote in response to Damien: 'FM was not a philosopher and did not write about "transhumanism." He was not interested in a "movement".' Please excuse any facetiousness in my reply, but the title of FM-2030s book "Upwingers: a Futurist's Manifesto" may indicate otherwise - why entitle your book a "manifesto" unless it is a call-to-arms for a movement? Manifestos usually come in three forms - 1) a political party setting out its policy ideas (the everyday sense) 2) a philosophical text outlining a political philosophy, aiming to inspire a political movement (as with Karl Marx's "A Communist Manifesto") 3) an artistic statement defining the principles of a movement (such as the Italian Futurist's manifesto, or the Dogme school of film-making, or even the Turku manifesto of live role-playing) People tend not to use the word "manifesto" in a book title unless they are interested in a movement. Natasha, would you say FM-2030 was using the word "manifesto" more in the philosophical or artistic sense of the word? Tom From giulio at gmail.com Sun Jun 20 16:41:59 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:41:59 +0200 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning forcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <20100620101514.upmmoewuck84c8go@webmail.creationstorm.com> References: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <20100619100455.skt8yg57i80gcsw8@webmail.creationstorm.com> <20100620101514.upmmoewuck84c8go@webmail.creationstorm.com> Message-ID: The mind and body are certainly not separate, like this text is not separate from the computer on which I am writing it. But in a few seconds I will send this message, and this text will be transferred to your computer via the cloud. So, this text is not separated from this computer, but it is separaBLE from it: it can live on another computer and still be the same text. Maybe it will be displayed with another font, size, etc. but it will be still the same text in all senses that matter. I think the relation between mind and body is similar. I will upload my text now ;-) On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 5:15 PM, wrote: > Quoting Giulio Prisco : > >> So, saying uploading is feasible is not agreeing to dualism. On the >> contrary, saying uploading is NOT feasible (in principle) IS agreeing >> to dualism. > > Hi Giulio! hahaha - ok yes and no - please bear with me, because I agree > with you, because we have skipped one part of my remark, and I am not being > clear I don't think: > > Agreeing to everything you said and the definition - Dualism also holds that > the mind and body are separate. If we can copy the brain into another > medium, and then that medium can simulate a copy of our consciousness, then > they are indeed separate: > > If we are agreeing that that is the context we refer to as "uploading" - > having two copies of the original mind being "run" in two separate mediums > (one biological, the original brain, the other synthetic, some sort of > "computer) - this has now shown that dualism is true, since the second mind > is not running in a biological substrate. So the mind and body would then be > separate - knowable, but separate. Would they not? At the very best > epiphenomenalism, mental being a cause of the physical - but that is still > distinct. > > Anyway. These are the things I consider when we talk about uploading. Some > people get concerned about the technology, I think that is an eventuality - > but this is getting to be a very, very long bumper sticker! > > > Cheers, > ~]3 > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Jun 20 17:52:18 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 19:52:18 +0200 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 20 In-Reply-To: <94825.71367.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <94825.71367.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 17 June 2010 17:47, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > All Islamic states are precisely the latter. ?Muslims are explicitly the slaves of Allah, and sharia strictly enforces this. Yes, I think that this is after a fashion a legacy of all monotheistic prospectives (and their secular versions, such as some views of "human rights"), according to which a given people would and should not have any real say on its constitutional and legal system, since the Right and Wrong are unique, universal and eternal enough that they have at most to be identified, so that popular sovereignty and self-determination are somewhat blasphemous concepts. But in the specific Islamic context, I believe that the Ummah, community of the faithful is by many recognised some kind of political and historical role or other... -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Jun 20 21:52:55 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 23:52:55 +0200 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> <20100616212336.8kkfstdzscoo0c4w@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C197FC1.3020109@satx.rr.com> <96FDD5F6618F4FF598E4262EE6657514@DFC68LF1> Message-ID: On 18 June 2010 02:10, John Grigg wrote: > Stefano Vaj wrote: >>See the Universal Transhumanist Bibliography at http://www.transumanisti.it/8.asp. > > Is there an English translation? ?Or at least a good translation > website that you would recommend? It is a *universal* bibliography. The interface of the site is in Italian, but most of the books listed (which are limited to those on paper, and in-print) are in English or other languages... -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Jun 20 21:57:59 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 23:57:59 +0200 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 17 June 2010 15:48, Giulio Prisco wrote: > We do have major texts. But they propose different interpretations of > transhumanism, fundamentally compatible (I think) but with important > differences in interpretation and focus. Speaking of books of transhumanists or on transhumanism or strictly related topics, we have this (a little out of date) list (the yellow square denote neoluddite or otherwise violently hostile books): [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 1 - *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] ***** 2 - *Ed.orig.*: Storia e destino, Aldo Schiavone (2007) Einaudi [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 3 - *Ed.orig.*: Etica della scienza pura, Riccardo Campa (2007) Sestante Edizioni [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 4 - *Ed.orig.*: Biopolitica. Il nuovo paradigma, Stefano Vaj (2005) SEB [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 5 - *Ed.orig.*: Post-Human. Verso nuovi modelli di esistenza, Roberto Marchesini (2002) Bollati Boringhieri [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 6 - *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: ostile] ***** 7 - *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] ***** 8 - *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] ***** 9 - *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] ***** 10 - *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: positivo o neutro] ***** 11 - *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: ostile] ***** 12 - *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] ***** 13 - *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] ***** 14 - *Ed.orig.*: La r?volution biolithique. Humains artificiels et machines anim?es, Herv? Kempf (1998) Albin Michel [fran?ais] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 15 - *Ed.orig.*: Nanotechnology: Science, Innovation, and Opportunity, Lynn E. Foster (2005) Prentice Hall PTR [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 16 - *Ed.orig.*: Create/Recreate: The 3rd Millennial Culture, Natasha Vita-More (2002) TAC [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 17 - *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] ***** 18 - *Ed.orig.*: The Singularity Is Near. When Human Transcend Biology, Ray Kurzweil (2005) Viking [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 19 - *Ed.orig.*: Technophobia!: Science Fiction Visions of Posthuman Technology, Daniel Dinello (2006) University of Texas Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ***** 20 - *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] ***** 21 - *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: ostile] ***** 22 - *Ed.orig.*: Enough : Staying Human in an Engineered Age, Bill McKibben (2004) Owl Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 23 - *Ed.orig.*: Citizen Cyborg, James J. Hughes (2004) Westview Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 24 - *Ed.orig.*: The Scientific Conquest of Death, AA.VV. The Immortalist Institute by Libros en Red [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 25 - *Ed.orig.*: More than Human. Embracing the Promise of Biological Enhancement, Ramez Naam (2005) Broadway [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 26 - *Ed.orig.*: Nanofuture: What's Next For Nanotechnology, Josh Storrs Hall (2005) Prometheus Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 27 - *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] ***** 28 - *Ed.orig.*: Viroid Life: Perspectives on Nietzsche and the Transhuman Condition, Ansell Pearson (1997) Routledge [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 29 - *Ed.orig.*: Posthumanism (Readers in Cultural Criticism), Neil Badmington (Editor) (2000) Palgrave Macmillan2000 [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 30 - *Ed.orig.*: Les ann?es Faust, ou La science face au vieillissement, Yves Christen (1991) Sand [fran?ais] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 31 - *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: positivo o neutro] **** 32 - *Ed.orig.*: Teoria e invenzione futurista, Filippo Tommaso Marinetti Mondadori [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 33 - *Ed.orig.*: La filosofia del postumano, Roberto Terrosi (1997) Costa & Nolan [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] **** 34 - *Ed.orig.*: Fecondazione extra-corporea. Pro o contro l'uomo?, Giuseppe Garrone (a cura di), (2001) Gribaudi [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 35 - *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: ostile] **** 36 - *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] **** 37 - *Ed.orig.*: Schild's Ladder, Greg Egan (2003) Eos [english] *Ed.ita.*: La scala di Schild (2004) Mondadori - narrativa, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 38 - *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] **** 39 - *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] **** 40 - *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] **** 41 - *Ed.orig.*: Supermen: Tales of the Posthuman Future, Gardner Dozois (2002) St. Martin's Griffin [english] - narrativa, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 42 - *Ed.orig.*: The Age of the Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence, Ray Kurzweil (2000) Penguin [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] **** 43 - *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] **** 44 - *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] **** 45 - *Ed.orig.*: Les utopies posthumaines. Contre-culture, cyberculture, culture du caos, R?mi Sussan (2005) Omniscience [fran?ais] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 46 - *Ed.orig.*: Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology, Eric Drexler (1987) Anchor [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 47 - *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] **** 48 - *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] **** 49 - *Ed.orig.*: The Wellborn Science. Eugenics in Germany, France, Brazil and Russia, Mark B. Adams Oxford University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 50 - *Ed.orig.*: Mind Children: The Future of Robot and Human Intelligence, Hans Moravec (1990) Harvard University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 51 - *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] **** 52 - *Ed.orig.*: Bioevolution. How Biotechnology Is Changing the World, Michael Fumento (2003) Encounter Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 53 - *Ed.orig.*: Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind, Moravec (2006) Oxford University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] *** 54 - *Ed.orig.*: L'epoca del postumano. Lezione magistrale per il compleanno di Pietro Ingrao, Pietro Barcellona (2007) Citt? Aperta [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] *** 55 - *Ed.orig.*: Umano, post-umano. Potere, sapere, etica nell'et? globale, Maria Paola Fimiani (2004) Editori Riuniti [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] *** 56 - *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] *** 57 - *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] *** 58 - *Ed.orig.*: La fecondazione proibita, Chiara Valentini (2005) Feltrinelli [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 59 - *Ed.orig.*: Futuro biologico, Walter F. Bodmer e Alan Jones Bollati Boringhier [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 60 - *Ed.orig.*: Il cyborg. Saggio sull?uomo artificiale, Antonio Caronia (2001) Shake [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 61 - *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] *** 62 - *Ed.orig.*: Qu'est ce que le virtuel?, Pierre L?vy (1998) La D?couverte [fran?ais] *Ed.ita.*: Il virtuale (1997) Raffaello Cortina - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 63 - *Ed.orig.*: Prenatal Diagnosis and Selective Abortion, Harry Harris Harvard University Press [english] *Ed.ita.*: Diagnosi prenatale e aborto selettivo Einaudi - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] *** 64 - *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] *** 65 - *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: positivo o neutro] *** 66 - *Ed.orig.*: Fantastic Voyage. Live Long Enough to Live Forever, Ray Kurzweil (2004) Rodale Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 67 - *Ed.orig.*: The Cyborg Handbook, Chris Gray (1995) Routledge [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] *** 68 - *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] *** 69 - *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] *** 70 - *Ed.orig.*: Digital People: From Bionic Humans to Androids, Sidney Perkowitz (2005) Joseph Henry Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] *** 71 - *Ed.orig.*: Nano-Hype: The Truth Behind the Nanotechnology Buzz, David M. Berube (2005) Prometheus Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 72 - *Ed.orig.*: Cyborg Citizen: Politics in the Posthuman Age, Chris Habl Gray (2002) Routledge [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 73 - *Ed.orig.*: Enhancing Evolution: The Ethical Case for Making Better People, John Harris (2007) Princeton University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 74 - *Ed.orig.*: Mechanical Bodies, Computational Minds: Artificial Intelligence from Automata to Cyborgs, Stefano Franchi (2005) The MIT Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 75 - *Ed.orig.*: The Age of Intelligent Machines, Ray Kurzweil (1992) The MIT Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 76 - *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: ostile] *** 77 - *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] *** 78 - *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] *** 79 - *Ed.orig.*: Natural-Born Cyborgs: Minds, Technologies, and the Future of Human Intelligence, Andy Clark (2004) Oxford University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ** 80 - *Ed.orig.*: Digital Soul: Intelligent Machines and Human Values, Thomas M. Georges (2003) Westview Press [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ** 81 - *Ed.orig.*: Fabbricare l'uomo. L'eugenetica tra biologia e ideologia, Christian Fuschetto (2004) Armando Editore [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 82 - *Ed.orig.*: Il simbionte. Prove di umanit? futura, Giuseppe O. Longo (2003) Meltemi [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 83 - *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] ** 84 - *Ed.orig.*: Cyberpunk. Antologia di scritti politici, Raf Valvola Scelsi (2007) Shake Edizioni [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 85 - *Ed.orig.*: Babies by Design: The Ethics of Genetic Choice, Ronald M. Green (2007) Yale University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 86 - *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: ostile] ** 87 - *Ed.orig.*: Science, Seeds and Cyborgs: Biotechnology and the Appropriation of Life, Finn Bowring (2003) Verso [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ** 88 - *Ed.orig.*: Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Happiness, Leon R. Kass (2003) Harper Perennia [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 89 - *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] ** 90 - *Ed.orig.*: Entering Space: Creating a Spacefaring Civilization, Robert Zubrin (2000) Tarcher [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 91 - *Ed.orig.*: Remaking Eden, Lee M. Silver (1998) Harper Perennial [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 92 - *Ed.orig.*: Unbounding the Future: The Nanotechnology Revolution, Eric Drexler and Chris Peterson (1993) Quill [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 93 - *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] ** 94 - *Ed.orig.*: Digital People: From Bionic Humans to Androids, Sidney Perkowitz (2004) Joseph Henry Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ** 95 - *Ed.orig.*: Biotecnolog?a y posthumanismo, Jes?s Ballesteros, Encarnaci?n Fern?ndez (2006) Aranzadi [espa?ol] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 96 - *Ed.orig.*: Filosofo cyberpunk, Rudy Rucker (2000) Di Renzo Editore [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 97 - *Ed.orig.*: Homo technologicus, Giuseppe O. Longo (2005) Meltemi [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] * 98 - *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: ostile] * 99 - *Ed.orig.*: From Human to Posthuman: Christian Theology And Technology in a Postmodern World, Brent Waters (2006) Ashgate Publishing [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 100 - *Ed.orig.*: Tomorrow Now: Envisioning the Next 50 Years, Bruce Sterling (2003) Random House [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 101 - *Ed.orig.*: Visions. How Science Will Revolutionize the 21st Century and Beyond, Michio Kaku (1999) Oxford Paperbacks [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 102 - *Ed.orig.*: Designer Evolution: A Transhumanist Manifesto, Simon Young (2005) Prometheus Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 103 - *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] * 104 - *Ed.orig.*: Robo sapiens: Evolution of a New Species, Peter Menzel (2001) The MIT Press [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 105 - *Ed.orig.*: The Fourth Discontinuity: The Co-Evolution of Humans and Machines, Bruce Mazlish (1995) Yale University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 106 - *Ed.orig.*: Flesh and Machines: How Robots Will Change Us, Rodney Brooks (2002) Pantheon [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] * 107 - *Ed.orig.*: Guiding Icarus: Merging Bioethics with Corporate Interests, Rahul K. Dhanda (2002) Wiley-Liss [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 108 - *Ed.orig.*: The Baby Boomers' Guide to Living Forever, Terry Grossman (2000) Hubristic Press [english] - saggistica, H+ -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 20 22:25:04 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 17:25:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C1E9540.5090006@satx.rr.com> On 6/20/2010 4:57 PM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > Speaking of books of transhumanists or on transhumanism or strictly > related topics, we have this (a little out of date) list (the yellow > square denote neoluddite or otherwise violently hostile books): A remarkable list, but fairly useless in the context of discussing >H *as a formal philosophy*. E.g., McKibben acknowledges transhumanist thinkers, but as you note he's one of the violently hostile commentators. Egan's novels display some versions of *post*humans (as do those of Sterling, Gibson, Stross, Kelly, Di Philippo, Banks, me and other fiction scribblers), but don't really constitute a philosophic tradition. I see only a couple of titles in there that might almost be the equivalent of David Kelley's, Tara Smith's and Chris Sciabara's books on Rand's Objectivism (although the non-English ones on >H might be packed with powerful goodness). Damien Broderick From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Jun 20 22:30:40 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 17:30:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] FM-2030 (was Re: transhumanist as a philosophy) In-Reply-To: <926126.22668.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <926126.22668.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <322AB10464D04ED68FCD1E007C319A07@DFC68LF1> Tom Nowell wrote: "Please excuse any facetiousness in my reply, but the title of FM-2030s book "Upwingers: a Futurist's Manifesto" may indicate otherwise - why entitle your book a "manifesto" unless it is a call-to-arms for a movement? Manifestos usually come in three forms - 1) a political party setting out its policy ideas (the everyday sense) 2) a philosophical text outlining a political philosophy, aiming to inspire a political movement (as with Karl Marx's "A Communist Manifesto") 3) an artistic statement defining the principles of a movement (such as the Italian Futurist's manifesto, or the Dogme school of film-making, or even the Turku manifesto of live role-playing)" FM created a project called "Upwingers". Upwingers is not transhumanism. It was a futursit perspective, like his colleague Toffler, but in a different style. Regarding a movement: FM recognized the difficulties which arise when trying to build an organization and a movement. He called transhuman an evolution and not a movement. He did not readily use the term transhumanism. "People tend not to use the word "manifesto" in a book title unless they are interested in a movement." Yes, this is true. "Natasha, would you say FM-2030 was using the word "manifesto" more in the philosophical or artistic sense of the word?" I think he used manifesto as a call to humanity. I think he discouraged the use of manifesto years later, at least he did to me when I authored the "Transhuman Statement" in 1982-3 and it was become of him that I did not use "manifesto" but used "statement". Manifesto is a better term. Natasha _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From sabrina.ballard at allromanceebooks.com Mon Jun 21 00:02:25 2010 From: sabrina.ballard at allromanceebooks.com (Sabrina Ballard) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 20:02:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Otherkin and Plural Systems- How do they fit in your views? Message-ID: I recently ran across a phenominon that is self-reported as "otherkin" and also "plural systems". Otherkin here means something along the line as one subjectively feels as if they are another species or race, much in the same way that someone who is transgendered feels they were born into a body of the wrong sex. I was interested on your take of this phenomenon, if you felt it had a bearing on the way that our world view has changes, and perhaps we are moving further from 'nature'? Or perhaps we are moving farther from ledgends which help people cope? The second is called "plural systems". These are essentially people who have more than one conciousness in the same body. How does this effect our view of what concsiousness is and is not? Does it even have an effect, in the sense that the medical community, especially in the USA and UK feel it is a disease? There feeling that it is a disease runs counter to what many of these plural systems feel. That is, that they are healthy and funtional members of society. I find much of these plural systems to be of interest when examining what consciousness and personhood are. Some express that multiple people can be "front" or controlling what the body does, much like one would multitask. Others report being a "gateway system", that when they are not "front" they inhabit a world much like our Earth, which has its laws of physics, many of them matching our own. That is to say, there is no "magic", things do not simply "happen". The no magic obviously excluding the body switching. What are your views, and how does researh into this area effect transhumanism? (If at all) ~Sabrina Ballard From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Jun 21 00:34:49 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 17:34:49 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Otherkin and Plural Systems- How do they fit in your views? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello Sabrina, I recall Anders Sandberg (a leading transhumanist intellectual) mentioning the Otherkin and considering their imaginings being akin to to the transhumanist desire to physically automorph. I think advanced technologies will allow people to actually embrace the legends which help people cope at a level never before possible. : ) The "plural systems" you mention were highlighted in the classic transhumanistic SF novel, "Aristoi." I think in the western world such things are currently viewed within a disease modality, but as nano/info/biotech merge and greatly progress, I see "multiple minds/personalities" being seen as a great advantage. Uploads will be able to inhabit various types of physical bodies to conduct their business within the "real" world. And when they are not within one of these avatars, they will live within a cyberspace that will certainly have it's own unique physical laws and capacities, in many ways outstripping the mundane universe we now inhabit. John On 6/20/10, Sabrina Ballard wrote: > I recently ran across a phenominon that is self-reported as > "otherkin" and also "plural systems". Otherkin here means something > along the line as one subjectively feels as if they are another > species or race, much in the same way that someone who is > transgendered feels they were born into a body of the wrong sex. I was > interested on your take of this phenomenon, if you felt it had a > bearing on the way that our world view has changes, and perhaps we are > moving further from 'nature'? Or perhaps we are moving farther from > ledgends which help people cope? > > The second is called "plural systems". These are essentially people > who have more than one conciousness in the same body. How does this > effect our view of what concsiousness is and is not? Does it even have > an effect, in the sense that the medical community, especially in the > USA and UK feel it is a disease? There feeling that it is a disease > runs counter to what many of these plural systems feel. That is, that > they are healthy and funtional members of society. > > I find much of these plural systems to be of interest when examining > what consciousness and personhood are. Some express that multiple > people can be "front" or controlling what the body does, much like one > would multitask. Others report being a "gateway system", that when > they are not "front" they inhabit a world much like our Earth, which > has its laws of physics, many of them matching our own. That is to > say, there is no "magic", things do not simply "happen". The no magic > obviously excluding the body switching. > > What are your views, and how does researh into this area effect > transhumanism? (If at all) > > ~Sabrina Ballard > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From arthur.breitman at gmail.com Mon Jun 21 00:33:25 2010 From: arthur.breitman at gmail.com (Arthur Breitman) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 20:33:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Concerning mind uploading In-Reply-To: <395650.4971.qm@web114410.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <395650.4971.qm@web114410.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 5:17 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Hi, J?r?me. > > I've heard quite a few people express the same doubts about uploading. I > think there's a fundamental misunderstanding about what life as an upload > would presumably be like. Nobody is proposing that an upload would be a > 'disembodied mind', with no inputs or outputs, a purely mental existence. > > That being said, it's interesting to ponder what a disembodied brain would feel. I can't imagine there ever being the technology to do something as complex as brain simulation without the technology to do the comparatively trivial task of simulating an external world. This is just an idle thought exercise, and shouldn't be taken as more than mere rambl^W speculation on my part. I can think of at least a few data points which hint at what a disembodied mind would feel. - Every night, our body is paralyzed and under a certain threshold, we do not feel our body. Yet, in our dreams, we're generally not disembodied, we have limbs, we move around. - Amputees widely report feeling phantoms limbs. - Isolation tanks produce visual and aural hallucinations. The brain seems to cope with the lack of stimuli by making up some. - Dissociative drugs like the anesthetic ketamine produce similar effects. Based on that, I tend to believe a brain in a box without any input or output would merely hallucinate its own environment. It wouldn't be hell, probably just a crazy dissociative dream. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Jun 21 01:00:54 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 20:00:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C1EB9C6.7040301@satx.rr.com> More Egan: Virtual Worlds and Imagined Futures - Greg Egan An interview with David Conyers, from Albedo One Magazine "Do transhuman characters with god-like powers alienate readers? Are they too far removed from human emotions and frailties that we experience in modern society? The frailty of our bodies is an enormously important part of our current reality ? and I very much doubt that anyone will ever be literally immortal ? but I don't think there's anything all that strange or alienating about the prospect of having, say, a far more robust body, or back-up copies of your mind. These are just ways of enabling us to do the kind of constructive things we're doing right now, with fewer unwelcome interruptions. If you asked someone who'd moved from a country with endemic violence, women dying in childbirth, high infant mortality, and no effective treatment for dozens of infectious diseases to a place where all of those problems had been solved whether they felt alienated by the loss of their precious human frailty, they'd just laugh." http://www.gregegan.net/INTERVIEWS/Interviews.html From max at maxmore.com Mon Jun 21 01:28:21 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 20:28:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction Message-ID: <201006210128.o5L1SUsv017978@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Damien pointed to some interviews with Greg Egan here: http://www.gregegan.net/INTERVIEWS/Interviews.html Some of his anti-(what he thinks is) transhumanism are curious and disappointing: Egan: I have some quite strong philosophical disagreements with large sections of the transhumanist movement I had an email from one transhumanist telling me that it was criminal that every intelligent person in the world wasn't working on uploading, because every significant human problem would be solved once we were immortal software. The blood of all the people who died because uploading didn't come sooner would be on the hands of those who didn't hasten its arrival. [So, Egan apparently identifies transhumanism with the views of one fanatical person -- or the few who share that view.] Another transhumanist meme that utterly amazes me is the idea that we ought to be handing the planet over to a benign, super-intelligent AI as quickly as possible. [Another view that is certainly held by *some* transhumanists, but obviously far from all, and probably a minority.] Many of your stories involve transhuman characters built with incredible, almost magic-like technology. Do you believe this is our future? I hate the word "transhuman"; it suggests beings who have become something alien and incomprehensible to us. Max ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher The Proactionary Project Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Mon Jun 21 01:16:20 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 02:16:20 +0100 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: <4C1EB9C6.7040301@satx.rr.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> <4C1EB9C6.7040301@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: We eulogise frailty for the same reasons we eulogise mortality; it acts as a coping mechanism that ameliorates our deepest fears. The reality that the vessel in which we experience the world is little more than water and congealed goo, is not one many people want to dwell on. If transhuman characters do alienate readers, I would suggest it is only because they further assert this frailty, not because they demonstrate what man could be if he transcended these frailties. On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > More Egan: > > Virtual Worlds and Imagined Futures - Greg Egan > An interview with David Conyers, from Albedo One Magazine > > "Do transhuman characters with god-like powers alienate readers? Are they > too far removed from human emotions and frailties that we experience in > modern society? > > The frailty of our bodies is an enormously important part of our current > reality ? and I very much doubt that anyone will ever be literally immortal > ? but I don't think there's anything all that strange or alienating about > the prospect of having, say, a far more robust body, or back-up copies of > your mind. These are just ways of enabling us to do the kind of constructive > things we're doing right now, with fewer unwelcome interruptions. If you > asked someone who'd moved from a country with endemic violence, women dying > in childbirth, high infant mortality, and no effective treatment for dozens > of infectious diseases to a place where all of those problems had been > solved whether they felt alienated by the loss of their precious human > frailty, they'd just laugh." > > http://www.gregegan.net/INTERVIEWS/Interviews.html > _______________________________________________ > 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 algaenymph at gmail.com Mon Jun 21 01:31:03 2010 From: algaenymph at gmail.com (AlgaeNymph) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:31:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: <201006210128.o5L1SUsv017978@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006210128.o5L1SUsv017978@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <4C1EC0D7.8010208@gmail.com> Max More wrote: > I hate the word "transhuman"; it suggests beings who have become > something alien and incomprehensible to us. I know what you mean, I avoid the T-word whenever possible when advocating enhancement. From max at maxmore.com Mon Jun 21 01:37:47 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 20:37:47 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction Message-ID: <201006210137.o5L1bwki002588@andromeda.ziaspace.com> AlgaeNymph: The words that were mine were in the square brackets. All the others -- including the one you quoted as mine -- were by Egan or the interviewer. Sorry, I could have made that more obvious. I don't have the word "transhuman" and disgree with Egan. I find it peculiar that he thinks the word is so repellent, rather than some of the disturbing scenarios he writes. Max >Max More wrote: > > I hate the word "transhuman"; it suggests beings who have become > > something alien and incomprehensible to us. >I know what you mean, I avoid the T-word whenever possible when >advocating enhancement. From seculartranshumanist at gmail.com Mon Jun 21 02:28:36 2010 From: seculartranshumanist at gmail.com (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 22:28:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: <201006210137.o5L1bwki002588@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006210137.o5L1bwki002588@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: Max More quoted Greg Egan as saying: > > Many of your stories involve transhuman characters built with incredible, almost magic-like technology. Do you believe this is our future? > > I hate the word "transhuman"; it suggests beings who have become something alien and incomprehensible to us. Personally, I see that as entirely the *point* of being a Transhumanist. I want to overcome the limits of my human form. I want to go beyond humanity both mentally and physically. I want to become post-human. I think that if and when true posthumans do arrive they *will* be alien and incomprehensible, at least on some level, to baseline humans. Just as the motives and actions of adults are largely incomprehensible to 6-year-olds today. Joseph From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Jun 21 03:53:55 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 22:53:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Boundary logic Message-ID: <4C1EE253.2090004@satx.rr.com> an interesting approach: The American logician and philosopher Charles S. Peirce first conceived of and published results in boundary logic in 1898. Peirce called his work Existential Graphs, and considered it to be among his greatest accomplishments. Existential graphs were sufficiently foreign an idea that both historians and biographers have omitted substantive portions of this work, considering them to be senile ravings. [etc etc etc] ....................................... William Bricken is currently a Research Professor of Education at the University of Washington and a Consultant for Interval Research Corporation, where he is working on unifying hardware and software approaches to computation. Dr. Bricken's prior positions include Principal Scientist of UW's Human Interface Technology Laboratory, where he designed and implemented the Virtual Environment Operating System and interactive tools of the VR environment; Director of Autodesk Research Lab, which developed the Cyberspace CAD prototype of virtual reality; and Principal Research Scientist at Advanced Decision Systems, where he pioneered high-performance inference engines, visual programming systems, and instructable interfaces. Dr. Bricken holds a multidisciplinary Ph.D. in Research Methodology, Educational Psychology and Computer Science from Stanford, and degrees in Statistics (MS Stanford), Education (DipEd, Monash University, Australia), and Social Psychology (BA, UCLA). Before entering industry, Dr. Bricken was a Assistant Professor of Education at University of Hawaii and at Monash University, specializing in General Methods of Teaching. Dr. Bricken is an internationally recognized expert in architectures for virtual environments and is the inventor of Boundary Mathematics, a formalism which uses void-based and spatial techniques to simply computation. From spike66 at att.net Mon Jun 21 04:08:49 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 21:08:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] happy solstice extropes In-Reply-To: <4C1EE253.2090004@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <900285.72784.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Since I am unlikely to be awake at 0430 Taxifornia time, I do wish you all a most pleasant summer solstice.? We make such a big deal over the winter solstice, it surprises me that we do not have more of?a hootnanny at the summer solstice every year.? Because of a heavy snow pack on the US west coast this year,?at the peak of the summer we are still waiting for our favorite camping spots to melt and clear of snow.? Some of the best camping areas still have a long time before they are clear. ? spike ? ? ? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Jun 21 06:29:25 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 23:29:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: <201006210128.o5L1SUsv017978@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006210128.o5L1SUsv017978@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <4C1F06C5.3080806@mac.com> Max More wrote: > Damien pointed to some interviews with Greg Egan here: > http://www.gregegan.net/INTERVIEWS/Interviews.html > > Some of his anti-(what he thinks is) transhumanism are curious and > disappointing: > > Egan: I have some quite strong philosophical disagreements with large > sections of the transhumanist movement > I had an email from one transhumanist telling me that it was criminal > that every intelligent person in the world wasn't working on > uploading, because every significant human problem would be solved > once we were immortal software. The blood of all the people who died > because uploading didn't come sooner would be on the hands of those > who didn't hasten its arrival. Yes, I have heard this argument. Or one of several variants at different times. One variation is that the lives of all those trillion upon trillions of future beings are in our hands and depend on our actions. And that somehow the rights of these yet to be possibly wondrous beings are more important or trump our own concerns by virtue of their sheer hypothetical numbers. Besides, every significant problem of human beings will not be overcome by uploading at all. The most significant problems, the one's of internal growth and development will certainly remain. Once transplanted to a different substrate is it not that clear most people will even have as much incentive to continue to grow and develop as they do now. No, you can't simply zap them into their "all growed up" form. You have no way to know what that is. You could replace them with a much more together facsimile by your own understanding. But arguably they are no more and never got the opportunity to find their way and to keep growing. > > [So, Egan apparently identifies transhumanism with the views of one > fanatical person -- or the few who share that view.] > > Another transhumanist meme that utterly amazes me is the idea that we > ought to be handing the planet over to a benign, super-intelligent AI > as quickly as possible. > > [Another view that is certainly held by *some* transhumanists, but > obviously far from all, and probably a minority.] > > Well, if you show me one such super Friendly AI then I might agree it should make most decisions. But that is not where we are and it is very very unlikely such can be created. The best proposals I have seen for how such could be made and should operate are quite unlikely to work and are exceedingly dangerous. > Many of your stories involve transhuman characters built with > incredible, almost magic-like technology. Do you believe this is our > future? > > I hate the word "transhuman"; it suggests beings who have become > something alien and incomprehensible to us. Well, it may be that human 2.0 is pretty incomprehensible to human 1.0. Oh, there will be plenty of similarities but also some quite significant differences. If the intelligence difference is great enough, for example, many of the ideas and thoughts of human 2.0 will not be comprehensible to 1.0 minds. Heck, I have met a handful of super-geniuses that especially in their most "on" moments are nearly impossible for me to comprehend. How many of us have been in states of hyper-functioning where we amazed utterly ever ourselves and felt like we were asleep at all other normal times even if our normal state is not that comprehensible to many outside our circles? And that is still well within the human 1.0 spectrum. So I don't see that that implication is all that off the mark. Emotional structures and such may be much the same? I am not so sure. I hope part of becoming human 2.0 is to understand much more how we tick and have greater mastery over our internal states all the way down to the brain chemistry level. - samantha From bbenzai at yahoo.com Mon Jun 21 08:44:51 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 01:44:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> bret at bonfireproductions.com wrote: > Agreeing to everything you said and the definition - > Dualism also? > holds that the mind and body are separate. If we can copy > the brain? > into another medium, and then that medium can simulate a > copy of our? > consciousness, then they are indeed separate: Not at all. you are not copying 'the mind, as a separate thing' in uploading, you are copying the relevant physical structures of the brain, or the mechanisms that they embody. To get rid of the Dualism label, just think there is no mind. Avoid mentioning it altogether. There is a machine (the brain) with a particular set of behaviours (don't say it), implemented by a particular set of mechanisms, and you recreate those same mechanisms in a different machine, which then exhibits the same set of behaviours. If you do the copying well enough, the new machine will exhibit exactly the same behaviours. That's it. Obviously I'm skimming over a mountain range of technical details, most of which we don't yet have the foggiest notion of (well, maybe a foggy notion of some of them), but in principle, that's all uploading is. It's no different to making a detailed plan as you disassemble a car, say, and recreate it from different parts according to the plan. If you do this carefully enough, you'll end up with an identical car. We wouldn't talk about the 'essence' of the car being transferred. One of the problems we face is deciding just how much detail is needed in practice, but this doesn't change the basic principle. If you don't like thinking of your 'self' as a (very complex) set of mechanistic behaviours, then you are a dualist. More and more, it seems to me as if almost everyone - transhumanists included - is a dualist, even if they say they aren't. On this list, I can only count about 8 or 10 people who, judging by their posts, seem to be truly free of dualisting thinking. I suspect that many people, after considering the absurdities of religion and so on, decide that they are materialists, then after realising what this implies for their own 'selves', change their minds. The implications can be quite disturbing for some people (and quite exciting for others), but that has no bearing on whether they are true. Ben Zaiboc From bbenzai at yahoo.com Mon Jun 21 09:13:42 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 02:13:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] metaphysics, and de meanings of words In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <311620.86297.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Apologies for not changing the subject line (again) in my original reply. Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/20/2010 9:54 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > > > what is 'meta' to physics? > > Ontology and epistemology. > > > (trick question). > > Well, no, not really. They are branches of philosophy, which wouldn't exist if there were no people. The physical universe would. The only thing which can be beyond the physics we know of, is more physics that we don't, surely? Max More asked: > > Ben: Metaphysics is one of the major branches of > philosophy, so I'm > puzzled when you say philosophy is good, but metaphysics > "double--plus baad". Do you mean all of philosophy minus > metaphysics > is good? Or do you mean "metaphysics" in some non-standard > way? (For > instance: In the way New Agers talk of "metaphysical"?) Yes, exactly. This 'new-ager' use is what most people mean by it. Looking it up doesn't really help: "Metaphysics is a branch of philosophy that is not easily defined..." "It is not easy to say what metaphysics is..." and in common practice it's used to refer to mystical things. It's synonymous with the supernatural. I know what you're saying about it being a part of philosophy, but I included philosophy as a good thing. My point is, it's a word best avoided because of it's baggage. Heh, another one. I seem to be collecting them. Simulation, Dualism, now Metaphysics. I'm thinking we're constantly banging up against the limits of our own language. Or at least constantly getting tangled up because of the multiple possible meanings (and de-meanings) of many words. I suppose it's too much to expect even the people on this list to start rigorously defining the words we use, to minimise this kind of thing, but it might be worth considering that many apparent disagreements are in fact nothing of the kind. How can we minimise this kind of miscommunication? Any ideas? Ben Zaiboc From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Jun 21 09:58:17 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 11:58:17 +0200 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C1E9540.5090006@satx.rr.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> <4C1E9540.5090006@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 21 June 2010 00:25, Damien Broderick wrote: > A remarkable list, but fairly useless in the context of discussing >H *as a > formal philosophy*. > > E.g., McKibben acknowledges transhumanist thinkers, but as you note he's one > of the violently hostile commentators. Egan's novels display some versions > of *post*humans (as do those of Sterling, Gibson, Stross, Kelly, Di > Philippo, Banks, me and other fiction scribblers), but don't really > constitute a philosophic tradition. I see only a couple of titles in there > that might almost be the equivalent of David Kelley's, Tara Smith's and > Chris Sciabara's books on Rand's Objectivism (although the non-English ones > on >H might be packed with powerful goodness). In fact, Objectivism may or may not be a good analogy, or not. Not really, because it had an undisputed, single, founder and master (mistress?), fixing orthodoxy. Yes to a point because it has to be inferred from a handful of novels, as in the case of transhumanism we have to take it out of a number of works either tangential to the subject, or owed to precursors, or again dealing with some technoscientific revolution or other. But what you mention for objectivisms are just kind of cribs and dummies guides, if I am not mistaken. Those should be rather easy to produce, but one probably finds more interesting stuff in the book of Stock, Naam, Hughes, Kurzweil, Young, Ettinger, Garreau, Moravec, or for that matter Rifkin, Fukuyama or Kass. More on the philosophical side one also finds Pearson's Viroid Life: Perspectives on Nietzsche and the Transhuman Condition, or Julie Clark's The Paradox of the Posthuman, and much more in Italian or French. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Jun 21 14:19:25 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 07:19:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Concerning mind uploading (Arthur Breitman) Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:00 AM, Arthur Breitman wrote: > On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 5:17 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > >> Hi, J?r?me. >> >> I've heard quite a few people express the same doubts about uploading. ?I >> think there's a fundamental misunderstanding about what life as an upload >> would presumably be like. ?Nobody is proposing that an upload would be a >> 'disembodied mind', with no inputs or outputs, a purely mental existence. >> > That being said, it's interesting to ponder what a disembodied brain would > feel. I can't imagine there ever being the technology to do something as > complex as brain simulation without the technology to do the comparatively > trivial task of simulating an external world. This is just an idle thought > exercise, and shouldn't be taken as more than mere rambl^W speculation on my > part. I have been thinking about this since Drexler came up with nanotechnology in the late 1970s. In this section of "the clinic seed" a young girl, Zaba, has been shot through the spine and is being repaired by an AI medical director at a remote clinic in Africa. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This time the nanomachines didn't infiltrate her brain just to shut it down, though they did that and reversed the mild damage from shock and low blood flow. The nanomachines mapped out all her neural circuits and cell connections. Shortly before her parents entered the clinic the next day they tentatively restored consciousness, partly in her brain--which was far below the temperature needed to run on its own--and partly in the haze of nanomachines that were also simulating input in place of her eyes and ears. "What happened to me? Where am I? Where is my body?" Zaba asked as she became conscious. She was calm because the nanomachines were acting as tranquilizers. Suskulan was listening to an interface to her mostly simulated motor cortex. To give Zaba orientation Suskulan imposed on her visual cortex a wire frame image of the human form he usually presented then explained: "You were shot, you are in the clinic Suskulan at the tata, and your body is under the clinic being repaired. "The clinic recently gained new powers to speak to spirits while their bodies are being healed. "The healing will take some time, even I do not know exactly how many days," he added, "You were badly injured." "My mother and father," Zaba started and then stopped. "They brought you to me yesterday and are very concerned. Your mother is holding the hand of an image of your body in the clinic. Suskulan switched her vision to one in the clinic looking at the repair table and Zaba?s parents. ?I can extend my power and let you use it to talk to them as if you were speaking through a telephone." snip Zaba had never used a telephone, the tata being well out of range of a cell tower but she knew what they were like. Suskulan's wire frame image handed Zaba a cell phone image. She reached out with her wire frame body and took it from him. snip Her biological memory was being mechanically updated in her very cold brain and her consciousness was running in a swarm of fast nano computers. Suskulan could have let her experience run even faster but he didn't want Zaba to get too far out of synch with her family and the rest of the tata. Mechanically constructed memory is a very efficient way to learn. snip A few hours before her parents were to come on the last day, Zaba warmed up her body under Suskulan's guidance. Her consciousness was continuous as the reactivated brain cells took over from the slowed down swarm of nano computers that had been simulating them. The support and information umbilical connections withdrew and the holes in her skin closed seamlessly as Zaba started breathing for the first time in 9 days. She sat up and coughed a few times. Her physical body was different from what she had experienced for the past subjective 90 days. Better? Worse? She could not decide. Zaba was delighted that there was no sign she had been shot. She walked around the huge underground space, which had become familiar to her in the past 3 months as she shifted her virtual viewpoint among clouds of utility fog. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > I can think of at least a few data points which hint at what a disembodied > mind would feel. > - Every night, our body is paralyzed and under a certain threshold, we do > not feel our body. Yet, in our dreams, we're generally not disembodied, we > have limbs, we move around. > - Amputees widely report feeling phantoms limbs. > - Isolation tanks produce visual and aural hallucinations. The brain seems > to cope with the lack of stimuli by making up some. > - Dissociative drugs like the anesthetic ketamine produce similar effects. > > Based on that, I tend to believe a brain in a box without any input or > output would merely hallucinate its own environment. It wouldn't be hell, > probably just a crazy dissociative dream. Maybe. I suspect a brain without input/output would be like a person in solitary confinement. Probably be considered cruel and unusual punishment. A substantial part of the population goes insane under such circumstances. Keith From jonkc at bellsouth.net Mon Jun 21 14:14:01 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 10:14:01 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Jeopardy and AI In-Reply-To: <201006201534.o5KFYTlm026058@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006201534.o5KFYTlm026058@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <4FEDE1C4-AA04-447C-9A82-2FBF91F560A9@bellsouth.net> There is quite a good article about the AI program "Watson" designed by IBM to compete in the quiz show "Jeopardy!"; they intend to have Watson go against a former Jeopardy human champion and televise the contest sometime this fall. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/20/magazine/20Computer-t.html John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sabrina.ballard at allromanceebooks.com Mon Jun 21 17:30:44 2010 From: sabrina.ballard at allromanceebooks.com (Sabrina Ballard) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 13:30:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Otherkin and Plural Systems Message-ID: >The "plural systems" you mention were highlighted in the classic >transhumanistic SF novel, "Aristoi." I think in the western world >such things are currently viewed within a disease modality, but as >nano/info/biotech merge and greatly progress, I see "multiple >minds/personalities" being seen as a great advantage. My question: Why are they viewed as a disease when many plural systems live a healthy life and feel absolutly no need for treatment? Or is it because all the healthy systems avoid the medical profession and they are left with only those who are significantly ill? And the Western Psychological profession as a whole seems to be very out of touch, while physical medicine seems to be moving forward. They still cling to clearly outdated modes from Freud. Is there some benefit in doing so? Also, could these "other worlds" which plural systems interface with help us figure out how to safely model "Virtual Reality"? Would these gateway systems's brain functions help us determine how to set up various interactions after uploading such as constructed realities, downloadable bodies, and others which I haven't thought of? Sabrina Ballard From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Mon Jun 21 21:15:25 2010 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:15:25 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Damien wrote in response to Stefano's list: "A remarkable list, but fairly useless in the context of discussing >H *as a formal philosophy*." Well, the point that people quoting SF and futurology like "the singularity is near" is that Transhumanism *the movement* is full of people who got inspired by SF and futurology, looked at the issues behind the grand ideas, and then learnt about the philosophy. Transhumanism *the philosophy* is still developing - Bostrom, Sandberg, More, have all published papers outlining ideas, and as Natasha said Extropy had a good variety of papers. Is there a core summation of these currently in print or readily accessible? I don't think so, which is why "The Transhumanist Reader" has a handy gap in the market it can fill. I suppose the best way to check what the core texts are from a philosophical point of view would be to ask those nice people at the Journal of Evolution and Technology to check the references quoted in their journal, and that way find out which philosophers are most quoted by philosophers discussing the ethics of technologies transhumanists hold dear. (If there are other good journals concentrating on transhumanist ideas, you could repeat the same experiment) Tom From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Jun 21 22:01:32 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 17:01:32 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> On 6/21/2010 4:15 PM, Tom Nowell wrote: > Transhumanism*the philosophy* is still developing - Bostrom, Sandberg, More, have all published papers outlining ideas, and as Natasha said Extropy had a good variety of papers. Is there a core summation of these currently in print or readily accessible? I don't think so Right, that's my point. > which is why "The Transhumanist Reader" has a handy gap in the market it can fill. Indeed. It should be a good start. > I suppose the best way to check what the core texts are from a philosophical point of view would be to ask those nice people at the Journal of Evolution and Technology to check the references quoted in their journal My good mate Dr. Dr. Russell Blackford is the current JET editor, and I've copied some of this discussion to him but haven't heard back yet. Damien Broderick From msd001 at gmail.com Mon Jun 21 22:30:58 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 18:30:58 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter In-Reply-To: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:44 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > I suspect that many people, after considering the absurdities of religion and so on, decide that they are materialists, then after realising what this implies for their own 'selves', change their minds. ?The implications can be quite disturbing for some people (and quite exciting for others), but that has no bearing on whether they are true. what is "true" and what models people use to get through the day/their lives aren't necessarily 1:1. I can conceive of being interchangeably human just like any other representative of the species and not much different from an ant in a hill (bee in a hive, whatever) There are moments where these insignificant units have unique value; such as being closest to a new source of food or able to articulate a previously ineffable idea. Otherwise their role would be filled by another unit in the collective with negligible difference to the species as a whole. Who would embrace that? I imagine most people would rather believe they provide unique or special value. Perhaps the machinery you copy during upload specifically contains a highly-evolved self-delusion mechanism? If you leave it out and all the uploads suddenly become completely rational and realistic, have you "successfully" uploaded the original 'person' or have you created something else? bonus: would the now-hyper-rational even want to continue living in their new state of raw truth? What do you think the yes/no percentage might be? From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 22 01:03:38 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 20:03:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> So I passed along the query to philosopher Russell Blackford, of JET, who replies (and allows me to repost): ====================== What core texts? Tranhumanism is a cultural and intellectual movement, but not a philosophical system as far as I can see. There may well be philosophical systems associated with it (Max's, perhaps), but if so they're not generally accepted within the movement. I don't see any body of core texts that everyone quotes, let alone a body of what could be called core *philosophical* texts. Some people quote James's book, of course, and people will often position themselves by referring to Nick Bostrom's history of transhumanism. Simon Young's book gets quoted a lot, but not by transhumanists. Actual transhumanists all seem to hate it.... All I really see is ferment and debate around some key ideas, e.g. of the posthuman. But we don't agree about stuff like the Singularity, and a key idea or two doesn't add up to a system or a philosophy. The big special issues of JET that we published a year or two back are arguably the best intellectual resource that exists, and they should be referred to, but I don't see any common philosophical system there. Likewise for the special issue of The Global Spiral that Natasha edited two years ago - probably a fair bit of commonality on that occasion, since Natasha chose and invited fairly like-minded contributors, but not a system. It's worth looking at to see people who are pretty informed, including Max and Natasha, trying to correct a batch of fairly ill-informed critiques. I expect the transhumanist reader that Max and Natasha are putting together will be the same - lots of ideas, lots of ferment. Btw, I don't think transhumanism is any the worse for this. Cheers, R ----- Original Message ----- From: "Damien Broderick" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 8:01 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy > On 6/21/2010 4:15 PM, Tom Nowell wrote: > >> Transhumanism*the philosophy* is still developing - Bostrom, Sandberg, >> More, have all published papers outlining ideas, and as Natasha said >> Extropy had a good variety of papers. Is there a core summation of these >> currently in print or readily accessible? I don't think so > > Right, that's my point. > >> which is why "The Transhumanist Reader" has a handy gap in the market it >> can fill. > > Indeed. It should be a good start. > >> I suppose the best way to check what the core texts are from a >> philosophical point of view would be to ask those nice people at the >> Journal of Evolution and Technology to check the references quoted in >> their journal > > My good mate Dr. Dr. Russell Blackford is the current JET editor, and I've > copied some of this discussion to him but haven't heard back yet. > > Damien Broderick > From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Jun 22 01:13:13 2010 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 20:13:13 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > There may well be philosophical systems associated with it (Max's, > perhaps), but if so they're not generally accepted within the movement. I think this is a gross misunderstanding of the situation. I was wondering if some others can pipe up. What's the deal? There's far more support for Max More and extropian ideas than Russell might think... uh, right? - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sabrina.ballard at allromanceebooks.com Tue Jun 22 00:53:48 2010 From: sabrina.ballard at allromanceebooks.com (Sabrina Ballard) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 20:53:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter In-Reply-To: References: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > what is "true" and what models people use to get through the day/their > lives aren't necessarily 1:1. I would even venture to say _usually_ aren't 1:1. A simple, flawed model will gain wider acceptance, than a sufficently complicated, but more accurate one simply because it is easier to use. Many people are happy living with rough estimates. If they should or not is a different matter. > hill (bee in a hive, whatever) There are moments where these > insignificant units have unique value; such as being closest to a new Perhaps there needs to be a fundimental shift in the way people think? Perhaps if we viewed each "insignificant unit" as something unique, even though it is fairly standard, then the idea would be more swallowable. That is, embrace the differences that make each person unique. Studying and propigating uniqueness may be more important that we realize. > Who would embrace that? I imagine most people would rather believe > they provide unique or special value. Why can't one believe that they are special and unique, even if they are more or less the same as others? A paradigm shift is ultimately required for a socially and racially survivable singularity. > Perhaps the machinery you copy during upload specifically contains a > highly-evolved self-delusion mechanism? If you leave it out and all > the uploads suddenly become completely rational and realistic, have > you "successfully" uploaded the original 'person' or have you created > something else? I think that you could very easily say that you have created something new because self-delusion in an important ans healthy part of many people's lives. This person would be funtimentially very different from the human we know today as to be 'alien' and 'cold'. I don't feel that people would relate very will to the idea. > bonus: would the now-hyper-rational even want to > continue living in their new state of raw truth? What do you think > the yes/no percentage might be? I think the question is, what would they want? What would be the motive? Without self-delusion, would goal oriented behavior cease? For a human, without the removed self-delusion, I think that a certian type of person, the kind that enjoys sensory overstimulation and information overload would very much enjoy the experience of being in an environment of raw truth, even if it would be a bit scarring. For the person who is not self-deluded, I think it would be more traumatic. (although I think I may be interpreting your statement differently than you intended. Please clarify me if I am.) Sabrina Ballard From sabrina.ballard at allromanceebooks.com Tue Jun 22 01:24:27 2010 From: sabrina.ballard at allromanceebooks.com (Sabrina Ballard) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:24:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Perhaps it is undesirable to have a core body of texts. Many people see the "standards" as immutible once they are set. Perhaps if we stay without core texts, we will remain a stimulated and intellectually diverse group with is capable of change and progress, instead of splintereing over points that in retrospect may seem petty. You know, divide and conquer as they say. Also, with the current soup of views in transhumanism, isn't there something innately _transhumanist_? That is, isn't the mix of ideas and views something that transhumanism aims to promote, as the convergence of lines of thought always lead to the most creative and lively cultures? From max at maxmore.com Tue Jun 22 04:56:18 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 23:56:18 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy Message-ID: <201006220456.o5M4uRGw021541@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Question for Damien: Is *materialism* a philosophy? Is it a philosophical system? (Perhaps these should be treated as two separate questions.) If so, what are its core texts? I'd be willing to grant that transhumanism is not a philosophical system -- if that is taken to mean a system of thought that includes a large number of highly specific claims. I do, however, maintain that it is a philosophy, as well as an intellectual and cultural movement. (It seems a bit peculiar to me to acknowledge that it's an intellectual movement but not a philosophy.) Max ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher The Proactionary Project Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 22 05:27:50 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 00:27:50 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <201006220456.o5M4uRGw021541@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006220456.o5M4uRGw021541@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <4C2049D6.8070705@satx.rr.com> On 6/21/2010 11:56 PM, Max More wrote: > Is *materialism* a philosophy? Is it a philosophical system? (Perhaps > these should be treated as two separate questions.) I don't even know what "materialism" means; it seems a sort of pre-20th century formulation, maybe pre-19th century, since QT and SR and GR seem more like "symmetryism" or "geometrism" or "ergism". I think maybe "naturalism" is a bit like what most people mean, or "positivism," or "physicalism." > If so, what are its > core texts? De rerum natura by Lucretius, all the way to Carnap and Ryle and Dewey and Nagel and Dennett and dog knows what all anti-dualists? See, eg, Damien Broderick From giulio at gmail.com Tue Jun 22 06:07:06 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 08:07:06 +0200 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Right. 2010/6/22 Bryan Bishop : > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Damien Broderick > wrote: >> >> There may well be philosophical systems associated with it (Max's, >> perhaps), but if so they're not generally accepted within the movement. > > I think this is a gross misunderstanding of the situation. I was wondering > if some others can pipe up. What's the deal? There's far more support for > Max More and extropian ideas than Russell might think... uh, right? > > - Bryan > http://heybryan.org/ > 1 512 203 0507 > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Jun 22 10:10:21 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:10:21 +0200 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter groups yearning forcyber-heaven In-Reply-To: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006162316.o5GNGSh4019009@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 17 June 2010 00:49, Max More wrote: > I think it's a serious error to say that. Transhumanism is a philosophy that > seeks to continually overcome human limits, including mortality and the > cognitive and emotional limits imposed by the human constitution as it > naturally evolved. Personally, I think that uploading is feasible in > principle and I don't have any personal identity based objections to it, but > it is only one possible path in the future. You can be (and remain) a > transhumanist if you expect uploading to be impossible or deadly or if it > turns out not to be feasible. This is a very good, to-the-point remark. I am afraid that a confusion still exists between the world "transhuman" as a description of something which is happening (or, less optimistically, might be happening), as in the phrase "transhumanist technologies", and the philosophy "that seeks to continually overcome human limits", in view of a posthuman change. The latter cannot be confirmed nor disproved by any technoscientific development, and organised transhumanism should not be understood as a fan club for some millennial, inevitable rapture or for the last hi-tech gadget, but rather as a *cultural and political grassroot movement* which promotes and supports such philosophy, including of course all practical, policy measures which are consistent with it, such as those who might encourage investments in research programmes or abrogate prohibitionist measures or implement the proactionary principle. -- Stefano Vaj From pharos at gmail.com Tue Jun 22 10:15:51 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 11:15:51 +0100 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: <4C1EB9C6.7040301@satx.rr.com> References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> <4C1EB9C6.7040301@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 6/21/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > More Egan: > > "Do transhuman characters with god-like powers alienate readers? Are they > too far removed from human emotions and frailties that we experience in > modern society? > > The frailty of our bodies is an enormously important part of our current > reality ? and I very much doubt that anyone will ever be literally immortal > ? but I don't think there's anything all that strange or alienating about > the prospect of having, say, a far more robust body, or back-up copies of > your mind. These are just ways of enabling us to do the kind of constructive > things we're doing right now, with fewer unwelcome interruptions. If you > asked someone who'd moved from a country with endemic violence, women dying > in childbirth, high infant mortality, and no effective treatment for dozens > of infectious diseases to a place where all of those problems had been > solved whether they felt alienated by the loss of their precious human > frailty, they'd just laugh." > > I think from the POV of authors that H+ makes life much more difficult. Just about every novel or film before about 1990 seems a waste of time to the younger generation. They stare in puzzlement at every plot crisis moment and say 'Why doesn't she use her mobile phone to get help?' Every 'lost' occasion brings 'Doesn't the GPS in her phone work?' When the actors don't know something important to the plot - 'Why don't they Google it?' The young just lose patience with all this seeming nonsense. If you add in superhuman intelligence, superhuman bodies, etc. it becomes really difficult to find crisis points that interest current humans. (That's why the authors usually keep some humans around, so they can have their interesting problems........) ;) BillK From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Jun 22 13:11:30 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 08:11:30 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> Damien wrote on behalf of Russell: "What core texts? Tranhumanism is a cultural and intellectual movement, but not a philosophical system as far as I can see. There may well be philosophical systems associated with it (Max's, perhaps), but if so they're not generally accepted within the movement." This is truly inaccurate and influenced by WTA's ardent thrust for pushing Extropy out and Bostrom/Hughes in. It was indeed obvious and even successful on many fronts because people are easily influenced, especially when a campaign is established and as with WTA's front and their control of Wikipedia. Anyway, Bostrom and Hughes are friends of mine and as someone somewhere said - all's fair in war and peace. "I don't see any body of core texts that everyone quotes, let alone a body of what could be called core *philosophical* texts. Some people quote James's book, of course, and people will often position themselves by referring to Nick Bostrom's history of transhumanism. Simon Young's book gets quoted a lot, but not by transhumanists. Actual transhumanists all seem to hate it.... All I really see is ferment and debate around some key ideas, e.g. of the posthuman. But we don't agree about stuff like the Singularity, and a key idea or two doesn't add up to a system or a philosophy." I agree that there is no specific book that calls itself the "Philosophy of Transhumanism". "The big special issues of JET that we published a year or two back are arguably the best intellectual resource that exists, and they should be referred to, but I don't see any common philosophical system there." There is some truth to this, but it does not out-think "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist Thought". It is simply more academic in scope. "Likewise for the special issue of The Global Spiral that Natasha edited two years ago - probably a fair bit of commonality on that occasion, since Natasha chose and invited fairly like-minded contributors, but not a system. I'm not sure what Russell means here. As Guest Editor, I suspect that what I produced is highly valuable and is the first project that actually takes on and directly and addresses and responds to academic opponents of transhumanism. "It's worth looking at to see people who are pretty informed, including Max and Natasha, trying to correct a batch of fairly ill-informed critiques. I expect the transhumanist reader that Max and Natasha are putting together will be the same - lots of ideas, lots of ferment." No, this book is not aim to cause ferment, but to educate. It is a collection which forms the foundations of transhumanism. Best, Natasha ----- Original Message ----- From: "Damien Broderick" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 8:01 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy > On 6/21/2010 4:15 PM, Tom Nowell wrote: > >> Transhumanism*the philosophy* is still developing - Bostrom, >> Sandberg, More, have all published papers outlining ideas, and as >> Natasha said Extropy had a good variety of papers. Is there a core >> summation of these currently in print or readily accessible? I don't >> think so > > Right, that's my point. > >> which is why "The Transhumanist Reader" has a handy gap in the market >> it can fill. > > Indeed. It should be a good start. > >> I suppose the best way to check what the core texts are from a >> philosophical point of view would be to ask those nice people at the >> Journal of Evolution and Technology to check the references quoted in >> their journal > > My good mate Dr. Dr. Russell Blackford is the current JET editor, and > I've copied some of this discussion to him but haven't heard back yet. > > Damien Broderick > _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Jun 22 13:21:29 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 08:21:29 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: The absurdity of this is mind-boggling. Max simply needs to fill some gaps. Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Giulio Prisco Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 1:07 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy Right. 2010/6/22 Bryan Bishop : > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Damien Broderick > > wrote: >> >> There may well be philosophical systems associated with it (Max's, >> perhaps), but if so they're not generally accepted within the movement. > > I think this is a gross misunderstanding of the situation. I was > wondering if some others can pipe up. What's the deal? There's far > more support for Max More and extropian ideas than Russell might think... uh, right? > > - Bryan > http://heybryan.org/ > 1 512 203 0507 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From algaenymph at gmail.com Tue Jun 22 13:51:20 2010 From: algaenymph at gmail.com (AlgaeNymph) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 06:51:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> Message-ID: <4C20BFD8.4000004@gmail.com> Natasha Vita-More wrote: > This is truly inaccurate and influenced by WTA's ardent thrust for pushing > Extropy out and Bostrom/Hughes in. So the politicking gets out into the open now. Perhaps this explains why I see factional debates instead of activism against Luddism. Anyway, why'd WTA want Extropy out and Hughes/Bostrom in? > It was indeed obvious and even successful > on many fronts because people are easily influenced, especially when a > campaign is established and as with WTA's front and their control of > Wikipedia. Ooo, memetics via Wikipedia. May we have the juicy details of this campaign? > Anyway, Bostrom and Hughes are friends of mine and as someone > somewhere said - all's fair in war and peace. > That's an ironic way to end the paragraph. From florent.berthet at gmail.com Tue Jun 22 15:00:34 2010 From: florent.berthet at gmail.com (Florent Berthet) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 17:00:34 +0200 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: References: <560161.65177.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C1943B9.8060908@satx.rr.com> <20100616181211.ian4ik61og0o80wk@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C19576B.401@satx.rr.com> <20100616192354.bjdzzidlfk4g4gs4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C196C28.2050903@satx.rr.com> <4C1EB9C6.7040301@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: > If you add in superhuman intelligence, superhuman bodies, etc. it > becomes really difficult to find crisis points that interest current > humans. (That's why the authors usually keep some humans around, so > they can have their interesting problems........) ;) > > > BillK > > Exactly. I'm currently trying to write a screenplay that would show the potential awesomeness of uploading, in a post AGI world. Fact is, I died a little inside each time I searched for a good plot, because any problem can be answered by "the AGI would solve it...". And I don't want to remove the AGI, that's a major point of the project. But for a movie to be good, there must be huge stakes in the plot, at least for the main character. So yeah, that's a real pain... Ideas are welcome. ;) - Florent Berthet -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 22 16:20:53 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 11:20:53 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> Message-ID: <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> On 6/22/2010 8:11 AM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > "The big special issues of JET that we published a year or two back are > arguably the best intellectual resource that exists, and they should be > referred to, but I don't see any common philosophical system there." > > There is some truth to this, but it does not out-think "Extropy: A Journal > of Transhumanist Thought". It is simply more academic in scope. JET is available to everyone in an instant at http://jetpress.org/ . Despite my long interest and involvement in the topic, I have never seen a copy, real or virtual, of "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist Thought," and as I pointed out recently it doesn't appear to be accessible online. Bryan urled to the Wayback Machine, but it isn't there either, it seems. The Extropy Institute has been closed down for a long time now. Bostrom and Hughes and Sandberg and Blackford are everywhere, in person and in print, while Max is... less so (except, perhaps tangentially, in the business community). Hence, it hardly seems necessary to invoke a conspiracy to explain why the active and visible representatives of transhumanism get more attention--and have more sway, assuming they do. The >H READER might change this, when and if it appears. Damien Broderick From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Jun 22 16:29:07 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 11:29:07 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com><35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Oh for goodness sakes Damien. I will wait for an apology for such a unnecessary accusation. Natasha Natasha Vita-More -----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, June 22, 2010 11:21 AM To: ExI chat list Cc: RussellBlackford Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy On 6/22/2010 8:11 AM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > "The big special issues of JET that we published a year or two back > are arguably the best intellectual resource that exists, and they > should be referred to, but I don't see any common philosophical system there." > > There is some truth to this, but it does not out-think "Extropy: A > Journal of Transhumanist Thought". It is simply more academic in scope. JET is available to everyone in an instant at http://jetpress.org/ . Despite my long interest and involvement in the topic, I have never seen a copy, real or virtual, of "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist Thought," and as I pointed out recently it doesn't appear to be accessible online. Bryan urled to the Wayback Machine, but it isn't there either, it seems. The Extropy Institute has been closed down for a long time now. Bostrom and Hughes and Sandberg and Blackford are everywhere, in person and in print, while Max is... less so (except, perhaps tangentially, in the business community). Hence, it hardly seems necessary to invoke a conspiracy to explain why the active and visible representatives of transhumanism get more attention--and have more sway, assuming they do. The >H READER might change this, when and if it appears. Damien Broderick _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Jun 22 16:32:44 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 11:32:44 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C20BFD8.4000004@gmail.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com><35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20BFD8.4000004@gmail.com> Message-ID: <02A4486CE38F40E7B9223576CC2631FA@DFC68LF1> Why are you so interested in gossip? Look, the "politicking" is open knowledge and been discussed over and over again for years. We have moved way, way, way beyond that time in history. Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of AlgaeNymph Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 8:51 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy Natasha Vita-More wrote: > This is truly inaccurate and influenced by WTA's ardent thrust for > pushing Extropy out and Bostrom/Hughes in. So the politicking gets out into the open now. Perhaps this explains why I see factional debates instead of activism against Luddism. Anyway, why'd WTA want Extropy out and Hughes/Bostrom in? > It was indeed obvious and even successful on many fronts because > people are easily influenced, especially when a campaign is > established and as with WTA's front and their control of Wikipedia. Ooo, memetics via Wikipedia. May we have the juicy details of this campaign? > Anyway, Bostrom and Hughes are friends of mine and as someone > somewhere said - all's fair in war and peace. > That's an ironic way to end the paragraph. _______________________________________________ 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 Tue Jun 22 16:47:31 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 11:47:31 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com><35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C20E923.1040707@satx.rr.com> On 6/22/2010 11:29 AM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > I will wait for an apology for such a > unnecessary accusation. Eh? What accusation? From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 22 17:00:10 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:00:10 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C20E923.1040707@satx.rr.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com><35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> <4C20E923.1040707@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C20EC1A.7080901@satx.rr.com> Worth adding that Max has an interesting essay in the Jan 2010 JET on "The Overhuman in the Transhuman," where he notes (in regard to >H philosophical development): (I hope ?Transhumanism: Towards a Futurist Philosophy? will appear in THE >H READER.) Damien Broderick From giulio at gmail.com Tue Jun 22 17:01:02 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 19:01:02 +0200 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Believe me Natasha, I perfectly understand your reaction. But Damien's "accusation" is not an accusation, but a statement of fact. It is a fact that Max has not been as publicly and visibly active as he used to be. It is a fact that the Extropy Institute has been closed down for a long time now. It is a fact that the old issues of "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist Thought" cannot be found online. BTW I am sure you have seen RU Sirius' "Mondo 2000 History Project", perhaps we should do something similar for Extropy. It is a fact that others have taken advantage of the perceived absence of Max and the Extropy Institute, and promoted their favorite interpretation of transhumanism as _the_ interpretation of transhumanism. I and many others are not satisfied with this. There are certainly many exciting transhumanist projects around, but without the central hub that the Extropy Institute represented. The question is, how to recover the spirit and practical organization of a few years ago. G. On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > Oh for goodness sakes Damien. ?I will wait for an apology for such a > unnecessary accusation. > > > > Natasha > Natasha Vita-More > > -----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, June 22, 2010 11:21 AM > To: ExI chat list > Cc: RussellBlackford > Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy > > On 6/22/2010 8:11 AM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > >> "The big special issues of JET that we published a year or two back >> are arguably the best intellectual resource that exists, and they >> should be referred to, but I don't see any common philosophical system > there." >> >> There is some truth to this, but it does not out-think "Extropy: A >> Journal of Transhumanist Thought". It is simply more academic in scope. > > JET is available to everyone in an instant at http://jetpress.org/ . > Despite my long interest and involvement in the topic, I have never seen a > copy, real or virtual, of "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist Thought," and > as I pointed out recently it doesn't appear to be accessible online. Bryan > urled to the Wayback Machine, but it isn't there either, it seems. The > Extropy Institute has been closed down for a long time now. Bostrom and > Hughes and Sandberg and Blackford are everywhere, in person and in print, > while Max is... less so (except, perhaps tangentially, in the business > community). Hence, it hardly seems necessary to invoke a conspiracy to > explain why the active and visible representatives of transhumanism get more > attention--and have more sway, assuming they do. > > The >H READER might change this, when and if it appears. > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From algaenymph at gmail.com Tue Jun 22 17:10:27 2010 From: algaenymph at gmail.com (AlgaeNymph) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 10:10:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <02A4486CE38F40E7B9223576CC2631FA@DFC68LF1> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com><35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20BFD8.4000004@gmail.com> <02A4486CE38F40E7B9223576CC2631FA@DFC68LF1> Message-ID: <4C20EE83.1020204@gmail.com> Natasha Vita-More wrote: > Why are you so interested in gossip? Look, the "politicking" is open > knowledge and been discussed over and over again for years. It's new to me, and it's a side of our subculture I rarely see. From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Jun 22 16:52:46 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 09:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <965341.27447.qm@web81604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 6/22/10, Florent Berthet wrote: Exactly. I'm currently trying to write a screenplay that would show the potential awesomeness of uploading, in a post AGI world. Fact is, I died a little inside each time I searched for a good plot, because any problem can be answered by "the AGI would solve it...". And I don't want to remove the AGI, that's a major point of the project. But for a movie to be good, there must be huge stakes in the plot, at least for the main character. So yeah, that's a real pain... Ideas are welcome. ;) 1. Don't confuse great intelligence with literal omnipotence.? *How* does the AGI solve it?? It still exists in the physical world, with finite (if large) access to information, materials, and speed.? For instance: an asteroid is out of orbit and will crash into Earth - significantly disrupting the AGI's operations there - if not fixed.? Yes, the AGI can think of a solution quickly - but then someone actually needs to implement the solution. 2. Murphy's Law still applies.? There will be local variables, not measurable from a distance.? Ideally, these can be allowed for.? In practice, what says that even an AGI can never be taken by surprise? 3. Don't assume it must be a monolithic single entity.? If the AGI is a gestalt of several human intelligences, augmented by computers, then each of those humans must still do their part to solve whatever tasks the collective AGI wishes to deal with - including dealing with the rest of the world.? (This approach was taken by the Webcomic "A Miracle Of Science" to good effect.? It has been used in other recent works as well, including at least one anime series that had broad distribution.)? The AGI's components could even form most or all of the cast, with their interactions key to the plot. Yes, these require depicting the limitations of an AGI.? But uploading does not let one solve everyone's problems instantly.? It's the old superhero shtick: yes, the main character gains great power - so the main character is faced with great challenges.? Augmented intelligence, on the level we are discussing, easily qualifies as a superpower. Alternately, possibly focus on the first few uploads, to keep the focus on "the potential awesomeness of uploading".? RoboCop style: introduce the protagonist while still human.? Protagonist dies; uploading is the only way to save. Protagonist gets used to new incarnation.? Meanwhile, problems related to the protagonist's death get more intense, to the point where only the protagonist can save the day.? Granted, it can be harder to keep interest when focusing on rapid thought than on physical action...although, once again invoking superheroes, you could do worse than study Batman for inspiration (physical abilities aside, his mind is his best power).? It is not much of a stretch to imagine his writers putting his brain in the Batmobile, with wireless access to his various computer assets, for an arc (though they would eventually return him to normal), and depicting him taking full advantage of this while it lasts. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 22 17:29:48 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:29:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C20F30C.5000607@satx.rr.com> On 6/22/2010 12:01 PM, Giulio Prisco wrote: > Damien's "accusation" is not an accusation, but a statement of fact. > > It is a fact that Max has not been as publicly and visibly active as > he used to be. It is a fact that the Extropy Institute has been closed > down for a long time now. It is a fact that the old issues of > "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist Thought" cannot be found online. ... > It is a fact that others have taken advantage of the perceived absence > of Max and the Extropy Institute, and promoted their favorite > interpretation of transhumanism as_the_ interpretation of > transhumanism. Yes, I reviewed what I'd written and felt that none of these facts deserved to be called an accusation. However, someone commented to me offlist that Natasha was probably upset because I'd used the word "conspiracy," when I wrote: "Hence, it hardly seems necessary to invoke a conspiracy to explain why the active and visible representatives of transhumanism get more attention--and have more sway, assuming they do." That was shorthand for Natasha's comment concerning: "...WTA's ardent thrust for pushing Extropy out and Bostrom/Hughes in. It was indeed obvious and even successful on many fronts because people are easily influenced, especially when a campaign is established and as with WTA's front and their control of Wikipedia." So some people established a pro-Bostrom/Hughes campaign, using WTA as one front among many, and controlling Wikipedia. All this might well be true, but isn't "conspiracy" a suitable word to summarize such activity? Perhaps I ought to have used Natasha's word "campaign." (Still--what shadowy forces were behind this campaign? Just wondering--I don't feel I have a dog in this event.) Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Jun 22 17:15:23 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 10:15:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <618632.44982.qm@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 6/22/10, BillK wrote: > Just about every novel or film before about 1990 seems a > waste of time > to the younger generation. > They stare in puzzlement at every plot crisis moment and > say 'Why > doesn't she use her mobile phone to get help?' > Every 'lost' occasion brings 'Doesn't the GPS in her phone > work?' > When the actors don't know something important to the plot > - 'Why > don't they Google it?'???The young just lose > patience with all this > seeming nonsense. One could do a children's series, about a kid with a mobile phone who uses apps on it to solve problems that baffle the adults. Bonus points if the only ones who are not slow to catch on and imitate, are the crime-and-corruption types the child works against, eventually leading the kid to lecture friendly but somewhat luddite adults about the proactionary principle (but not calling it by that name, since neither the work's audience nor the kid's in-world audience would know it, and in any case this child may have independently reinvented it). A possible extension: the child has the phone implanted, and brain slowly rewired (over the course of the story) to a silicon simulation - and sped up. The child starts off identifiable; the audience sees the path to the conclusion; the audience may still identify with the post-uploaded mind even as it distributes among dozens of shells and starts breaking out the custom-designed nanotech. Even the fraction of the mind that consciously seeks to rewire and improve can be likened to a martial artist's self-training (though, it is important that this not be depicted as the sole activity: yes, the mind is improving itself, but as a means to some other end). From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Jun 22 17:18:18 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 10:18:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C20EE83.1020204@gmail.com> Message-ID: <350548.42536.qm@web81605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 6/22/10, AlgaeNymph wrote: > Natasha Vita-More wrote: > > Why are you so interested in gossip?? Look, the > "politicking" is open > > knowledge and been discussed over and over again for > years. > It's new to me, and it's a side of our subculture I rarely > see. Politicking is a side that we could do with less of. It's tough enough just getting our message out to the general public, without also having to deal with infighting. From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 22 18:08:55 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:08:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: <618632.44982.qm@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <618632.44982.qm@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C20FC37.2000808@satx.rr.com> On 6/22/2010 12:15 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > A possible extension: the child has the phone implanted, and > brain slowly rewired (over the course of the story) to a > silicon simulation - and sped up. The child starts off > identifiable; the audience sees the path to the conclusion; > the audience may still identify with the post-uploaded mind > even as it distributes among dozens of shells and starts > breaking out the custom-designed nanotech. All of this is either spelled out or implicit in Robert Sawyer's new trilogy (2 volumes already in print), WWW. Worth looking at for ways to dramatize an emergent AI and ver developing relationship with humans. Damien Broderick From max at maxmore.com Tue Jun 22 18:18:27 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (max at maxmore.com) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:18:27 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: <618632.44982.qm@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <618632.44982.qm@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20100622131827.jq58rdeog8sko8w0@webmail.maxmore.com> A story along the lines of what you say here that I'm especially fond of is "The Gentle Seduction" by Marc Stiegler. I see it's available online: http://www.skyhunter.com/marcs/GentleSeduction.html I also recommend Marc's Earthweb novel, for its portrayal of global use of decision markets to repel overwhelming alien invaders. Max Quoting Adrian Tymes : > A possible extension: the child has the phone implanted, and > brain slowly rewired (over the course of the story) to a > silicon simulation - and sped up. The child starts off > identifiable; the audience sees the path to the conclusion; > the audience may still identify with the post-uploaded mind > even as it distributes among dozens of shells and starts > breaking out the custom-designed nanotech. From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Jun 22 18:18:38 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:18:38 -0400 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20100622141838.92q5c5ofks4c0sk4@webmail.natasha.cc> Quoting Giulio Prisco : > Believe me Natasha, I perfectly understand your reaction. But Damien's > "accusation" is not an accusation, but a statement of fact. I think you misread Damien's message. He said: "Hence, it hardly seems necessary to invoke a conspiracy to explain why ..." I did not invoke a conspiracy. I was recalling what had transpired and which is well known as a matter of Fact. I have been a big cheerleader and a pain in the neck to get Max up and running again and I am clearly and most definitely not in denial about his absence and the absence of all the frick'n hard work. THAT IS A FACT. > It is a fact that others have taken advantage of the perceived absence > of Max and the Extropy Institute, and promoted their favorite > interpretation of transhumanism as _the_ interpretation of > transhumanism. Yes, this is very true. > I and many others are not satisfied with this. Yes, this is very true. > There > are certainly many exciting transhumanist projects around, but without > the central hub that the Extropy Institute represented. Yes, this is very true. > The question is, how to recover the spirit and practical organization > of a few years ago. Some $$$ would be a great start. :-) N > > G. > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Natasha Vita-More > wrote: >> Oh for goodness sakes Damien. I will wait for an apology for such a >> unnecessary accusation. >> >> >> >> Natasha >> Natasha Vita-More >> >> -----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, June 22, 2010 11:21 AM >> To: ExI chat list >> Cc: RussellBlackford >> Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy >> >> On 6/22/2010 8:11 AM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: >> >>> "The big special issues of JET that we published a year or two back >>> are arguably the best intellectual resource that exists, and they >>> should be referred to, but I don't see any common philosophical system >> there." >>> >>> There is some truth to this, but it does not out-think "Extropy: A >>> Journal of Transhumanist Thought". It is simply more academic in scope. >> >> JET is available to everyone in an instant at http://jetpress.org/ . >> Despite my long interest and involvement in the topic, I have never seen a >> copy, real or virtual, of "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist Thought," and >> as I pointed out recently it doesn't appear to be accessible online. Bryan >> urled to the Wayback Machine, but it isn't there either, it seems. The >> Extropy Institute has been closed down for a long time now. Bostrom and >> Hughes and Sandberg and Blackford are everywhere, in person and in print, >> while Max is... less so (except, perhaps tangentially, in the business >> community). Hence, it hardly seems necessary to invoke a conspiracy to >> explain why the active and visible representatives of transhumanism get more >> attention--and have more sway, assuming they do. >> >> The >H READER might change this, when and if it appears. >> >> Damien Broderick >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From bret at bonfireproductions.com Tue Jun 22 18:30:12 2010 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (bret at bonfireproductions.com) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:30:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <20100622141838.92q5c5ofks4c0sk4@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> <20100622141838.92q5c5ofks4c0sk4@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <20100622133012.fvryi4slc4g0sw0c@webmail.creationstorm.com> Perhaps this is a good time to jump in, granted it is with a point that some may be tired of considering, but would help I think. This may even have been the intent on Giulio's bumper sticker. If we were to render things down, is it possible to make a tree that starts with the most basic Transhuman tenants and work out where the branches are that would be considered Extropian or other flavors, that could also include where they overlap? It would help a great deal with propagation, and we've got a societal chasm to cross at this point. What would be #1? Any thoughts? Quoting natasha at natasha.cc: > Quoting Giulio Prisco : > >> Believe me Natasha, I perfectly understand your reaction. But Damien's >> "accusation" is not an accusation, but a statement of fact. > > I think you misread Damien's message. He said: "Hence, it hardly seems > necessary to invoke a conspiracy to explain why ..." I did not invoke > a conspiracy. I was recalling what had transpired and which is well > known as a matter of Fact. > > I have been a big cheerleader and a pain in the neck to get Max up and > running again and I am clearly and most definitely not in denial about > his absence and the absence of all the frick'n hard work. THAT IS A > FACT. > > >> It is a fact that others have taken advantage of the perceived absence >> of Max and the Extropy Institute, and promoted their favorite >> interpretation of transhumanism as _the_ interpretation of >> transhumanism. > > Yes, this is very true. > >> I and many others are not satisfied with this. > > Yes, this is very true. > >> There >> are certainly many exciting transhumanist projects around, but without >> the central hub that the Extropy Institute represented. > > Yes, this is very true. > >> The question is, how to recover the spirit and practical organization >> of a few years ago. > > Some $$$ would be a great start. :-) > > N > > >> >> G. >> >> On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Natasha Vita-More >> wrote: >>> Oh for goodness sakes Damien. I will wait for an apology for such a >>> unnecessary accusation. >>> >>> >>> >>> Natasha >>> Natasha Vita-More >>> >>> -----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, June 22, 2010 11:21 AM >>> To: ExI chat list >>> Cc: RussellBlackford >>> Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy >>> >>> On 6/22/2010 8:11 AM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: >>> >>>> "The big special issues of JET that we published a year or two back >>>> are arguably the best intellectual resource that exists, and they >>>> should be referred to, but I don't see any common philosophical system >>> there." >>>> >>>> There is some truth to this, but it does not out-think "Extropy: A >>>> Journal of Transhumanist Thought". It is simply more academic in scope. >>> >>> JET is available to everyone in an instant at http://jetpress.org/ . >>> Despite my long interest and involvement in the topic, I have never seen a >>> copy, real or virtual, of "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist >>> Thought," and >>> as I pointed out recently it doesn't appear to be accessible online. Bryan >>> urled to the Wayback Machine, but it isn't there either, it seems. The >>> Extropy Institute has been closed down for a long time now. Bostrom and >>> Hughes and Sandberg and Blackford are everywhere, in person and in print, >>> while Max is... less so (except, perhaps tangentially, in the business >>> community). Hence, it hardly seems necessary to invoke a conspiracy to >>> explain why the active and visible representatives of >>> transhumanism get more >>> attention--and have more sway, assuming they do. >>> >>> The >H READER might change this, when and if it appears. >>> >>> Damien Broderick >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 From pharos at gmail.com Tue Jun 22 18:43:08 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 19:43:08 +0100 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <20100622133012.fvryi4slc4g0sw0c@webmail.creationstorm.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> <20100622141838.92q5c5ofks4c0sk4@webmail.natasha.cc> <20100622133012.fvryi4slc4g0sw0c@webmail.creationstorm.com> Message-ID: On 6/22/10, bret at bonfireproductions.com wrote: > > If we were to render things down, is it possible to make a tree that starts > with the most basic Transhuman tenants and work out where the branches are > that would be considered Extropian or other flavors, that could also include > where they overlap? > > What!? Transhuman lodgers? Bet it is those dastardly illegal immigrants! ;) BillK From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Jun 22 18:47:31 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:47:31 -0400 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C20F30C.5000607@satx.rr.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> <4C20F30C.5000607@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20100622144731.0q9c8u86os4ws08w@webmail.natasha.cc> Quoting Damien Broderick : > Yes, I reviewed what I'd written and felt that none of these facts > deserved to be called an accusation. I wasn't referring to "any of these facts" as being accusations. I bloody hell know the facts. It is your assumption that my mentioning WTA was invoking a conspiracy. Frickn' frack. Where have you been for the past decade?! > However, someone commented to me > offlist that Natasha was probably upset because I'd used the word > "conspiracy," when I wrote: "Hence, it hardly seems necessary to invoke > a conspiracy to explain why the active and visible representatives of > transhumanism get more attention--and have more sway, assuming they do." ... > All this might well be > true, but isn't "conspiracy" a suitable word to summarize such > activity? No it's not. A campaign is "a series of actions advancing a principle or tending toward a particular end" and a conspiracy is "a plot to carry out some harmful or illegal act". I do not think that at all. > Perhaps I ought to have used Natasha's word "campaign." > (Still--what shadowy forces were behind this campaign? Just > wondering--I >don't feel I have a dog in this event.) Yes, that would have more fitting; but I get the feeling you are looking for some drama. Natasha From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 22 18:48:32 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:48:32 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <20100622141838.92q5c5ofks4c0sk4@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> <20100622141838.92q5c5ofks4c0sk4@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <4C210580.70801@satx.rr.com> On 6/22/2010 1:18 PM, natasha at natasha.cc wrote: > Quoting Giulio Prisco : >> Believe me Natasha, I perfectly understand your reaction. But Damien's >> "accusation" is not an accusation, but a statement of fact. > I think you misread Damien's message. He said: "Hence, it hardly seems > necessary to invoke a conspiracy to explain why ..." I did not invoke a > conspiracy. Natasha, I think *you* misread Damien's message. It contained 140 words by me. You picked on one of them. I've already explained why it seemed okay as a summary of your comment about "...WTA's ardent thrust for pushing Extropy out and Bostrom/Hughes in. It was indeed obvious and even successful on many fronts because people are easily influenced, especially when a campaign is established and as with WTA's front and their control of Wikipedia." It looks as if you meant by that something other than I took you to mean. Sorry you were offended. Damien Broderick From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Jun 22 18:52:24 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:52:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <20100622133012.fvryi4slc4g0sw0c@webmail.creationstorm.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> <20100622141838.92q5c5ofks4c0sk4@webmail.natasha.cc> <20100622133012.fvryi4slc4g0sw0c@webmail.creationstorm.com> Message-ID: <20100622145224.gigtt1sntws08g4s@webmail.natasha.cc> This not what you are specifically looking for; but here is a tree with identifiers http://www.natasha.cc/transhumantree.htm I designed this a few years ago when building a theory for transhumanism. I have since changed my mind on some of the links. I would add download, upload and whole brain emulation and instead of noosphere, for example, I would not use connective agency or something similar to that. Natasha Quoting bret at bonfireproductions.com: > > Perhaps this is a good time to jump in, granted it is with a point that > some may be tired of considering, but would help I think. This may even > have been the intent on Giulio's bumper sticker. > > If we were to render things down, is it possible to make a tree that > starts with the most basic Transhuman tenants and work out where the > branches are that would be considered Extropian or other flavors, that > could also include where they overlap? > > It would help a great deal with propagation, and we've got a societal > chasm to cross at this point. > > What would be #1? > > Any thoughts? > > > Quoting natasha at natasha.cc: > >> Quoting Giulio Prisco : >> >>> Believe me Natasha, I perfectly understand your reaction. But Damien's >>> "accusation" is not an accusation, but a statement of fact. >> >> I think you misread Damien's message. He said: "Hence, it hardly seems >> necessary to invoke a conspiracy to explain why ..." I did not invoke >> a conspiracy. I was recalling what had transpired and which is well >> known as a matter of Fact. >> >> I have been a big cheerleader and a pain in the neck to get Max up and >> running again and I am clearly and most definitely not in denial about >> his absence and the absence of all the frick'n hard work. THAT IS A >> FACT. >> >> >>> It is a fact that others have taken advantage of the perceived absence >>> of Max and the Extropy Institute, and promoted their favorite >>> interpretation of transhumanism as _the_ interpretation of >>> transhumanism. >> >> Yes, this is very true. >> >>> I and many others are not satisfied with this. >> >> Yes, this is very true. >> >>> There >>> are certainly many exciting transhumanist projects around, but without >>> the central hub that the Extropy Institute represented. >> >> Yes, this is very true. >> >>> The question is, how to recover the spirit and practical organization >>> of a few years ago. >> >> Some $$$ would be a great start. :-) >> >> N >> >> >>> >>> G. >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Natasha Vita-More >>> wrote: >>>> Oh for goodness sakes Damien. I will wait for an apology for such a >>>> unnecessary accusation. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Natasha >>>> Natasha Vita-More >>>> >>>> -----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, June 22, 2010 11:21 AM >>>> To: ExI chat list >>>> Cc: RussellBlackford >>>> Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy >>>> >>>> On 6/22/2010 8:11 AM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: >>>> >>>>> "The big special issues of JET that we published a year or two back >>>>> are arguably the best intellectual resource that exists, and they >>>>> should be referred to, but I don't see any common philosophical system >>>> there." >>>>> >>>>> There is some truth to this, but it does not out-think "Extropy: A >>>>> Journal of Transhumanist Thought". It is simply more academic in scope. >>>> >>>> JET is available to everyone in an instant at http://jetpress.org/ . >>>> Despite my long interest and involvement in the topic, I have never seen a >>>> copy, real or virtual, of "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist >>>> Thought," and >>>> as I pointed out recently it doesn't appear to be accessible online. Bryan >>>> urled to the Wayback Machine, but it isn't there either, it seems. The >>>> Extropy Institute has been closed down for a long time now. Bostrom and >>>> Hughes and Sandberg and Blackford are everywhere, in person and in print, >>>> while Max is... less so (except, perhaps tangentially, in the business >>>> community). Hence, it hardly seems necessary to invoke a conspiracy to >>>> explain why the active and visible representatives of >>>> transhumanism get more >>>> attention--and have more sway, assuming they do. >>>> >>>> The >H READER might change this, when and if it appears. >>>> >>>> Damien Broderick >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Tue Jun 22 19:05:17 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:05:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <20100622144731.0q9c8u86os4ws08w@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> <4C20F30C.5000607@satx.rr.com> <20100622144731.0q9c8u86os4ws08w@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <4C21096D.8030806@satx.rr.com> On 6/22/2010 1:47 PM, natasha at natasha.cc wrote: > A campaign is "a series of actions advancing a principle or tending > toward a particular end" and a conspiracy is "a plot to carry out some > harmful or illegal act". No, I didn't mean (or think you meant) an *illegal* plot--just a furtive activity, using "fronts". Damien Broderick From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Jun 22 19:21:55 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:21:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C210580.70801@satx.rr.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> <20100622141838.92q5c5ofks4c0sk4@webmail.natasha.cc> <4C210580.70801@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20100622152155.jt1y0vtkis04ogcs@webmail.natasha.cc> Quoting Damien Broderick : > It looks as if you meant by that something other than I took you to > mean. It was not a matter of words (although their meanings are significant). It seems that you thought by "accusation" I was not referring to your suggested lack of Max's transhumanist presence. But, I was actually referring to you saying I was "invoking" a conspiracy that caused my hair to friz. > Sorry you were offended. Thank you Damien. I was simply dumbfounded. Natasha From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Jun 22 20:18:48 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:18:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter In-Reply-To: References: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Sabrina Ballard wrote: > Perhaps there needs to be a fundimental shift in the way people think? > Perhaps if we viewed each "insignificant unit" as something unique, > even though it is fairly standard, then the idea would be more > swallowable. That is, embrace the differences that make each person > unique. Studying and propigating uniqueness may be more important that > we realize. Agreed. Diversity and specifically novelty will become increasingly valuable as we move away from the zero-sum game we play today and into the unlimited post-scarcity future. I wish the current vampire fascination would address the boredom that would come from the same old drama of human short-lives in a society of immortals. Oh right, that's because the audience isn't actually immortal... > I think that you could very easily say that you have created something > new because self-delusion in an important ans healthy part of many > people's lives. This person would be funtimentially very different > from the human we know today as to be 'alien' and 'cold'. I don't feel > that people would relate very will to the idea. The post to which I was replying suggested that dualists believe in a soul. I was wondering if the soul-less had any sense of identity in their machinery or if any amount of missing parts would change who they are. I didn't think many people would volunteer to have their evolved irrationality removed along the way to cyber-heaven if they knew in advance that they wouldn't recognize anyone (including themself) on the other side. > > (although I think I may be interpreting your statement differently > than you intended. Please clarify me if I am.) I intended only a different point of view. Thanks for responding at all. :) From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 22 19:56:41 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:56:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] cool computer article in chess news In-Reply-To: <20100622152155.jt1y0vtkis04ogcs@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <309816.78770.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? Konrad Zuse's 100th birthday.? This article was in Chess News but it isn't about chess, rather computer development.? Kurzweil talks about the singularity in there too: ? http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6446 ? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From udend05 at aol.com Tue Jun 22 20:17:31 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:17:31 -0400 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <8CCE05F13FA86F8-1A3C-1A96@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> My first post, one of hopeful pacification: I can see where Damien is coming from on this issue as it is difficult to locate a 'core' text, or even a cluster of such texts. Most, if not all, philosophical movements have these core texts, so why doesn't transhumanism? I want to bring out the word 'movement' here: it is quite true that movements require such texts, established works that demonstrate, analyse and codfiy their beliefs. It would be a peculiar sort of movement that had no such thing, or only a loosely-assembled group of short works for people to point to in support of their vews. It would, I suppose, be like a Christian suggesting they based their entire beliefs on the book of Leviticus and a snippet of the Gospel of John. Nevertheless, to argue that for this reason alone transhumanism does not amount to a philosophy seems to be little more than a quibble. When I tell people that I hold the view that it is desirable for us to use technology to increase our abilities (in all sorts of ways which I needn't list here), I am taking an essentially philosophical stance. Why so? My statement has a normative flavour, for a start: it is a position I maintain, and which I support with all sorts of arguments, ethical, political, medical and so on. I will defend the view against its detractors and point to articles by other thinkers in support of my views (though I may not point to any single or group of core texts - yet!). So far, so philosophical. That word 'yet' seems important. Transhumanism is a young philosophy (oops - I mean, set of loosely related thoughts) and has to go a long way before people can say they belong to the philosophical 'movement' of transhumanism. But they can certainly say that their philosophy is that of transhumanism. In any case, what else would you call it? Outlook? View? Or some new phrase we haven't thought of yet? Whatever, if as I maintain is the case, there is a difference between a philosophy and a philosophical movement, then transhumanism is certainly the one, if not quite yet the fully matured other. What I see Natasha, Max, Kurzweil, Bostrom, Sanders and all the rest as doing is helping it to grow into adulthood. Damian. -----Original Message----- From: Damien Broderick To: 'ExI chat list' Sent: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 2:03 Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy So I passed along the query to philosopher Russell Blackford, of JET, who replies (and allows me to repost): ====================== What core texts? Tranhumanism is a cultural and intellectual movement, but not a philosophical system as far as I can see. There may well be philosophical systems associated with it (Max's, perhaps), but if so they're not generally accepted within the movement. I don't see any body of core texts that everyone quotes, let alone a body of what could be called core *philosophical* texts. Some people quote James's book, of course, and people will often position themselves by referring to Nick Bostrom's history of transhumanism. Simon Young's book gets quoted a lot, but not by transhumanists. Actual transhumanists all seem to hate it.... All I really see is ferment and debate around some key ideas, e.g. of the posthuman. But we don't agree about stuff like the Singularity, and a key idea or two doesn't add up to a system or a philosophy. The big special issues of JET that we published a year or two back are arguably the best intellectual resource that exists, and they should be referred to, but I don't see any common philosophical system there. Likewise for the special issue of The Global Spiral that Natasha edited two years ago - probably a fair bit of commonality on that occasion, since Natasha chose and invited fairly like-minded contributors, but not a system. It's worth looking at to see people who are pretty informed, including Max and Natasha, trying to correct a batch of fairly ill-informed critiques. I expect the transhumanist reader that Max and Natasha are putting together will be the same - lots of ideas, lots of ferment. Btw, I don't think transhumanism is any the worse for this. Cheers, R ----- Original Message ----- From: "Damien Broderick" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 8:01 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy > On 6/21/2010 4:15 PM, Tom Nowell wrote: > >> Transhumanism*the philosophy* is still developing - Bostrom, Sandberg, >> More, have all published papers outlining ideas, and as Natasha said >> Extropy had a good variety of papers. Is there a core summation of these >> currently in print or readily accessible? I don't think so > > Right, that's my point. > >> which is why "The Transhumanist Reader" has a handy gap in the market it >> can fill. > > Indeed. It should be a good start. > >> I suppose the best way to check what the core texts are from a >> philosophical point of view would be to ask those nice people at the >> Journal of Evolution and Technology to check the references quoted in >> their journal > > My good mate Dr. Dr. Russell Blackford is the current JET editor, and I've > copied some of this discussion to him but haven't heard back yet. > > 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 dan_ust at yahoo.com Tue Jun 22 20:53:28 2010 From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Occultation Reveals KBO is Surprisingly Icy Bright Message-ID: <571942.29726.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> http://www.universetoday.com/2010/06/18/occulation-reveals-distant-kuiper-belt-object-is-surprisingly-icy-bright/ Didn't see anyone else post on this... So I'm guessing it's not a dup. I haven't yet read the Nature paper, though it looks pretty interesting. Regards, Dan From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 22 21:37:17 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:37:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <8CCE05F13FA86F8-1A3C-1A96@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 6/22/10, udend05 at aol.com wrote: ? ? My first post, one of hopeful pacification: ? Welcome Damian!? Another possible verbation of the adjective pacify might be pacifiction (but that one sounds made up) or?even possibly pacifixion (although?that carries a bit of christian-soundingness.)? If you went with pacifaction, that sounds like a breakaway?subset that opposes war.? ? With a name?that sounds?close to Damien,?you come in?with our expectation that you will be one who likes wordplay.? {8-]? Its a tradition around here, exuberantly and competently carried forth by Damien. ...it is difficult to locate a 'core' text, or even a cluster of such texts.? Damian ? This is still probably the best description of what extropians are about: ? http://www.maxmore.com/extprn3.htm ? Do feel free to tell us a little about Damian please, or not if you prefer.? You are among friends here. ? spike ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nanogirl at halcyon.com Tue Jun 22 21:42:39 2010 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:42:39 -0600 Subject: [ExI] 3D Nanotechnology graphic novel "Lazarus" just released In-Reply-To: <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <24523291F3D3423BBCC6AAEB2CCC0A80@3DBOXXW4850> My first book hooray! Lazarus is fully illustrated by computer generated 3 dimensional artwork. Lazarus is a tale of nanotechnology, immortality and one man's quest to discover the truth. Gina "Nanogirl" Miller is the author and artist of Lazarus. Watch the trailer and find out more here: http://www.nanogirl.com/author.html Yours, Gina -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 22 21:46:56 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:46:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Damian with an a In-Reply-To: <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C212F50.1040103@satx.rr.com> On 6/22/2010 4:37 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > Do feel free to tell us a little about Damian please Do, please, and fling in your surname or first initial thereof, while you're at it, so we don't get mixed up. (Few people seem to notice the ia/ie distinction.) Damien B. From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Tue Jun 22 22:17:23 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 23:17:23 +0100 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane Message-ID: http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/06/22/jesus-returning-cancer-cured-u-s-poll-predicts-life-in-2050/ That 41%, the idiot contingent, represents an enormous obstacle to the kind of future the transhumanist movement believes in. These are people for whom modernity is difficult to deal with, what awaits will alienate them in ways they can't even imagine; and therein lies the problem. I think the biggest terrorist threat in the future may well be from some confluence of crazies, from disparate religious traditions, united under the banner of neo-ludditry. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From udend05 at aol.com Tue Jun 22 22:23:58 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:23:58 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Damian with an a In-Reply-To: <4C212F50.1040103@satx.rr.com> References: <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C212F50.1040103@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <8CCE070BE3BB2F5-1A3C-32C9@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> Well then, I am Damian U., if you like. I cannot remember what got me on to transhumanism in the first place (though I'm sure it must have stemmed from my love for Banks' Culture), but I remember it hitting me with the icy clarity of a no-brainer. I mean, in a nut-shell, that the notion of improving ourselves and our lot, across the wide spectrum of types of person, is without doubt a desirable thing. I can point to many examples of where I feel transhumanism enters this life: I want the best education/training/love/support and so on for my two children - why not want the best genes, augmented capabilities etc. as well? I have worked with autistic children for twelve years and I have seen the tremendous amount of suffering this debilitating condition causes - if the gene could be removed, the mirror neurons replaced/augmented, why not grasp the chance to alleviate that suffering? (A tendentious issue; one that braves the disapprobation of a politically correct formulation of personal worth and value. That for another time, though.). For myself, I want to have read all the great novels and seen all the great films, travelled to all the cities of this world and listened to and learned to love all the music ever written - and why shouldn't I? If technology can do it for me, bring it on. Finally, politically. If something like nanotechnology can rid us of scarcity and take us into the stars, we are surely duty-bound to try it. Evolution has given us a chance (or staggered blindly towards an opportunity, if you prefer). We'd be mad not to take it. My background is in philosophy and I am currently working towards being a professional counsellor with a view to doing postgrad' research into the link between the talking therapies and emerging technologies - I am particularly interested in the question of whether it would be desirable to do the work of counselling/psychotherapy with a pill. In other words, if you could swallow a pill (where pill=some form of as yet undreamed-of but technologically-based therapy) and have all your problems disappear, would that be better (in a given sense) than going through the motions of solving the problems yourself (or at least trying to)? I am also working on a screenplay that explores ideas around the abolutionist project, but that gets little attention in amongst everything else I have to be and do. That's (mostly (I left out my love for parentheses)) me. Damian U. -----Original Message----- From: Damien Broderick To: ExI chat list Sent: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 22:46 Subject: [ExI] Damian with an a On 6/22/2010 4:37 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > Do feel free to tell us a little about Damian please Do, please, and fling in your surname or first initial thereof, while you're at it, so we don't get mixed up. (Few people seem to notice the ia/ie distinction.) Damien B. _______________________________________________ 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 bbenzai at yahoo.com Tue Jun 22 22:26:29 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:26:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] transhumanism in fiction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <109672.48393.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> max at maxmore.com wrote: > > A story along the lines of what you say here that I'm > especially fond? > of is "The Gentle Seduction" by Marc Stiegler. I see it's > available? > online: > > http://www.skyhunter.com/marcs/GentleSeduction.html > That was excellent. Not just entertaining and inspirational, but a serious and I think very important message. Thanks for pointing it out. Ben Zaiboc From spike66 at att.net Tue Jun 22 22:22:05 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:22:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Occultation Reveals KBO is Surprisingly Icy Bright In-Reply-To: <571942.29726.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <499257.23130.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 6/22/10, Dan wrote: ? http://www.universetoday.com/2010/06/18/occulation-reveals-distant-kuiper-belt-object-is-surprisingly-icy-bright/ Dan ? Oh so cool.? Occultations like this are so rare, we really are damn lucky. ? spike ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From udend05 at aol.com Tue Jun 22 22:32:26 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:32:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <8CCE05F13FA86F8-1A3C-1A96@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com><4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <8CCE05F13FA86F8-1A3C-1A96@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8CCE071ECD14B32-1A3C-341C@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> That said, Damien talks of 'systematic' philosophy. Perhaps this is a third tier, somewhere above philosophical movement and plain old philosophy. I for one can cannot deny that without a core text or group of texts to do this work of defining, ordering, analysing and so on, it would be difficult to think of transhumanism as a systematic philosophy. If this is what Damien meant, I can only reiterate my view that transhumanism is only an infant: it needs careful handling by parents with reasonably consistent views, an abundance of love (for each other, as well), and a single-minded devotion to the idea that it will be the most beautiful adult ever created. Best, Damian U. -----Original Message----- From: udend05 at aol.com To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Sent: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 21:17 Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy My first post, one of hopeful pacification: I can see where Damien is coming from on this issue as it is difficult to locate a 'core' text, or even a cluster of such texts. Most, if not all, philosophical movements have these core texts, so why doesn't transhumanism? I want to bring out the word 'movement' here: it is quite true that movements require such texts, established works that demonstrate, analyse and codfiy their beliefs. It would be a peculiar sort of movement that had no such thing, or only a loosely-assembled group of short works for people to point to in support of their vews. It would, I suppose, be like a Christian suggesting they based their entire beliefs on the book of Leviticus and a snippet of the Gospel of John. Nevertheless, to argue that for this reason alone transhumanism does not amount to a philosophy seems to be little more than a quibble. When I tell people that I hold the view that it is desirable for us to use technology to increase our abilities (in all sorts of ways which I needn't list here), I am taking an essentially philosophical stance. Why so? My statement has a normative flavour, for a start: it is a position I maintain, and which I support with all sorts of arguments, ethical, political, medical and so on. I will defend the view against its detractors and point to articles by other thinkers in support of my views (though I may not point to any single or group of core texts - yet!). So far, so philosophical. That word 'yet' seems important. Transhumanism is a young philosophy (oops - I mean, set of loosely related thoughts) and has to go a long way before people can say they belong to the philosophical 'movement' of transhumanism. But they can certainly say that their philosophy is that of transhumanism. In any case, what else would you call it? Outlook? View? Or some new phrase we haven't thought of yet? Whatever, if as I maintain is the case, there is a difference between a philosophy and a philosophical movement, then transhumanism is certainly the one, if not quite yet the fully matured other. What I see Natasha, Max, Kurzweil, Bostrom, Sanders and all the rest as doing is helping it to grow into adulthood. Damian. -----Original Message----- From: Damien Broderick To: 'ExI chat list' Sent: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 2:03 Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy So I passed along the query to philosopher Russell Blackford, of JET, who replies (and allows me to repost): ====================== What core texts? Tranhumanism is a cultural and intellectual movement, but not a philosophical system as far as I can see. There may well be philosophical systems associated with it (Max's, perhaps), but if so they're not generally accepted within the movement. I don't see any body of core texts that everyone quotes, let alone a body of what could be called core *philosophical* texts. Some people quote James's book, of course, and people will often position themselves by referring to Nick Bostrom's history of transhumanism. Simon Young's book gets quoted a lot, but not by transhumanists. Actual transhumanists all seem to hate it.... All I really see is ferment and debate around some key ideas, e.g. of the posthuman. But we don't agree about stuff like the Singularity, and a key idea or two doesn't add up to a system or a philosophy. The big special issues of JET that we published a year or two back are arguably the best intellectual resource that exists, and they should be referred to, but I don't see any common philosophical system there. Likewise for the special issue of The Global Spiral that Natasha edited two years ago - probably a fair bit of commonality on that occasion, since Natasha chose and invited fairly like-minded contributors, but not a system. It's worth looking at to see people who are pretty informed, including Max and Natasha, trying to correct a batch of fairly ill-informed critiques. I expect the transhumanist reader that Max and Natasha are putting together will be the same - lots of ideas, lots of ferment. Btw, I don't think transhumanism is any the worse for this. Cheers, R ----- Original Message ----- From: "Damien Broderick" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 8:01 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy > On 6/21/2010 4:15 PM, Tom Nowell wrote: > >> Transhumanism*the philosophy* is still developing - Bostrom, Sandberg, >> More, have all published papers outlining ideas, and as Natasha said >> Extropy had a good variety of papers. Is there a core summation of these >> currently in print or readily accessible? I don't think so > > Right, that's my point. > >> which is why "The Transhumanist Reader" has a handy gap in the market it >> can fill. > > Indeed. It should be a good start. > >> I suppose the best way to check what the core texts are from a >> philosophical point of view would be to ask those nice people at the >> Journal of Evolution and Technology to check the references quoted in >> their journal > > My good mate Dr. Dr. Russell Blackford is the current JET editor, and I've > copied some of this discussion to him but haven't heard back yet. > > Damien Broderick > _______________________________________________ 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 thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 22 23:19:00 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:19:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <8CCE071ECD14B32-1A3C-341C@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com><4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <8CCE05F13FA86F8-1A3C-1A96@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> <8CCE071ECD14B32-1A3C-341C@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <4C2144E4.5070502@satx.rr.com> On 6/22/2010 5:32 PM, udend05 at aol.com wrote: > That said, Damien talks of 'systematic' philosophy. Don't recall that. What I kept talking about was its status as *formal* philosophy. > I can only reiterate my view that > transhumanism is only an infant: it needs careful handling by parents > with reasonably consistent views, an abundance of love (for each other, > as well), and a single-minded devotion to the idea that it will be the > most beautiful adult ever created. Indeed, indeed. Damien Broderick From msd001 at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 01:41:20 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 21:41:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <8CCE05F13FA86F8-1A3C-1A96@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/22 Gregory Jones > With a name?that sounds?close to Damien,?you come in?with our expectation that you will be one who likes wordplay.? {8-]? Its a tradition around here, exuberantly and competently carried forth by Damien. Who carried first through third? > > Do feel free to tell us a little about Damian please, or not if you prefer.? You are among friends here. > > spike > ... and if wordplay isn't enough fun, we seem to have homophonic and homonymic member confusions too, eh? From nanogirl at halcyon.com Wed Jun 23 02:35:22 2010 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:35:22 -0600 Subject: [ExI] 3D Nanotechnology graphic novel "Lazarus" just released -P.S.- In-Reply-To: <24523291F3D3423BBCC6AAEB2CCC0A80@3DBOXXW4850> References: <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <24523291F3D3423BBCC6AAEB2CCC0A80@3DBOXXW4850> Message-ID: <151410B25FBD4966A82B2ACEA2A71088@3DBOXXW4850> P.S. you can watch the trailer for my nanotech graphic novel here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=km8p7VfgRjY Best wishes, Gina ----- Original Message ----- From: Gina Miller To: ExI chat list Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 3:42 PM Subject: [ExI] 3D Nanotechnology graphic novel "Lazarus" just released My first book hooray! Lazarus is fully illustrated by computer generated 3 dimensional artwork. Lazarus is a tale of nanotechnology, immortality and one man's quest to discover the truth. Gina "Nanogirl" Miller is the author and artist of Lazarus. Watch the trailer and find out more here: http://www.nanogirl.com/author.html Yours, Gina ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ 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 Wed Jun 23 02:41:38 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 21:41:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C20EC1A.7080901@satx.rr.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com><35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> <4C20E923.1040707@satx.rr.com> <4C20EC1A.7080901@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C217462.7080605@satx.rr.com> On 6/22/2010 12:00 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > (I hope ?Transhumanism: Towards a Futurist Philosophy? will appear in > THE >H READER.) It can be read at From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 23 02:32:15 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 19:32:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] wordplay in exi-chat Re: transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <443977.9810.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 6/22/10, Mike Dougherty wrote: ? >...exuberantly and competently carried forth by Damien. Who carried first through third? Who is on first.? I Don't Know is on third. ? Oh dear, this is how it starts... ? spike ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 23 03:06:52 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 22:06:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] wordplay in exi-chat Re: transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <443977.9810.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <443977.9810.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C217A4C.3060605@satx.rr.com> On 6/22/2010 9:32 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > > --- On *Tue, 6/22/10, Mike Dougherty //* wrote: > >...exuberantly and competently carried forth by Damien. > > Who carried first through third? > Who is on first. I Don't Know is on third. > Oh dear, this is how it starts... I'll second that. From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 03:11:54 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:11:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] transhumanist as a philosophy Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Damian, udend05 at aol.com wrote: > I can see where Damien is coming from on this issue as it is difficult to locate a 'core' text, or even a cluster of such texts. Most, if not all, philosophical movements have these core texts, so why doesn't transhumanism? I want to bring out the word 'movement' here: it is quite true that movements require such texts, established works that demonstrate, analyse and codfiy their beliefs. It would be a peculiar sort of movement that had no such thing, or only a loosely-assembled group of short works for people to point to in support of their views. It would, I suppose, be like a Christian suggesting they based their entire beliefs on the book of Leviticus and a snippet of the Gospel of John. One possibility is that transhumanism is closely tied up with the singularity, and the singularity is almost by definition something it is impossible to see beyond. > Nevertheless, to argue that for this reason alone transhumanism does not amount to a philosophy seems to be little more than a quibble. When I tell people that I hold the view that it is desirable for us to use technology to increase our abilities (in all sorts of ways which I needn't list here), I am taking an essentially philosophical stance. Why so? My statement has a normative flavour, for a start: it is a position I maintain, and which I support with all sorts of arguments, ethical, political, medical and so on. I will defend the view against its detractors and point to articles by other thinkers in support of my views (though I may not point to any single or group of core texts - yet!). So far, so philosophical. Among the medical is cryonics (been signed up with Alcor for 25 years now). In some people it is a relatively integrated set of mutually reinforcing memes. > That word 'yet' seems important. Transhumanism is a young philosophy (oops - I mean, set of loosely related thoughts) and has to go a long way before people can say they belong to the philosophical 'movement' of transhumanism. But they can certainly say that their philosophy is that of transhumanism. I can't see where it would hurt. > In any case, what else would you call it? Outlook? View? Or some new phrase we haven't thought of yet? Whatever, if as I maintain is the case, there is a difference between a philosophy and a philosophical movement, then transhumanism is certainly the one, if not quite yet the fully matured other. What I see Natasha, Max, Kurzweil, Bostrom, Sanders and all the rest as doing is helping it to grow into adulthood. If it only flowers with the singularity, then writing it down in final form may be the end of the line. Keith From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 23 02:45:33 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 19:45:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] hubble discovers jupiter brain In-Reply-To: <4C217462.7080605@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <776102.77983.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? Anders was right all along.? Is this a Jupiter Brain, or what? ? http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/06/22/a-vast-cosmic-cloudy-brain-looms-in-a-nearby-galaxy/ {8-] ? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 03:34:09 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:34:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 30 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 7:36 PM, udend05 at aol.com wrote: > If this is what Damien meant, I can only reiterate my view that transhumanism is only an infant: it needs careful handling by parents with reasonably consistent views, an abundance of love (for each other, as well), and a single-minded devotion to the idea that it will be the most beautiful adult ever created. It is my thought that the people who will have the most effect on bringing the elements of transhumanism into being (ultra medicine, AI, nanotech, etc) probably will have never heard of transhumanism or if they have, only in passing. The working stiffs tend to be allergic to anything with a philosophical flavor. Keith From sabrina.ballard at hotmail.com Wed Jun 23 03:14:13 2010 From: sabrina.ballard at hotmail.com (Sabrina Ballard) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 23:14:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] wordplay in exi-chat Re: transhumanist as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <443977.9810.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C217A4C.3060605@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: what is on second. :) On 6/22/10, Sabrina Ballard wrote: > what is second? :) > > On 6/22/10, Damien Broderick wrote: >> On 6/22/2010 9:32 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: >>> >>> --- On *Tue, 6/22/10, Mike Dougherty //* wrote: >>> >...exuberantly and competently carried forth by Damien. >>> >>> Who carried first through third? >>> Who is on first. I Don't Know is on third. >>> Oh dear, this is how it starts... >> >> I'll second that. >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > > -- > Sabrina Ballard > -- Sabrina Ballard From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 06:33:20 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 23:33:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] hubble discovers jupiter brain In-Reply-To: <776102.77983.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <4C217462.7080605@satx.rr.com> <776102.77983.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Spike, I half expected to see Bender floating in space (asking questions of the Jupiter Brain)... John : ) On 6/22/10, Gregory Jones wrote: > > Anders was right all along.? Is this a Jupiter Brain, or what? > > http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/06/22/a-vast-cosmic-cloudy-brain-looms-in-a-nearby-galaxy/ > > {8-] > > spike > From udend05 at aol.com Wed Jun 23 06:31:47 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 02:31:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 30 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CCE0B4E3DBF262-D34-66DC@webmail-d004.sysops.aol.com> >It is my thought that the people who will have the most effect on bringing the elements of transhumanism into being (ultra medicine, AI, nanotech, etc) probably will have never heard of transhumanism or if they have, only in passing. That's a good point. The tech' goes ahead without any sort of coherent over-arching agenda, unless it be that a good many scientists out there individually or corporately share the view that augmenting our species is a valuable thing to do. Another space for the 'philosophy' of transhumanism to occupy, perhaps? Damian U. _______________________________________________ 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 max at maxmore.com Wed Jun 23 07:00:54 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 02:00:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] A simple, but powerful technology for the abused Message-ID: <201006230701.o5N710IG024991@andromeda.ziaspace.com> It's not specifically transhumanist, but this is a technology that I celebrate for its ability (at least claimed, yet to be established) for reducing horrific abuse. I found the following quote to be utterly bloody awful (I can only hope it's exaggerated, but I fear not): "it's estimated that 500,000 rapes are committed annually in South Africa, and the likelihood of a young woman being sexually assaulted is far greater than her learning how to read." Apparently, the Rape-Axe can help: http://www.thegrio.com/news/anti-rape-condoms-with-teeth-make-debut-at-world-cup.php Now this is an augmentation that has major, immediate effects in at least some parts of the world. Max ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher The Proactionary Project Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From udend05 at aol.com Wed Jun 23 06:59:06 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 02:59:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C2144E4.5070502@satx.rr.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com><4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <8CCE05F13FA86F8-1A3C-1A96@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com><8CCE071ECD14B32-1A3C-341C@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> <4C2144E4.5070502@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <8CCE0B8B4DAC650-D34-68C9@webmail-d004.sysops.aol.com> >What I kept talking about was its status as *formal* philosophy. A fourth tier? Oh dear. But I think I agree again: a 'formal' philosophy sounds like something studied, published and debated in the usual circles. The first suggestion that pops into my mind is akin to Dickie's 'Institutional' definition of art - that an artifact becomes art when it is placed in a context (say, a gallery). Would a 'formal' philosophy be one, then, that is in such a context - i.e., a univeristy? As such, would not Bostrom's research centre at Oxford not count towards that definition? (T Anything other than the above would seem to suggest 'formal' was a synonym of 'systematic'. Or am I missing your point, Damien? What do you mean by formal? Another thing, tangentially: perhaps a reason for the slowness of transhumanism's development into a formal or systematic philosophy is to do with the fact that so much attention has been paid recently to the notion of existential risk and the possibility/probability of the kinds of technology conceived. Let's face it, is there a precedent for a philosophy having to cover so much territory and being linked with such experiential ideas (that are in constant flux - with apologies to Heraclitus)? These are exciting times: we are on the threshold of something entirely new on many levels. I'm off to read the Reader, kids willing. (Talking of whom... they have injections today - another good reason to hope for a time when gene-therapy rids us of the need for these invasive, painful and tortuous methods.) Best, Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rpicone at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 07:05:29 2010 From: rpicone at gmail.com (Robert Picone) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 00:05:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter In-Reply-To: References: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Sabrina Ballard < sabrina.ballard at allromanceebooks.com> wrote: > > > Perhaps the machinery you copy during upload specifically contains a > > highly-evolved self-delusion mechanism? If you leave it out and all > > the uploads suddenly become completely rational and realistic, have > > you "successfully" uploaded the original 'person' or have you created > > something else? > > I think that you could very easily say that you have created something > new because self-delusion in an important ans healthy part of many > people's lives. This person would be funtimentially very different > from the human we know today as to be 'alien' and 'cold'. I don't feel > that people would relate very will to the idea. > > The thought experiment raises some interesting questions. Someone with some major irrationality circuit removed, if such a thing existed, would certainly be a different person, but where is the line drawn? I suspect most uploads would be willing to choose to never get hungry and thirsty or have to regulate body temperature, but can someone really be considered the same person if their hypothalamus is essentially disabled? The brain would operate in a fundamentally different way, and when put in certain (simulated) identical environments they would act very significantly differently from the original over the course of a negligible timespan, so my criteria for being a different person are met, but they would on the other hand most likely be recognized as the original if the two were somehow otherwise the same. But, as far as that goes, there are plenty of conditions where someone's personality is unrecognizable from other states based upon factors of metabolism for example. Must you necessarily emulate someone's blood glucose levels based upon their pre-upload diet? How do you manage caffeine intake? Recreational drugs? Libido? Do you give the individual dials/switches for this kind of stuff? Wouldn't that too significantly modify behavior? As a monist it seems to me that 1:1 uploads are extremely unlikely. If our bodies are part of who we are, as seems obvious to me, then you can't really be the same person you would've otherwise been without painstakingly keeping even the most inconvenient constraints of your anatomy. This seems to me like too great of a drawback for anyone uploading to choose if they are given other options. Maybe we have too much of a focus on the impossible task of maintaining some imagined fidelity in who someone is. Maybe it is good enough to be an intellectual offspring who is remarkably like the original. I certainly am not the same person I was 5 years ago. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 07:16:28 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 00:16:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 3D Nanotechnology graphic novel "Lazarus" just released -P.S.- In-Reply-To: <151410B25FBD4966A82B2ACEA2A71088@3DBOXXW4850> References: <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <24523291F3D3423BBCC6AAEB2CCC0A80@3DBOXXW4850> <151410B25FBD4966A82B2ACEA2A71088@3DBOXXW4850> Message-ID: > My first book hooray! Lazarus is fully illustrated by computer generated 3 > dimensional artwork. Lazarus is a tale of nanotechnology, immortality and > one man's quest to discover the truth. Gina "Nanogirl" Miller is the author > and artist of Lazarus. > Watch the trailer and find out more here: > http://www.nanogirl.com/author.html Congratulations, Gina!! : ) I found the trailer fascinating. Best wishes, John From ryanobjc at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 07:16:47 2010 From: ryanobjc at gmail.com (Ryan Rawson) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 00:16:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Reputable US supplies of Piracetam Message-ID: Hi all, I've had good luck buying "UCB" Piracetam from a UK company (QHI), but it seems like such a long time and trip just to get such a simple substance. I've done a bit of research, and there seems to be one US-based source of piracetam as a tablet/capsule. A one "CTD Labs" Piracetam, they seem to be a sports nutrition/pharma company, but I have only learned about this via 3rd hand websites, they don't seem to have their own company branded website. Does anyone have any suggestions about either CTD labs, or some other organization? Thanks muchly! -ryan From pharos at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 07:29:29 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 08:29:29 +0100 Subject: [ExI] A simple, but powerful technology for the abused In-Reply-To: <201006230701.o5N710IG024991@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006230701.o5N710IG024991@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 6/23/10, Max More wrote: > I found the following quote to be utterly bloody awful (I can only hope > it's exaggerated, but I fear not): > > "it's estimated that 500,000 rapes are committed annually in South Africa, > and the likelihood of a young woman being sexually assaulted is far greater > than her learning how to read." > > Why are you appalled at this specific report about South Africa? When life is short and brutal, civilization breaks down. Many areas of Africa have similar problems of murder, rape, gang violence and tribal warfare. Possibly more troubling is the US where about 20% of women report having been raped at some time in their life. And you can probably double that to allow for under-reporting, for obvious reasons. BillK From giulio at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 07:31:38 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 09:31:38 +0200 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter In-Reply-To: References: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi Robert, "If our bodies are part of who we are, as seems obvious to me, then you can't really be the same person you would've otherwise been without painstakingly keeping even the most inconvenient constraints of your anatomy. " Our bodies are certainly part of who we are. This seems obvious to me as well, for example if I have a headache I am in a very bad mood and all my cognitive abilities are strongly degraded. But I would be happy to give up headaches, and I am sure I would still feel like me. And I am guessing if I were uploaded, provided I am given other sense inputs to replace those I have lost, I would still feel like me after some adaptation, in some very valid sense.. G- 2010/6/23 Robert Picone : > > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Sabrina Ballard > wrote: >> >> > Perhaps the machinery you copy during upload specifically contains a >> > highly-evolved self-delusion mechanism? ?If you leave it out and all >> > the uploads suddenly become completely rational and realistic, have >> > you "successfully" uploaded the original 'person' or have you created >> > something else? >> >> I think that you could very easily say that you have created something >> new because self-delusion in an important ans healthy part of many >> people's lives. This person would be funtimentially very different >> from the human we know today as to be 'alien' and 'cold'. I don't feel >> that people would relate very will to the idea. >> > > The thought experiment raises some interesting questions. ?Someone with some > major irrationality circuit removed, if such a thing existed, would > certainly be a different person, but where is the line drawn? > I suspect most uploads would be willing to choose to never get hungry and > thirsty or have to regulate body temperature, but can someone really be > considered the same person if their hypothalamus is essentially disabled? > ?The brain would operate in a?fundamentally?different way, and when put in > certain (simulated) identical environments they would act very significantly > differently from the original over the course of a negligible timespan, so > my criteria for being a different person are met, but they would on the > other hand most likely be recognized as the original if the two were somehow > otherwise the same. > But, as far as that goes, there are plenty of conditions where someone's > personality is unrecognizable from other states based upon factors of > metabolism for example. ?Must you?necessarily?emulate someone's blood > glucose levels based upon their pre-upload diet? ?How do you manage caffeine > intake? ?Recreational drugs? ?Libido? ?Do you give the individual > dials/switches for this kind of stuff? ?Wouldn't that too significantly > modify behavior? > > As a monist it seems to me that 1:1 uploads are extremely unlikely. ?If our > bodies are part of who we are, as seems obvious to me, then you can't really > be the same person you would've otherwise been without painstakingly keeping > even the most inconvenient constraints of your anatomy. ?This seems to me > like too great of a drawback for anyone uploading to choose if they are > given other options. > Maybe we have too much of a focus on the impossible task of maintaining some > imagined fidelity in who someone is. ?Maybe it is good enough to be an > intellectual offspring who is remarkably like the original. ?I certainly am > not the same person I was 5 years ago. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 07:41:21 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 00:41:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 30 In-Reply-To: <8CCE0B4E3DBF262-D34-66DC@webmail-d004.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CCE0B4E3DBF262-D34-66DC@webmail-d004.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: Keith Henson wrote: It is my thought that the people who will have the most effect on bringing the elements of transhumanism into being (ultra medicine, AI, nanotech, etc) probably will have never heard of transhumanism or if they have, only in passing. >>> But I thought this was changing with transhumanism becoming the "in thing" with young and not so young intellectuals, scientists and academics (such as with the H+ Summit held at *Harvard*). John On 6/22/10, udend05 at aol.com wrote: > > >>It is my thought that the people who will have the most effect on > bringing the elements of transhumanism into being (ultra medicine, AI, > nanotech, etc) probably will have never heard of transhumanism or if > they have, only in passing. > > That's a good point. The tech' goes ahead without any sort of coherent > over-arching agenda, unless it be that a good many scientists > out there individually or corporately share the view that augmenting our > species is a valuable thing to do. Another space for the 'philosophy' > of transhumanism to occupy, perhaps? > Damian U. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 08:31:48 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 01:31:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <8CCE0B8B4DAC650-D34-68C9@webmail-d004.sysops.aol.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <8CCE05F13FA86F8-1A3C-1A96@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> <8CCE071ECD14B32-1A3C-341C@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> <4C2144E4.5070502@satx.rr.com> <8CCE0B8B4DAC650-D34-68C9@webmail-d004.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: Giulio Prisco wrote: Believe me Natasha, I perfectly understand your reaction. But Damien's "accusation" is not an accusation, but a statement of fact. It is a fact that Max has not been as publicly and visibly active as he used to be. It is a fact that the Extropy Institute has been closed down for a long time now. It is a fact that the old issues of "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist Thought" cannot be found online. BTW I am sure you have seen RU Sirius' "Mondo 2000 History Project", perhaps we should do something similar for Extropy. It is a fact that others have taken advantage of the perceived absence of Max and the Extropy Institute, and promoted their favorite interpretation of transhumanism as _the_ interpretation of transhumanism. I and many others are not satisfied with this. There are certainly many exciting transhumanist projects around, but without the central hub that the Extropy Institute represented. >>> Natasha Vita-More wrote: I have been a big cheerleader and a pain in the neck to get Max up and running again and I am clearly and most definitely not in denial about his absence and the absence of all the frick'n hard work. THAT IS A FACT. >>> Whew!!! lol I admit to scratching my head when the Extropy Institute officially closed it's doors and said it's goals had been achieved. But I am very grateful for this list and my continued association with Max and Natasha. I only got to attend one Extropy conference (Extropy 5) and dearly wish there were more to come. I realize the WTA (errrr...., I mean H+) has some excellent gatherings, but give me that old-time Extropian religion! hee Giulio Prisco continued: The question is, how to recover the spirit and practical organization of a few years ago. >>> I agree. And with Natasha's ever increasingly high profile on the conference speaker circuit, and Max's great skill as a diplomatic debater (I've seen him in action), we should start having Extropy Conferences again. An Extropy Institute website reboot (maybe something along the lines of what H+ or the Imminst are doing) would be a good way to galvanize interest in a resurrected ExI. But I do hope the Extropy mailing list never goes away, because it's one of my very favorite internet watering holes. John : ) P.S. We will need everyone to buy ExI memberships and/or have an extremely wealthy patron to fund things. And I want a quantum computer decoder ring in exchange for joining up! On 6/22/10, udend05 at aol.com wrote: > >>What I kept talking about was its status as *formal* philosophy. > > A fourth tier? Oh dear. > > > But I think I agree again: a 'formal' philosophy sounds like something > studied, published and debated in the usual circles. The first suggestion > that pops into my mind is akin to Dickie's 'Institutional' definition of art > - that an artifact becomes art when it is placed in a context (say, a > gallery). Would a 'formal' philosophy be one, then, that is in such a > context - i.e., a univeristy? As such, would not Bostrom's research centre > at Oxford not count towards that definition? (T > > > Anything other than the above would seem to suggest 'formal' was a synonym > of 'systematic'. Or am I missing your point, Damien? What do you mean by > formal? > > > Another thing, tangentially: perhaps a reason for the slowness of > transhumanism's development into a formal or systematic philosophy is to do > with the fact that so much attention has been paid recently to the notion of > existential risk and the possibility/probability of the kinds of technology > conceived. Let's face it, is there a precedent for a philosophy having to > cover so much territory and being linked with such experiential ideas (that > are in constant flux - with apologies to Heraclitus)? These are exciting > times: we are on the threshold of something entirely new on many levels. > > > I'm off to read the Reader, kids willing. (Talking of whom... they have > injections today - another good reason to hope for a time when gene-therapy > rids us of the need for these invasive, painful and tortuous methods.) > > > Best, > Damian U. > > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 08:53:29 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 01:53:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Damian with an a In-Reply-To: <8CCE070BE3BB2F5-1A3C-32C9@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> References: <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C212F50.1040103@satx.rr.com> <8CCE070BE3BB2F5-1A3C-32C9@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: Damien U wrote: I am particularly interested in the question of whether it would be desirable to do the work of counselling/psychotherapy with a pill. In other words, if you could swallow a pill (where pill=some form of as yet undreamed-of but technologically-based therapy) and have all your problems disappear, would that be better (in a given sense) than going through the motions of solving the problems yourself (or at least trying to)? >>> This reminds me (as we use our currently rather crude medical technologies) of the classic book about antidepressants, "Listening to Prozac." The author felt that in some cases medication could work wonders on patients (within a few weeks/months) in ways that years of talk therapy just could not. But as I understand things, it is widely believed that a combination of talk therapy and medication is best for most people who suffer from serious depression. And then there is the idea of "cosmetic pharmacology" where a healthy person takes antidepressants to be "better than well." WELCOME TO THE LIST! : ) John On 6/22/10, udend05 at aol.com wrote: > Well then, I am Damian U., if you like. > > > I cannot remember what got me on to transhumanism in the first place (though > I'm sure it must have stemmed from my love for Banks' Culture), but I > remember it hitting me with the icy clarity of a no-brainer. I mean, in a > nut-shell, that the notion of improving ourselves and our lot, across the > wide spectrum of types of person, is without doubt a desirable thing. I can > point to many examples of where I feel transhumanism enters this life: I > want the best education/training/love/support and so on for my two children > - why not want the best genes, augmented capabilities etc. as well? I have > worked with autistic children for twelve years and I have seen the > tremendous amount of suffering this debilitating condition causes - if the > gene could be removed, the mirror neurons replaced/augmented, why not grasp > the chance to alleviate that suffering? (A tendentious issue; one that > braves the disapprobation of a politically correct formulation of personal > worth and value. That for another time, though.). For myself, I want to have > read all the great novels and seen all the great films, travelled to all the > cities of this world and listened to and learned to love all the music ever > written - and why shouldn't I? If technology can do it for me, bring it on. > Finally, politically. If something like nanotechnology can rid us of > scarcity and take us into the stars, we are surely duty-bound to try it. > Evolution has given us a chance (or staggered blindly towards an > opportunity, if you prefer). We'd be mad not to take it. > > > My background is in philosophy and I am currently working towards being a > professional counsellor with a view to doing postgrad' research into the > link between the talking therapies and emerging technologies - I am > particularly interested in the question of whether it would be desirable to > do the work of counselling/psychotherapy with a pill. In other words, if you > could swallow a pill (where pill=some form of as yet undreamed-of but > technologically-based therapy) and have all your problems disappear, would > that be better (in a given sense) than going through the motions of solving > the problems yourself (or at least trying to)? I am also working on a > screenplay that explores ideas around the abolutionist project, but that > gets little attention in amongst everything else I have to be and do. > > > That's (mostly (I left out my love for parentheses)) me. > > > Damian U. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Damien Broderick > To: ExI chat list > Sent: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 22:46 > Subject: [ExI] Damian with an a > > > On 6/22/2010 4:37 PM, Gregory Jones wrote: > >> Do feel free to tell us a little about Damian please > > Do, please, and fling in your surname or first initial thereof, while you're > at it, so we don't get mixed up. (Few people seem to notice the ia/ie > distinction.) > > Damien B. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > From stathisp at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 10:27:45 2010 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 20:27:45 +1000 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2010/6/23 Ross Evans : > http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/06/22/jesus-returning-cancer-cured-u-s-poll-predicts-life-in-2050/ > > That 41%, the idiot contingent, represents an enormous obstacle to the kind > of future the transhumanist movement believes in. These are people for whom > modernity is difficult to deal with, what awaits will alienate them in ways > they can't even imagine; and therein lies the problem. I think the biggest > terrorist threat in the future may well? be from some confluence of crazies, > from disparate religious? traditions, united under the banner of > neo-ludditry. Surely some of the 41% are only pretending to be crazy, or there's some sampling error, or something. Otherwise, two out of five people you bump into really believe Jesus is going to return, and that figure just seems incredible. -- Stathis Papaioannou From pharos at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 11:16:26 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:16:26 +0100 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > Surely some of the 41% are only pretending to be crazy, or there's > some sampling error, or something. Otherwise, two out of five people > you bump into really believe Jesus is going to return, and that figure > just seems incredible. > > No, the figure is little changed since the previous survey in 1999 when 44% believed Jesus would return. But it depends what circles you move in. College graduates are 19%, but....... at almost 60% are white Protestant evangelicals and those with only High School or less education (not necessarily the same people). If you want to extrapolate from the 1546 people in the phone survey (land-line and cell phone), then you should make sure that the percentage of those groups in the survey reflect the percentage in the total population. Which presumably Pew have done, as they claim to be polling experts. BillK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scerir at libero.it Wed Jun 23 12:46:36 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 14:46:36 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] A simple, but powerful technology for the abused Message-ID: <17016820.1328841277297196090.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> ... it also solves a puzzle ... http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=68 From stathisp at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 14:02:40 2010 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:02:40 +1000 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2010/6/23 BillK : > On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Stathis Papaioannou? wrote: >> Surely some of the 41% are only pretending to be crazy, or there's >> some sampling error, or something. Otherwise, two out of five people >> you bump into really believe Jesus is going to return, and that figure >> just seems incredible. >> >> > > No, the figure is little changed since the previous survey in 1999 when 44% > believed Jesus would return. But it depends what circles you move in. > > College graduates are 19%, but....... > at almost 60% are white Protestant evangelicals and those with only High > School or less education (not necessarily the same people). If you want to > extrapolate from the 1546 people in the phone survey (land-line and cell > phone), then you should make sure that the percentage of those groups in the > survey reflect the percentage in the total population. Which presumably Pew > have done, as they claim to be polling experts. > > > > Yes, but I wonder how many people really believe the answer they give, rather than just saying it because it is socially acceptable. -- Stathis Papaioannou From pharos at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 14:34:02 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 15:34:02 +0100 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/23/10, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > Yes, but I wonder how many people really believe the answer they give, > rather than just saying it because it is socially acceptable. > > Well, that suggestion could invalidate every poll ever done. :) I believe that Pew works with panels of people that volunteer to answer surveys for them and they provide Pew with details of their lifestyle, so that Pew can make a balanced selection for each poll. The survey is done by phone, so there is no peer pressure to saying yes, no, maybe, to each question asked. If there was anyone else in the room, they wouldn't hear the questions. It is also unlikely that people would volunteer to do surveys in the first place if they intended to lie. Why bother? BillK From bbenzai at yahoo.com Wed Jun 23 13:15:19 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 06:15:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] A simple, but powerful technology for the abused In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <345173.44538.qm@web114409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Max More wrote: > > It's not specifically transhumanist, but this is a > technology that I > celebrate for its ability (at least claimed, yet to be > established) > for reducing horrific abuse. > > I found the following quote to be utterly bloody awful (I > can only > hope it's exaggerated, but I fear not): > > "it's estimated that 500,000 rapes are committed annually > in South > Africa, and the likelihood of a young woman being sexually > assaulted > is far greater than her learning how to read." > > Apparently, the Rape-Axe can help: > > http://www.thegrio.com/news/anti-rape-condoms-with-teeth-make-debut-at-world-cup.php > > Now this is an augmentation that has major, immediate > effects in at > least some parts of the world. Nice try, but it'll fail, I fear. For this to be effective, the potential rape victims need to know about it, which means the potential rapists will also know about it, and perform a simple pre-rape check, followed by a brutal beating if the victim is using one. I expect the main effect will be an increase in beatings and murders, not a decrease in rapes. Ben Zaiboc From stathisp at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 15:14:13 2010 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 01:14:13 +1000 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 24 June 2010 00:34, BillK wrote: > On 6/23/10, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> Yes, but I wonder how many people really believe the answer they give, >> ?rather than just saying it because it is socially acceptable. >> >> > > Well, that suggestion could invalidate every poll ever done. ? :) > > I believe that Pew works with panels of people that volunteer to > answer surveys for them and they provide Pew with details of their > lifestyle, so that Pew can make a balanced selection for each poll. > The survey is done by phone, so there is no peer pressure to saying > yes, no, maybe, to each question asked. If there was anyone else in > the room, they wouldn't hear the questions. It is also unlikely that > people would volunteer to do surveys in the first place if they > intended to lie. Why bother? I suspect it may be different with people who have had a religious upbringing. They may know it's all crap but be uncomfortable admitting it, even to themselves. One of the items in Christian indoctrination is that one must have faith, implying that there is a strong tendency to doubt that needs to be stamped out. So the faithful are not so much convinced that their religion is true as that it is bad to doubt that it is true. If they are taught to feel guilty about the mere act of doubting, they are more likely to lie in surveys. It would be easier to throw off this mindset in secular countries but the US is not really a secular country. -- Stathis Papaioannou From mbb386 at main.nc.us Wed Jun 23 15:27:22 2010 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 11:27:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > I believe that Pew works with panels of people that volunteer to > answer surveys for them and they provide Pew with details of their > lifestyle, so that Pew can make a balanced selection for each poll. > The survey is done by phone, so there is no peer pressure to saying > yes, no, maybe, to each question asked. If there was anyone else in > the room, they wouldn't hear the questions. It is also unlikely that > people would volunteer to do surveys in the first place if they > intended to lie. Why bother? > Anyone can refuse a survey, but for Pew to have a pre-selected, self-selected group they ask seems highly un-random, thus potentially unrepresentative. Regards, MB From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 16:11:48 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 09:11:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 7:36 PM, udend05 at aol.com wrote: snip > My background is in philosophy and I am currently working towards being a professional counsellor with a view to doing postgrad' research into the link between the talking therapies and emerging technologies - I am particularly interested in the question of whether it would be desirable to do the work of counselling/psychotherapy with a pill. In other words, if you could swallow a pill (where pill=some form of as yet undreamed-of but technologically-based therapy) and have all your problems disappear, snip Old technology. When the shades of night are falling, Comes a fellow ev'ryone knows, It's the old dope peddler, Spreading joy wherever he goes. Ev'ry evening you will find him, Around our neighborhood. It's the old dope peddler Doing well by doing good. He gives the kids free samples, Because he knows full well That today's young innocent faces Will be tomorrow's clientele. Here's a cure for all your troubles, Here's an end to all distress. It's the old dope peddler With his powdered ha-happiness. http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/The-Old-Dope-Peddler-lyrics-Tom-Lehrer/4C1F7B5A27436FAF48256A7D0024C395 Keith :-) From natasha at natasha.cc Wed Jun 23 16:22:43 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 11:22:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com><8CCE05F13FA86F8-1A3C-1A96@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com><8CCE071ECD14B32-1A3C-341C@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com><4C2144E4.5070502@satx.rr.com><8CCE0B8B4DAC650-D34-68C9@webmail-d004.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <77E1C6E807A649A9B8EF1FD5F9336BDB@DFC68LF1> John Grigg wrote: Giulio Prisco wrote: >>>It is a fact that others have taken advantage of the perceived absence of Max and the Extropy Institute, and promoted their favorite interpretation of transhumanism as _the_ interpretation of transhumanism. I and many others are not satisfied with this. There are certainly many exciting transhumanist projects around, but without the central hub that the Extropy Institute represented.<<< Natasha Vita-More wrote: >>I have been a big cheerleader and a pain in the neck to get Max up and running again and I am clearly and most definitely not in denial about his absence and the absence of all the frick'n hard work. THAT IS A FACT.<< >Whew!!! Lol< :-) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL9xOLpwI0I ... Makes me want to SHOUT. Dubby-dub-ba-du-wah. From giulio at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 16:48:59 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:48:59 +0200 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <8CCE05F13FA86F8-1A3C-1A96@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> <8CCE071ECD14B32-1A3C-341C@Webmail-d107.sysops.aol.com> <4C2144E4.5070502@satx.rr.com> <8CCE0B8B4DAC650-D34-68C9@webmail-d004.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: I definitely agree with the idea to re-launch Extropy and the Extro conferences. Of course the decision belongs to Natasha and Max. I have already told them that, if they wish, I will do my best to support the initiative, and I am sure I am not the only one. About conferences: in a few days I will formally announce the next cycle of Transvision conferences, now independent of WTA/H+. G. On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:31 AM, John Grigg wrote: > Giulio Prisco wrote: > Believe me Natasha, I perfectly understand your reaction. But Damien's > "accusation" is not an accusation, but a statement of fact. > > It is a fact that Max has not been as publicly and visibly active as > he used to be. It is a fact that the Extropy Institute has been closed > down for a long time now. It is a fact that the old issues of > "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist Thought" cannot be found online. > BTW I am sure you have seen RU Sirius' "Mondo 2000 History Project", > perhaps we should do something similar for Extropy. > > It is a fact that others have taken advantage of the perceived absence > of Max and the Extropy Institute, and promoted their favorite > interpretation of transhumanism as _the_ interpretation of > transhumanism. I and many others are not satisfied with this. There > are certainly many exciting transhumanist projects around, but without > the central hub that the Extropy Institute represented. >>>> > > Natasha Vita-More wrote: > I have been a big cheerleader and a pain in the neck to get Max up and > running again and I am clearly and most definitely not in denial about > his absence and the absence of all the frick'n hard work. THAT IS A > FACT. >>>> > > Whew!!! lol ?I admit to scratching my head when the Extropy Institute > officially closed it's doors and said it's goals had been achieved. > But I am very grateful for this list and my continued association with > Max and Natasha. ? I only got to attend one Extropy conference > (Extropy 5) and dearly wish there were more to come. ?I realize the > WTA (errrr...., I mean H+) ? has some excellent gatherings, but give > me that old-time Extropian religion! hee > > Giulio Prisco continued: > The question is, how to recover the spirit and practical organization > of a few years ago. >>>> > > I agree. ?And with Natasha's ever increasingly high profile on the > conference speaker circuit, and Max's great skill as a diplomatic > debater (I've seen him in action), we should start having Extropy > Conferences again. ?An Extropy Institute website reboot (maybe > something along the lines of what H+ or the Imminst are doing) would > be a good way to galvanize interest in a resurrected ExI. ?But I do > hope the Extropy mailing list never goes away, because it's one of my > very favorite internet watering holes. > > John ?: ) > > P.S. ?We will need everyone to buy ExI memberships and/or have an > extremely wealthy patron to fund things. ?And I want a quantum > computer decoder ring in exchange for joining up! > > > > On 6/22/10, udend05 at aol.com wrote: >> >>>What I kept talking about was its status as *formal* philosophy. >> >> A fourth tier? Oh dear. >> >> >> But I think I agree again: a 'formal' philosophy sounds like something >> studied, published and debated in the usual circles. The first suggestion >> that pops into my mind is akin to Dickie's 'Institutional' definition of art >> - that an artifact becomes art when it is placed in a context (say, a >> gallery). Would a 'formal' philosophy be one, then, that is in such a >> context - i.e., a univeristy? As such, would not Bostrom's research centre >> at Oxford not count towards that definition? (T >> >> >> Anything other than the above would seem to suggest 'formal' was a synonym >> of 'systematic'. Or am I missing your point, Damien? What do you mean by >> formal? >> >> >> Another thing, tangentially: perhaps a reason for the slowness of >> transhumanism's development into a formal or systematic philosophy is to do >> with the fact that so much attention has been paid recently to the notion of >> existential risk and the possibility/probability of the kinds of technology >> conceived. Let's face it, is there a precedent for a philosophy having to >> cover so much territory and being linked with such experiential ideas (that >> are in constant flux - with apologies to Heraclitus)? These are exciting >> times: we are on the threshold of something entirely new on many levels. >> >> >> I'm off to read the Reader, kids willing. (Talking of whom... they have >> injections today - another good reason to hope for a time when gene-therapy >> rids us of the need for these invasive, painful and tortuous methods.) >> >> >> Best, >> Damian U. >> >> > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From udend05 at aol.com Wed Jun 23 19:43:41 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 15:43:41 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> Hmmm. Lest anyone should think I am an advocate of such a technology, I want to reiterate here that I am only interested in the potential desirability of replacing talking therapies with some from of advanced technology that could wipe away a person's problems (cognitive, emotional, psychological) and make them more effective in terms of their aspirations and their ability to lead successful lives (however they may be defined). I see it as a branch of the abolitionist project - which is also something I am not entirely decided upon. But I am certainly not advocating for 'dope' as a way of making people happy. Indeed, I'm not really talking about making people happy at all - not in the sense of 'Hey, I'm so high I couldn't give a flying...'. What I am suggesting is a process that could reverse-engineer, for instance, a person's life in order to understand where lines of thought were tainted with irrational (to use the language of Albert Ellis, the pioneer of Rational Emotive Behavioural Therapy) elements. Such a technology might enable a person to access buried memories, repressed feelings, forgotten relationships or experiences. Think mind uploading and then reviewing the data, to give a very basic example. To liken these ideas to the use of crude neuropharmaceuticals or psychostimulants is an irrelevance at best. The crux of my issue is whether there is some inherent value in working through a set of problems within a therapeutic setting, or whether that struggle for understanding is an unecessary by-product of the procedure. That needs a great deal of working out. Damian U. -----Original Message----- From: Keith Henson To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Sent: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 17:11 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 7:36 PM, udend05 at aol.com wrote: snip > My background is in philosophy and I am currently working towards being a professional counsellor with a view to doing postgrad' research into the link between the talking therapies and emerging technologies - I am particularly interested in the question of whether it would be desirable to do the work of counselling/psychotherapy with a pill. In other words, if you could swallow a pill (where pill=some form of as yet undreamed-of but technologically-based therapy) and have all your problems disappear, snip Old technology. When the shades of night are falling, Comes a fellow ev'ryone knows, It's the old dope peddler, Spreading joy wherever he goes. Ev'ry evening you will find him, Around our neighborhood. It's the old dope peddler Doing well by doing good. He gives the kids free samples, Because he knows full well That today's young innocent faces Will be tomorrow's clientele. Here's a cure for all your troubles, Here's an end to all distress. It's the old dope peddler With his powdered ha-happiness. http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/The-Old-Dope-Peddler-lyrics-Tom-Lehrer/4C1F7B5A27436FAF48256A7D0024C395 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 spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 23 20:45:20 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:45:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] alternate reality airshow In-Reply-To: <776102.77983.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <301623.98242.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? Invented an?alternate reality machine, went to alt-2010, took in an airshow while I was there, snapped some photos: ? http://www.scifiairshow.com/guided-tour.html spike ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nanogirl at halcyon.com Wed Jun 23 21:02:56 2010 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 15:02:56 -0600 Subject: [ExI] 3D Nanotechnology graphic novel "Lazarus" just released-P.S.- In-Reply-To: References: <772519.44798.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com><24523291F3D3423BBCC6AAEB2CCC0A80@3DBOXXW4850><151410B25FBD4966A82B2ACEA2A71088@3DBOXXW4850> Message-ID: Thank you John for watching. I hope everyone on the list enjoys it - Gina ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Grigg" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 1:16 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] 3D Nanotechnology graphic novel "Lazarus" just released-P.S.- >> My first book hooray! Lazarus is fully illustrated by computer >> generated 3 >> dimensional artwork. Lazarus is a tale of nanotechnology, immortality and >> one man's quest to discover the truth. Gina "Nanogirl" Miller is the >> author >> and artist of Lazarus. >> Watch the trailer and find out more here: >> http://www.nanogirl.com/author.html > > > Congratulations, Gina!! : ) I found the trailer fascinating. > > Best wishes, > > John > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From sparge at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 21:18:34 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 17:18:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] hubble discovers jupiter brain In-Reply-To: <776102.77983.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <4C217462.7080605@satx.rr.com> <776102.77983.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/22 Gregory Jones > > Anders was right all along. Is this a Jupiter Brain, or what? > > > http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/06/22/a-vast-cosmic-cloudy-brain-looms-in-a-nearby-galaxy/ > That's a pretty picture...but if you look closely you'll see that some of the brighter objects have a cross-shaped flares, as if Hubble (or NASA) is using a photographer's "star filter". Further inspection reveals that the angles on flares aren't all the same--on the left side they lean to the right and on the right side they lean to the left. It looks like the image was constructed by stitching at least two images together. I wonder if the raw images are available anywhere. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Wed Jun 23 21:42:56 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 17:42:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter In-Reply-To: References: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/23 Robert Picone > Must you necessarily emulate someone's blood glucose levels based upon > their pre-upload diet? How do you manage caffeine intake? Recreational > drugs? Libido? Do you give the individual dials/switches for this kind of > stuff? Wouldn't that too significantly modify behavior? "Too significantly" for what? To be considered the same person? I don't think so. I'd be happy to have a libido dial/switch today. I posted about that on the original Extropy list years ago, and I still don't like the level of influence that it has on me. I enjoy sex a lot, but I'd really rather not have the distractions that having a libido provides *all* the time. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Jun 23 23:57:18 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 16:57:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] A simple, but powerful technology for the abused In-Reply-To: <345173.44538.qm@web114409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <249303.72276.qm@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 6/23/10, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > For this to be effective, the potential rape victims need > to know about it, which means the potential rapists will > also know about it, and perform a simple pre-rape check, > followed by a brutal beating if the victim is using one. Most criminals don't think that far ahead. Would-be criminals gifted with extensive amounts of foresight and planning tend to go into big business and/or politics, where they can escape repercussions for their actions - partly by making sure the law does not forbid their particular methods. It is a bit circular, but it does work out. From stathisp at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 00:42:37 2010 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:42:37 +1000 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/24 : > Hmmm. Lest anyone should think I am an advocate of such a technology, I want > to reiterate here that I am only interested in the potential desirability of > replacing talking therapies with some from of advanced technology that could > wipe away a person's problems (cognitive, emotional, psychological) and make > them more effective in terms of their aspirations and their ability to lead > successful lives (however they may be defined). I see it as a branch of the > abolitionist project - which is also something I am not entirely decided > upon. > But I am certainly not advocating for 'dope' as a way of making people > happy. Indeed, I'm not really talking about making people happy at all - not > in the sense of 'Hey, I'm so high I couldn't give a flying...'. What I am > suggesting is a process that could reverse-engineer, for instance, a > person's life in order to understand where lines of thought were tainted > with irrational (to use the language of Albert Ellis, the pioneer of > Rational Emotive Behavioural Therapy) elements. Such a technology might > enable a person to access buried memories, repressed feelings, forgotten > relationships or experiences. Think mind uploading and then reviewing the > data, to give a very basic example. > To liken these ideas to the use of crude neuropharmaceuticals or > psychostimulants is an irrelevance at best. The crux of my issue is whether > there is some inherent value in working through a set of problems within a > therapeutic setting, or whether that struggle for understanding is an > unecessary by-product of the procedure. That needs a great deal of working > out. > Damian U. With a talking therapy, you bring about changes in a person's brain by causing vibrations in the tympanic membrane. With the equivalent pill, you bring about the same changes via absorption of chemicals from the gut. One problem with this is that you can't really have an "equivalent" pill because there is not enough room in a single chemical to pack the information you can pack into sound waves. So, a pill will be much cruder than talking therapy. Sometimes crude can be more effective: you can crack a walnut more easily with a hammer than by talking to it; other times crude will not be as effective. In theory you could put more information into a pill by having multiple chemicals in combination, but there is no guarantee that this method would work. I would be more hopeful about direct brain-computer interfaces. -- Stathis Papaioannou From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 00:52:35 2010 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 02:52:35 +0200 Subject: [ExI] hubble discovers jupiter brain In-Reply-To: References: <4C217462.7080605@satx.rr.com> <776102.77983.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/23 Dave Sill > 2010/6/22 Gregory Jones > > >> Anders was right all along. Is this a Jupiter Brain, or what? >> >> >> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/06/22/a-vast-cosmic-cloudy-brain-looms-in-a-nearby-galaxy/ >> > > That's a pretty picture...but if you look closely you'll see that some of > the brighter objects have a cross-shaped flares, as if Hubble (or NASA) is > using a photographer's "star filter". Further inspection reveals that the > angles on flares aren't all the same--on the left side they lean to the > right and on the right side they lean to the left. It looks like the image > was constructed by stitching at least two images together. > Probably many more than two, because the image seems much too big for the Hubble field of view. Images like this are typically processed for aesthetics. The different wavelengths of each filter are remapped to different colours for maximum effect. The crosses on the brighter objects are diffraction effects caused by the four arms holding the secondary mirror in place. The holding arms necessarily intersect the aperture. This happens in all telescopes, with two, four or six-shaped "crosses" depending on the holding arms pattern. > > I wonder if the raw images are available anywhere. > > Here they are: http://archive.eso.org/archive/hst/search/ (or the older interface if the new one does not work: http://archive.eso.org/wdb/wdb/hst/science/form ) input "LHA 120-N 11B" (the catalogue reference for this object) as the target name for the SIMBAD catalog. Beware that these kinds of data dumps are quite difficult to use if you don't know what you are doing :-) Alfio > -Dave > > _______________________________________________ > 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 sabrina.ballard at hotmail.com Thu Jun 24 00:01:08 2010 From: sabrina.ballard at hotmail.com (Sabrina Ballard) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 20:01:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: >I want to reiterate here that I am only interested in the potential desirability of replacing >talking therapies with some from of advanced technology that could wipe away a person's >problems (cognitive, emotional, psychological) and make them more effective in terms of >their aspirations and their ability to lead successful lives (however they may be defined). I think that learning to solve your own issues is important in many cases. Instantly "solving" people's problems could be very counter productive in the long term as without some kind of internal struggle, would people ever develop a very complex or solid identity? But I do think that in certian cases it could be useful to simply "wash it all away". Sabrina Ballard From arthur.breitman at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 01:02:30 2010 From: arthur.breitman at gmail.com (Arthur Breitman) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 21:02:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] hubble discovers jupiter brain In-Reply-To: References: <4C217462.7080605@satx.rr.com> <776102.77983.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:33 AM, John Grigg wrote: > Spike, > > I half expected to see Bender floating in space (asking questions of > the Jupiter Brain)... > > Bender ? Everyone knows it's Marvin who has a brain the size of a planet... > John : ) > > On 6/22/10, Gregory Jones wrote: > > > > Anders was right all along. Is this a Jupiter Brain, or what? > > > > > http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/06/22/a-vast-cosmic-cloudy-brain-looms-in-a-nearby-galaxy/ > > > > {8-] > > > > 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 msd001 at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 02:07:49 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 22:07:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter In-Reply-To: References: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/23 Dave Sill : > 2010/6/23 Robert Picone >> >> Must you?necessarily?emulate someone's blood glucose levels based upon >> their pre-upload diet? ?How do you manage caffeine intake? ?Recreational >> drugs? ?Libido? ?Do you give the individual dials/switches for this kind of >> stuff? ?Wouldn't that too significantly modify behavior? > > "Too significantly" for what? To be considered the same person? I don't > think so. I read the original as, "Wouldn't that also significantly modify behavior?" From rpicone at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 02:58:18 2010 From: rpicone at gmail.com (Robert Picone) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 19:58:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter In-Reply-To: References: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > 2010/6/23 Dave Sill : > > 2010/6/23 Robert Picone > >> > >> Must you necessarily emulate someone's blood glucose levels based upon > >> their pre-upload diet? How do you manage caffeine intake? Recreational > >> drugs? Libido? Do you give the individual dials/switches for this kind > of > >> stuff? Wouldn't that too significantly modify behavior? > > > > "Too significantly" for what? To be considered the same person? I don't > > think so. > > I read the original as, "Wouldn't that also significantly modify behavior?" > > > You read it as intended, sorry for the parsing confusion there. ...Though, I'd say the number one cause of people failing to recognize personalities as being the same in purely biological humans is the use of a dopamine switch, so I can certainly see such underlying access as making someone a different person. I'm not convinced it has to be a big deal to no longer be the same person though. People acknowledge not being the people they previously were all the time, does a difference in substrate really not qualify for the same freakout-exemption given to a difference in age? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sabrina.ballard at hotmail.com Thu Jun 24 04:25:03 2010 From: sabrina.ballard at hotmail.com (Sabrina Ballard) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:25:03 -0400 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter In-Reply-To: References: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > I'm not convinced it has to be a big deal to no longer be the same person > though. People acknowledge not being the people they previously were all > the time, does a difference in substrate really not qualify for the same > freakout-exemption given to a difference in age? When you put it this way, I can see your point. But I still think that apprehension would exist because people may not know how they will be changed, or want to be changed in that manner. Sabrina Ballard From max at maxmore.com Thu Jun 24 05:23:03 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:23:03 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Stem cells reverse blindness caused by burns Message-ID: <201006240523.o5O5NB5m008358@andromeda.ziaspace.com> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37881663/ns/health-health_care/ From udend05 at aol.com Thu Jun 24 05:49:16 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 01:49:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CCE1781DE10B9D-455C-C279@Webmail-d116.sysops.aol.com> In my original message I wrote: >where pill=some form of as yet undreamed-of but technologically-based therapy Perhaps I should have been clearer on the 'pill's' status as a metaphor, but I'm not sure how. Best, Damian U. -----Original Message----- From: Stathis Papaioannou To: ExI chat list Sent: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 1:42 Subject: Re: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler 2010/6/24 : > Hmmm. Lest anyone should think I am an advocate of such a technology, I want > to reiterate here that I am only interested in the potential desirability of > replacing talking therapies with some from of advanced technology that could > wipe away a person's problems (cognitive, emotional, psychological) and make > them more effective in terms of their aspirations and their ability to lead > successful lives (however they may be defined). I see it as a branch of the > abolitionist project - which is also something I am not entirely decided > upon. > But I am certainly not advocating for 'dope' as a way of making people > happy. Indeed, I'm not really talking about making people happy at all - not > in the sense of 'Hey, I'm so high I couldn't give a flying...'. What I am > suggesting is a process that could reverse-engineer, for instance, a > person's life in order to understand where lines of thought were tainted > with irrational (to use the language of Albert Ellis, the pioneer of > Rational Emotive Behavioural Therapy) elements. Such a technology might > enable a person to access buried memories, repressed feelings, forgotten > relationships or experiences. Think mind uploading and then reviewing the > data, to give a very basic example. > To liken these ideas to the use of crude neuropharmaceuticals or > psychostimulants is an irrelevance at best. The crux of my issue is whether > there is some inherent value in working through a set of problems within a > therapeutic setting, or whether that struggle for understanding is an > unecessary by-product of the procedure. That needs a great deal of working > out. > Damian U. With a talking therapy, you bring about changes in a person's brain by causing vibrations in the tympanic membrane. With the equivalent pill, you bring about the same changes via absorption of chemicals from the gut. One problem with this is that you can't really have an "equivalent" pill because there is not enough room in a single chemical to pack the information you can pack into sound waves. So, a pill will be much cruder than talking therapy. Sometimes crude can be more effective: you can crack a walnut more easily with a hammer than by talking to it; other times crude will not be as effective. In theory you could put more information into a pill by having multiple chemicals in combination, but there is no guarantee that this method would work. I would be more hopeful about direct brain-computer interfaces. -- Stathis Papaioannou _______________________________________________ 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 udend05 at aol.com Thu Jun 24 06:11:56 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 02:11:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8CCE17B489FB135-455C-C439@Webmail-d116.sysops.aol.com> >I think that learning to solve your own issues is important in many cases. Instantly "solving" people's problems could be very counter productive in the long term as without some kind of internal struggle, would people ever develop a very complex or solid identity? I would sincerely love you to unpack that first sentence a bit more, to articulate the thoughts behind it. (Is the alternative counter-intuitive? Is it only an intuition in the first place? How are you thinking that?) As to the second, I think that raises a pragmatic issue: the person might not develop a solid identity based on their problems (or their ability to solve them), but they might develop an excellent foundation on the basis of a sound mental well-being, if life were to go on without those problems. Is there some virtue in solving your own problems that isn't outweighed by the practical consideration of a 'successful life' (again: however that may be construed) based on mental and emotional equilibrium? Of course, the history of the idea that we need suffering to be completely who we are is a long one and is, I think, religious in origin. Do we need suffering to be all that we can be? Is mental pain and anguish necessary to our individual evolution? Does routine irrational thinking and its consequences have a special place in our developmental process? If so, what? Are we sentimentally bound to it? What would development without these things look like? Best, Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 06:29:08 2010 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:29:08 +1000 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: On 24 June 2010 10:01, Sabrina Ballard wrote: >>I want to reiterate here that I am only interested in the potential desirability of replacing >talking therapies with some from of advanced technology that could wipe away a person's >problems (cognitive, emotional, psychological) and make them more effective in terms of >their aspirations and their ability to lead successful lives (however they may be defined). > > I think that learning to solve your own issues is important in many > cases. Instantly "solving" people's problems could be very counter > productive in the long term as without some kind of internal struggle, > would people ever develop a very complex or solid identity? > > But I do think that in certian cases it could be useful to simply > "wash it all away". But if you instantly "learn to solve your own issues" by having the knowledge implanted into your brain - i.e. by having exactly the same brain changes as would occur doing it the slow way, but as a result of direct brain manipulation - your future psychological trajectory would be exactly the same. -- Stathis Papaioannou From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 24 06:40:38 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 01:40:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <4C22FDE6.2030901@satx.rr.com> On 6/24/2010 1:29 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> > I think that learning to solve your own issues is important in many >> > cases. Instantly "solving" people's problems could be very counter >> > productive in the long term as without some kind of internal struggle, >> > would people ever develop a very complex or solid identity? > But if you instantly "learn to solve your own issues" by having the > knowledge implanted into your brain - i.e. by having exactly the same > brain changes as would occur doing it the slow way, but as a result of > direct brain manipulation - your future psychological trajectory would > be exactly the same. By Sabrina's hypothesis, having the knowledge "implanted" would only be equivalent if it was bundled with fake memories of adversity and insight gained via determination. Are you assuming that fakery will be built in, or denying the premise? Damien Broderick From invitations at boxbe.com Thu Jun 24 06:47:36 2010 From: invitations at boxbe.com (ilsa bartlett) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 23:47:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] ilsa bartlett invites you to use Boxbe Message-ID: <1443039788.169419.1277362056830.JavaMail.prod@app002.boxbe.com> ExI, I'd like to share approved contacts with you on Boxbe Here's the link: https://www.boxbe.com/register?tc=3380482208_1417857937 -ilsa This message was sent at the request of ilsa.bartlett at gmail.com. If you want to opt-out of invitations from Boxbe members, use this link: https://www.boxbe.com/unsubscribe?email=extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org&tc=3380482208_1417857937 Boxbe, Inc. | 2390 Chestnut Street #201 | San Francisco, CA 94123 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 07:00:56 2010 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 17:00:56 +1000 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: <4C22FDE6.2030901@satx.rr.com> References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> <4C22FDE6.2030901@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 24 June 2010 16:40, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/24/2010 1:29 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > >>> > ?I think that learning to solve your own issues is important in many >>> > ?cases. Instantly "solving" people's problems could be very counter >>> > ?productive in the long term as without some kind of internal struggle, >>> > ?would people ever develop a very complex or solid identity? > >> But if you instantly "learn to solve your own issues" by having the >> knowledge implanted into your brain - i.e. by having exactly the same >> brain changes as would occur doing it the slow way, but as a result of >> direct brain manipulation - your future psychological trajectory would >> be exactly the same. > > By Sabrina's hypothesis, having the knowledge "implanted" would only be > equivalent if it was bundled with fake memories of adversity and insight > gained via determination. Are you assuming that fakery will be built in, or > denying the premise? The fakery could be built in, or it could perhaps be done without the fakery. It may be possible to create the same level of aversion to putting your hand in a fire without actually doing it or implanting a false memory of doing it. -- Stathis Papaioannou From pharos at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 07:33:21 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:33:21 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: <4C22FDE6.2030901@satx.rr.com> References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> <4C22FDE6.2030901@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 6/24/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > By Sabrina's hypothesis, having the knowledge "implanted" would only be > equivalent if it was bundled with fake memories of adversity and insight > gained via determination. Are you assuming that fakery will be built in, or > denying the premise? > > If it ever becomes possible to implant specific beliefs bundled with fake memories for added reinforcement then I foresee government agencies doing wholesale manipulation of populations. (For their own good, of course, or for the sake of the children). BillK From bbenzai at yahoo.com Thu Jun 24 07:33:56 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:33:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <406540.74836.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > I suspect it may be different with people who have had a > religious > upbringing. They may know it's all crap but be > uncomfortable admitting > it, even to themselves. One of the items in Christian > indoctrination > is that one must have faith, implying that there is a > strong tendency > to doubt that needs to be stamped out. So the faithful are > not so much > convinced that their religion is true as that it is bad to > doubt that > it is true. If they are taught to feel guilty about the > mere act of > doubting, they are more likely to lie in surveys. It would > be easier > to throw off this mindset in secular countries but the US > is not > really a secular country. This is why I think these atheist campaigns are so important. They let people know that they are not alone in having these doubts, and that you can still be a good person without submitting to religious tyranny. Ben Zaiboc From rpicone at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 07:58:23 2010 From: rpicone at gmail.com (Robert Picone) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:58:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 7:34 AM, BillK wrote: > On 6/23/10, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > Yes, but I wonder how many people really believe the answer they give, > > rather than just saying it because it is socially acceptable. > > > > > > Well, that suggestion could invalidate every poll ever done. :) > > I believe that Pew works with panels of people that volunteer to > answer surveys for them and they provide Pew with details of their > lifestyle, so that Pew can make a balanced selection for each poll. > The survey is done by phone, so there is no peer pressure to saying > yes, no, maybe, to each question asked. If there was anyone else in > the room, they wouldn't hear the questions. It is also unlikely that > people would volunteer to do surveys in the first place if they > intended to lie. Why bother? > > > BillK > This particular survey at least seems to have been a random sample, which is weighted after the fact to reflect more representative demographics. see: http://people-press.org/methodology/ Anyway, while I share your doubt that misrepresentation had a significant effect in this case, but wouldn't say there is no peer pressure over the phone if a respondent suspects the survey taker shares the views of those they frequently interact with (most probably do automatically). There's some evidence that automated telephone polling in which questions are answered by touch-tone to a system that is obviously a machine inspires more honest responses than ones handled by humans (unfortunately this is counteracted by the inability of most automated systems to evaluate the credibility of a respondent, call cell phones, or explain questions, leaving about the same net accuracy). In other news, apparently 81% of Americans believe ordinary computers will be able to pass a turing test: ("Computers probably/definitely be able to converse like human beings in 2050."). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rpicone at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 08:05:33 2010 From: rpicone at gmail.com (Robert Picone) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 01:05:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Robert Picone wrote: > > In other news, apparently 81% of Americans believe ordinary computers will > be able to pass a turing test: ("Computers probably/definitely be able to > converse like human beings in 2050."). > Though it is unclear whether the intersection presumes Jesus and any angelic minions will be interacting with these computers in 2050. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From udend05 at aol.com Thu Jun 24 08:50:51 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 04:50:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8CCE1917BE5634C-5200-1397F@Webmail-d114.sysops.aol.com> This raises an interesting query: what if the heart of my issue is actually about time? Does desirability in fact equal short-term goal? Thank you for suggesting this. More food for thought. Best, Damian U. -----Original Message----- From: Stathis Papaioannou To: ExI chat list Sent: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 7:29 Subject: Re: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler On 24 June 2010 10:01, Sabrina Ballard wrote: >>I want to reiterate here that I am only interested in the potential desirability of replacing >talking therapies with some from of advanced technology that could wipe away a person's >problems (cognitive, emotional, psychological) and make them more effective in terms of >their aspirations and their ability to lead successful lives (however they may be defined). > > I think that learning to solve your own issues is important in many > cases. Instantly "solving" people's problems could be very counter > productive in the long term as without some kind of internal struggle, > would people ever develop a very complex or solid identity? > > But I do think that in certian cases it could be useful to simply > "wash it all away". But if you instantly "learn to solve your own issues" by having the knowledge implanted into your brain - i.e. by having exactly the same brain changes as would occur doing it the slow way, but as a result of direct brain manipulation - your future psychological trajectory would be exactly the same. -- Stathis Papaioannou _______________________________________________ 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 udend05 at aol.com Thu Jun 24 09:04:51 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 05:04:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8CCE193709D3166-5200-13A63@Webmail-d114.sysops.aol.com> > your future psychological trajectory would be exactly the same. Um, yes, give or take a little bit. But if that is towards mental well-being and effective living, where's the problem? We're talking about the desirability of this kind of technology here: if you could reach that end-state of well-being in the manner suggested (which both removes the pain of the procedure and the pain of the reason behind the procedure), would it be worthwhile? I mean this ethically and, in a sense, medically. It seems to me that a clearer conception of this issue would be better off founded on an understanding of the different types of counselling theory, as well as scenarios of the kind of technologies I am imagining. Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 09:53:58 2010 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 19:53:58 +1000 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: <8CCE193709D3166-5200-13A63@Webmail-d114.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> <8CCE193709D3166-5200-13A63@Webmail-d114.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/24 : > >> your future psychological trajectory would > be exactly the same. > > > Um, yes, give or take a little bit. But if that is towards mental well-being > and > > effective living, where's the problem? We're talking about the desirability > > of this kind of technology here: if you could reach that end-state of > > well-being in the manner suggested (which both removes the pain > > of the procedure and the pain of the reason behind the procedure), > > would it be worthwhile? I mean this ethically and, in a sense, medically. > > It seems to me that a clearer conception of this issue would be > > better off founded on an understanding of the different types > > of counselling theory, as well as scenarios of the kind of > > technologies I am imagining. Yes, it would be worth making the changes in the easiest and most efficient way possible. I imagine a common reaction against this idea would be that it is somehow better or more noble to do it the hard way, but that is irrational. -- Stathis Papaioannou From giulio at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 11:00:56 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:00:56 +0200 Subject: [ExI] YES! Hard-core transhumanist splinter In-Reply-To: References: <429879.78385.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Give time to time Sabrina. Probably this will be a common first reaction after the first deployment of mind uploading technology. But after some time, people won't even think twice about it, just like we don't think twice about the magic device in our pocket which lets us talk immediately with people far away. Like in the universe of Richard K. Morgan novels (google Takeshi Kovacs), where uploading technology is commonplace and used routinely. On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 6:25 AM, Sabrina Ballard wrote: >> I'm not convinced it has to be a big deal to no longer be the same person >> though. ?People acknowledge not being the people they previously were all >> the time, does a difference in substrate really not qualify for the same >> freakout-exemption given to a difference in age? > > When you put it this way, I can see your point. But I still think that > apprehension would exist because people may not know how they will be > changed, or want to be changed in that manner. > > > Sabrina Ballard > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From udend05 at aol.com Thu Jun 24 12:01:58 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:01:58 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> <8CCE193709D3166-5200-13A63@Webmail-d114.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8CCE1AC2E1FE222-950-849A@webmail-m033.sysops.aol.com> >I imagine a common reaction against this idea would be that it is somehow better or more noble to do it the hard way, but that is irrational. Indeed, arguments around so-called 'dignity' seem to demand an element of suffering. But why? What do we get out of it? Part of my project would be to look at this value of suffering to determine its place. If, as I strongly suspect is the case, it is yet another instance of our evolutionary heritage plaguing us long after it's shelf-life has expired, then the way would be made clear to go on to show that it can not only be done away with safely, but to the benefit of all. (Though it still leaves open my original question.) A lot of this is to be found in the work of David Pearce. Best, Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From udend05 at aol.com Thu Jun 24 09:29:19 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 05:29:19 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: <4C22FDE6.2030901@satx.rr.com> References: <8CCE123846CD312-100-70FB@webmail-m031.sysops.aol.com> <4C22FDE6.2030901@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <8CCE196DB196365-5200-13C06@Webmail-d114.sysops.aol.com> >By Sabrina's hypothesis, having the knowledge "implanted" would only be equivalent if it was bundled with fake memories of adversity and insight gained via determination. I don't think this suggestion is consistent with what I originally meant. One of the many tasks of counselling is to unpack the past in order to figure out why we think the way we do in the present. As such, fake memories would play no part in the process. Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jun 24 13:16:27 2010 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:16:27 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <458268.53400.qm@web27006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I have two reactions to the Pew research: >From a cultural perspective, it seems the spirit of the age is apocalyptic - 41% believe in the second coming before 2050, 30% believe in world war III, a large number are worried about terrorist nukes - a lot of people possess fear of at least potentially existential risk for out civilisation. >From a Christian perspective - *sigh*. 41% of people have listened to a preacher talk about the second coming without checking the Bible passages themselves. In Mark's gospel, chapter 13, Jesus makes it clear that even he doesn't know when the second coming is, only God the Father - "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." (In respect of the many atheists on this list, I'm quoting the version used on the atheist/agnostic discussion on http://atheism.about.com/od/biblegospelofmark/a/mark13f.htm ) It is depressing to realise the folk beliefs of so many are so out of line with the "core texts" (to quote a phrase we've been using lately) they claim to believe. To use a Bertrand Russell quote Max More is fond of stating, "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." Most people would rather accept the word of an expert than review the arguments themselves(in this case their preacher; in the case of right-wing conspiracies, some articulate person on fox news; in the case of politics, whatever the latest media soundbite is). Luckily for us, most people who self-identify as transhumanists are willing to pay a little attention to arguments and source material, so our disagreements on this list are less dogmatic than on many internet fora. I hope this remains so for a long time to come, otherwise the "singularity cargo cultists" that Dale Carrico so enjoys attacking may actually come into existence. Tom From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 13:43:28 2010 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:13:28 +0930 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word Message-ID: Hi all, I'm trying to crystallize a concept, and I need a word to help to do it. The online world is now full of APIs, which let code literate people talk to online services (all the standard webby protocols, google's many apis, amazons compute cloud ++, twitter APIs, facebook APIs, etc etc etc). There are myriad ways of interacting with these things, from having code on your own machines reach out to them, to hosting code "out there" in online services. I'm conceptualizing this as a multidimensional space through which code literate people can move, interact, create, in a very real sense in which we partially can already live. What would you call this space? It's a bit like a noosphere, but that term would be a bit trite and not do the concept justice. And don't say cyberspace. Any ideas? -- Emlyn http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog Find me on Facebook and Buzz From giulio at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 13:45:46 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:45:46 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Telesphere? On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Emlyn wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm trying to crystallize a concept, and I need a word to help to do it. > > The online world is now full of APIs, which let code literate people > talk to online services (all the standard webby protocols, google's > many apis, amazons compute cloud ++, twitter APIs, facebook APIs, etc > etc etc). There are myriad ways of interacting with these things, from > having code on your own machines reach out to them, to hosting code > "out there" in online services. > > I'm conceptualizing this as a multidimensional space through which > code literate people can move, interact, create, in a very real sense > in which we partially can already live. What would you call this > space? It's a bit like a noosphere, but that term would be a bit trite > and not do the concept justice. And don't say cyberspace. Any ideas? > > -- > Emlyn > > http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built > http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog > Find me on Facebook and Buzz > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 13:55:11 2010 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:25:11 +0930 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 24 June 2010 23:15, Giulio Prisco wrote: > Telesphere? > Is that literally "far sphere"? I'm not sure that does it justice. Bytespace? ;-) -- Emlyn http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog Find me on Facebook and Buzz From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 24 14:13:46 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 07:13:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <860178.88743.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/24/10, Emlyn wrote: ? What would you call this space??... Any ideas? Metasphere?? Reasoning: it is a superset of internet protocols and a medium of?memetic exchange. ? spike ? ? From: Emlyn Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word To: "ExI chat list" Date: Thursday, June 24, 2010, 6:43 AM Hi all, I'm trying to crystallize a concept, and I need a word to help to do it. The online world is now full of APIs, which let code literate people talk to online services (all the standard webby protocols, google's many apis, amazons compute cloud ++, twitter APIs, facebook APIs, etc etc etc). There are myriad ways of interacting with these things, from having code on your own machines reach out to them, to hosting code "out there" in online services. I'm conceptualizing this as a multidimensional space through which code literate people can move, interact, create, in a very real sense in which we partially can already live. What would you call this space? It's a bit like a noosphere, but that term would be a bit trite and not do the concept justice. And don't say cyberspace. Any ideas? -- Emlyn http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog Find me on Facebook and Buzz _______________________________________________ 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 Thu Jun 24 14:14:59 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 09:14:59 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C236863.1010606@satx.rr.com> On 6/24/2010 8:55 AM, Emlyn wrote: > Bytespace? ;-) Code space? From painlord2k at libero.it Thu Jun 24 14:30:32 2010 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:30:32 +0200 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: <458268.53400.qm@web27006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <458268.53400.qm@web27006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C236C08.3070402@libero.it> Il 24/06/2010 15.16, Tom Nowell ha scritto: > I have two reactions to the Pew research: > > > From a cultural perspective, it seems the spirit of the age is apocalyptic - 41% believe in the second coming before 2050, 30% believe in world war III, a large number are worried about terrorist nukes - a lot of people possess fear of at least potentially existential risk for out civilisation. > The Apocalyptic spirit is good to have thing done. It is immensely useful as a motivation to accomplish things before it is too late. What is worrisome is that they believe in Second Coming before 2050. It is a bit too far to motivate someone, as the majority will believe they will be already dead by the time of SC. ^Daniel 12: 4 But you, Daniel, close up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge." 4"But as for you, Daniel, ^(J ) conceal these words and ^(K ) seal up the book until the ^(L ) end of time; ^(M ) many will go back and forth, and knowledge will increase." You see, the increase of knowledge is a sign of the End of the Times. But they are not insane, only irrational. Sometimes is rational to be irrational (in very specific ways). > > From a Christian perspective - *sigh*. 41% of people have listened to a preacher talk about the second coming without checking the Bible passages themselves. In Mark's gospel, chapter 13, Jesus makes it clear that even he doesn't know when the second coming is, only God the Father - "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." (In respect of the many atheists on this list, I'm quoting the version used on the atheist/agnostic discussion on http://atheism.about.com/od/biblegospelofmark/a/mark13f.htm ) > Well, if they believe they know, they are arrogant. But if they believe they must keep the people always prepared, they are right. You know the parable of the spouses and the oil lamps. > It is depressing to realise the folk beliefs of so many are so out of line with the "core texts" (to quote a phrase we've been using lately) they claim to believe. To use a Bertrand Russell quote Max More is fond of stating, "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." Most people would rather accept the word of an expert than review the arguments themselves(in this case their preacher; in the case of right-wing conspiracies, some articulate person on fox news; in the case of politics, whatever the latest media soundbite is). > It is so true. This is because I always have problem writing and talking about Islam. I checked the texts (at least the translations in English) and found that "extremist"'s actions are not so out of the mainstream of Islam. Simply the majority of the Muslims (and Westerns) don't know what is in their books and accept the opinions of their leaders and experts without questioning them. Muslims do so because they are mainly illetterate where western do so because they are mainly schooled in public schools (I'm repeating myself?). The first must accept the opinion of the literate because they have no other choice where the latter are actively trained to accept the opinion of the experts without thinking. > Luckily for us, most people who self-identify as transhumanists are willing to pay a little attention to arguments and source material, so our disagreements on this list are less dogmatic than on many internet fora. I hope this remains so for a long time to come, otherwise the "singularity cargo cultists" that Dale Carrico so enjoys attacking may actually come into existence. > Damned you do, damned you don't. Mirco -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- Nessun virus nel messaggio in uscita. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 9.0.829 / Database dei virus: 271.1.1/2960 - Data di rilascio: 06/24/10 08:35:00 From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 14:31:28 2010 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:01:28 +0930 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: <860178.88743.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <860178.88743.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/24 Gregory Jones > > > --- On Thu, 6/24/10, Emlyn wrote: > > What would you call this space??... Any ideas? > > Metasphere?? Reasoning: it is a superset of internet protocols and a medium of?memetic exchange. > > spike > I'm leaning toward rejecting anything that hints at "realm of the mind", it's not really that. I think it's something less grandiose and more concrete (and actually more interesting because of that). Bryan actually said "The Cloud"... it's actually hard to argue with, excepting that it causes me physical pain. -- Emlyn http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog Find me on Facebook and Buzz From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 14:34:30 2010 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:04:30 +0930 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: <4C236863.1010606@satx.rr.com> References: <4C236863.1010606@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 24 June 2010 23:44, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/24/2010 8:55 AM, Emlyn wrote: > >> Bytespace? ;-) > > Code space? like it. simple. codesphere? -- Emlyn http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog Find me on Facebook and Buzz From scerir at libero.it Thu Jun 24 14:38:43 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:38:43 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word Message-ID: <32564278.98391277390323071.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> info-sphere, info-space, semio-sphere, semio-space, apps-sphere, ... From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Jun 24 14:40:25 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 09:40:25 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <38A2B43CFC4D4037ADE8DDF80DA40C73@DFC68LF1> Guilio is on point with telesphers, especially becaue the tele part is linked to telematics. What you are envisioning is a type of n-order cybernetics' sphere. But since the sphere is not just a circular process, it would be more of a "metasphere". N Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Emlyn Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:43 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word Hi all, I'm trying to crystallize a concept, and I need a word to help to do it. The online world is now full of APIs, which let code literate people talk to online services (all the standard webby protocols, google's many apis, amazons compute cloud ++, twitter APIs, facebook APIs, etc etc etc). There are myriad ways of interacting with these things, from having code on your own machines reach out to them, to hosting code "out there" in online services. I'm conceptualizing this as a multidimensional space through which code literate people can move, interact, create, in a very real sense in which we partially can already live. What would you call this space? It's a bit like a noosphere, but that term would be a bit trite and not do the concept justice. And don't say cyberspace. Any ideas? -- Emlyn http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog Find me on Facebook and Buzz _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Jun 24 14:42:44 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 09:42:44 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: References: <4C236863.1010606@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Codesphere is a noun sounding words. Codersphere is a action sounding, that is if the particpants are causing the sphere to morph in any direction. Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Emlyn Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:35 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Looking for a word On 24 June 2010 23:44, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/24/2010 8:55 AM, Emlyn wrote: > >> Bytespace? ;-) > > Code space? like it. simple. codesphere? -- Emlyn http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog Find me on Facebook and Buzz _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Thu Jun 24 14:57:46 2010 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 07:57:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <838049.30703.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> ----- Original Message ---- > From: Emlyn > To: ExI chat list > Sent: Thu, June 24, 2010 6:43:28 AM > Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word > I'm conceptualizing this as a > multidimensional space through which code literate people can move, interact, > create, in a very real sense in which we partially can already live. What > would you call this space? It's a bit like a noosphere, but that term would > be a bit trite and not do the concept justice. And don't say cyberspace. Any > ideas? The Twibyte Zone? From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 16:02:53 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 09:02:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:00 AM, udend05 at aol.com wrote: > In my original message I wrote: > >>where pill=some form of as yet undreamed-of but technologically-based therapy > > Perhaps I should have been clearer on the 'pill's' status as a metaphor, but I'm not sure how. This should topic drift into a discussion of being careful of what you ask for, because you might get it. If human desires are fulfilled, it is rather likely to be the end of the species. Keith From arthur.breitman at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 14:23:27 2010 From: arthur.breitman at gmail.com (Arthur Breitman) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:23:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: <4C236863.1010606@satx.rr.com> References: <4C236863.1010606@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Thursday, June 24, 2010, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/24/2010 8:55 AM, Emlyn wrote: > > > Bytespace? ;-) Hate to use a buzzword, but isn't this what is referred to as "the Cloud" > > > Code space? > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From udend05 at aol.com Thu Jun 24 18:53:02 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 14:53:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CCE1E59B8E3FDF-950-D77E@webmail-m033.sysops.aol.com> >This should topic drift into a discussion of being careful of what you ask for, because you might get it. That needs a bit more unpacking, doesn't it? What makes it true - assuming you think that it is? Any examples of it leading to negative outcomes (other than morality tales)? >If human desires are fulfilled, it is rather likely to be the end of the species. One word alone suffices to refute this absurd reasoning: orgasm (which, I notice, works on two levels in this context). I trust I don't have to unpack that. Best, Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Jun 24 19:12:26 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:12:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <638887.4879.qm@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > through which > code literate people can move, interact, create, Interact and create, yes. Move, as a direct analogue to physical movement, no - and that's part of the point: this interaction and creation is possible without physical presence. It is, in large sense, the "cloud" of "cloud computing". Given the acceptance that term already has, you would be well served by using it. But here's a kicker: there are many different, somewhat competing definitions of the "cloud". If you have a clear and cohesive definition, which you can readily apply in ways that average people can understand "this is what that term means", then you are at an advantage when using the term. And yes, it does take code-literate people - or software agents, created either by said people or by other software they have made - to interact with this space. (In fact, the number of code-literate people who interact directly is far smaller than those who make software to do it. I've done it directly - almost as directly as one can short of physically manipulating the voltage signals on the wire without using electronics to do so, anyway. It can be somewhat brutal and messy, and it is very inefficient for large jobs. But sometimes, the job at hand is small enough that hunting for or making software to do the interface for you, can be a much slower or more expensive proposition than just doing it...if one knows how to do it, or how to find out how to do it.) --- On Thu, 6/24/10, Emlyn wrote: > From: Emlyn > Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word > To: "ExI chat list" > Date: Thursday, June 24, 2010, 6:43 AM > Hi all, > > I'm trying to crystallize a concept, and I need a word to > help to do it. > > The online world is now full of APIs, which let code > literate people > talk to online services (all the standard webby protocols, > google's > many apis, amazons compute cloud ++, twitter APIs, facebook > APIs, etc > etc etc). There are myriad ways of interacting with these > things, from > having code on your own machines reach out to them, to > hosting code > "out there" in online services. > > I'm conceptualizing this as a multidimensional space > through which > code literate people can move, interact, create, in a very > real sense > in which we partially can already live. What would you call > this > space? It's a bit like a noosphere, but that term would be > a bit trite > and not do the concept justice. And don't say cyberspace. > Any ideas? > > -- > Emlyn > > http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio > that I built > http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog > Find me on Facebook and Buzz > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 19:25:01 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:25:01 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Emlyn wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm trying to crystallize a concept, and I need a word to help to do it. > > The online world is now full of APIs, which let code literate people > talk to online services (all the standard webby protocols, google's > many apis, amazons compute cloud ++, twitter APIs, facebook APIs, etc > etc etc). There are myriad ways of interacting with these things, from > having code on your own machines reach out to them, to hosting code > "out there" in online services. > > I'm conceptualizing this as a multidimensional space through which > code literate people can move, interact, create, in a very real sense > in which we partially can already live. What would you call this > space? It's a bit like a noosphere, but that term would be a bit trite > and not do the concept justice. And don't say cyberspace. Any ideas? > > -- > Emlyn > > http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built > http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog > Find me on Facebook and Buzz > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > How about a neologism... 'Discorpality' a conflation of discorporate and reality. A reality existing in the ethereal realms of the cyberspace. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Jun 24 19:47:23 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:47:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <95187.51580.qm@web81505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 6/24/10, Ross Evans wrote: How about a neologism... 'Discorpality' a conflation of discorporate and reality.? A reality existing in the ethereal realms of the cyberspace. ? ? This is my favorite so far, better than my own notion,?metasphere.? Ross, well done, sir!? He is right: most terms we could think of already carry the baggage of previous use in a similar context.? The terms web and cloud worked because they had not already?been used in the software context.? The weakness of discorpality?I see?is that it has five syllables, whereas ideally we want no more than two, even one if we can do it. ? In the spirit of Ross' notion of a neologism, I propose the term "reeth"?loosely derived from?the remarkably succinct and inclusive definition suggested by Ross, a "reality existing in the ethereal realms of cyberspace."??Reeth also has the advantage of ryhming with wreath, a leafy collection of various things which are?joined to come full circle. ? When we decide on a term, let us just start using it, see if it catches hold. ? spike? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 20:45:35 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:45:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... Message-ID: ...do you have a pension plan? To hear people in their 20's and 30's talk about pension provision they have either made, intend to make, or wish they could afford to make, is incredibly dissonant for those of us who imagine the future being rather radically different than the now. I'm 30, have no pension plan, nor any intention to burden myself with one. Indeed, for those transhumanist/ singularitarians in this age group, the ideology confers a distinct economic advantage; the ability to turn their backs on a fiscally unsustainable ponzi scheme, the need for which technological progress will obviate. Capital that would otherwise be deployed into such schemes could be more usefully employed in gaining new skills, travelling, and investing inthe very companies that will build the future they want. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Jun 24 20:54:46 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:54:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C23C616.6080701@satx.rr.com> On 6/24/2010 3:45 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > I'm 30, have no pension plan, nor any intention to burden myself with > one. Indeed, for those transhumanist/singularitarians in this age group, > the ideology confers a distinct economic advantage; the ability to turn > their backs on a fiscally unsustainable ponzi scheme, the need for which > technological progress will obviate. Man, you're going to be soooo pissed at yourself in 2040. (Been there, done that.) Damien Broderick From pharos at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 21:18:22 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 22:18:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/24/10, Ross Evans wrote: > I'm 30, have no pension plan, nor any > intention to burden myself with one. Indeed, for those > transhumanist/singularitarians in this age group, the ideology confers a > distinct economic advantage; the ability to turn their backs on a fiscally > unsustainable ponzi scheme, the need for which technological progress will > obviate. Capital that would otherwise be deployed into such schemes could be > more usefully employed in gaining new skills, travelling, and investing > inthe very companies that will build the future they want. > > You should always have a Plan B. In the present economic crisis there are many problems attached to pension schemes and investments of any kind really. Especially as broke governments are looking to take over pension schemes (i.e. steal them). But basically a pension scheme is just a wealth accumulation plan, deferring present spending and accumulating the deferred money to spend when you are no longer able to generate much income yourself. Anything could be called a pension scheme if it ends up providing capital to use when you are too old to work. Even if Kurzweil's accelerating change takes off, it is always handy to have some capital accumulated. If it turns out that you don't need a pension, the capital could still be handy to buy rejuvenation drugs or treatments, etc. (And accumulated capital tends to attract females). ;) BillK From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 21:44:54 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 22:44:54 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:18 PM, BillK wrote: > On 6/24/10, Ross Evans wrote: > > I'm 30, have no pension plan, nor any > > intention to burden myself with one. Indeed, for those > > transhumanist/singularitarians in this age group, the ideology confers a > > distinct economic advantage; the ability to turn their backs on a > fiscally > > unsustainable ponzi scheme, the need for which technological progress > will > > obviate. Capital that would otherwise be deployed into such schemes could > be > > more usefully employed in gaining new skills, travelling, and investing > > inthe very companies that will build the future they want. > > > > > > > You should always have a Plan B. > > In the present economic crisis there are many problems attached to > pension schemes and investments of any kind really. Especially as > broke governments are looking to take over pension schemes (i.e. steal > them). > > But basically a pension scheme is just a wealth accumulation plan, > deferring present spending and accumulating the deferred money to > spend when you are no longer able to generate much income yourself. > Anything could be called a pension scheme if it ends up providing > capital to use when you are too old to work. > > Even if Kurzweil's accelerating change takes off, it is always handy > to have some capital accumulated. If it turns out that you don't need > a pension, the capital could still be handy to buy rejuvenation drugs > or treatments, etc. > (And accumulated capital tends to attract females). ;) > > > BillK > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > Productive deployment of capital now will always beat passive investment for the future. Pensions plans are the only way a person on average income can ever hope to accumulate a fund big enough to provide a meaningful retirement income. These plans basically involve playing the stock market, and as such their performance cannot be guaranteed. The reality is that people on average incomes cannot afford to set aside a sufficient amount of capital for a retirement plan that does not resort to casino capitalism to make returns. The whole pension system is predicated upon actuarial assumptions that no longer hold true; it was never envisaged that people would live 20+ years beyond their retirement age, and this flaw now represents a risk of systemic failure in the pension system, especially in Europe. I'd say if you're 30 years or more from pension age, putting capital into a pension is likely to be a bad financial decision. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 22:13:43 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:13:43 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/24/10, Ross Evans wrote: > The whole pension system is predicated upon actuarial assumptions > that no longer hold true; it was never envisaged that people would live 20+ > years beyond their retirement age, and this flaw now represents a risk of > systemic failure in the pension system, especially in Europe. I'd say if > you're 30 years or more from pension age, putting capital into a pension is > likely to be a bad financial decision. > > I'm not really disagreeing, just saying keep your options open. Many dot-com millionaires found their wealth disappeared overnight. You youngsters will be taxed to the hilt anyway to pay for the boomers pensions as the population ages. The UK is already proposing moving to a 70 retirement age and it will probably keep on increasing if life expectancy keeps increasing. If we get to the stage of life expectancy increasing by one year every year then you won't *ever* get a government pension. But accumulating capital is still to be recommended. (But I'm not going to tell you how to do it - that's up to you). :) BillK From olga.bourlin at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 22:14:35 2010 From: olga.bourlin at gmail.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:14:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2010/6/24 Ross Evans : > > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:18 PM, BillK wrote: >> >> On 6/24/10, Ross Evans wrote: >> > I'm 30, have no pension plan, nor any >> > intention to burden myself with one. Indeed, for those >> > transhumanist/singularitarians in this age group, the ideology confers a >> > distinct economic advantage; the ability to turn their backs on a >> > fiscally >> > unsustainable ponzi scheme, the need for which technological progress >> > will >> > obviate. Capital that would otherwise be deployed into such schemes >> > could be >> > more usefully employed in gaining new skills, travelling, and investing >> > inthe very companies that will build the future they want. >> > >> > >> >> >> You should always have a Plan B. >> >> In the present economic crisis there are many problems attached to >> pension schemes and investments of any kind really. Especially as >> broke governments are looking to take over pension schemes (i.e. steal >> them). >> >> But basically a pension scheme is just a wealth accumulation plan, >> deferring present spending and accumulating the deferred money to >> spend when you are no longer able to generate much income yourself. >> Anything could be called a pension scheme if it ends up providing >> capital to use when you are too old to work. >> >> Even if Kurzweil's accelerating change takes off, it is always handy >> to have some capital accumulated. If it turns out that you don't need >> a pension, the capital could still be handy to buy rejuvenation drugs >> or treatments, etc. >> (And accumulated capital tends to attract females). ?;) >> >> >> BillK >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > Productive deployment of capital now will always beat passive investment for > the future. Pensions plans are the only way a person on average income can > ever hope to accumulate a fund big enough to provide a meaningful retirement > income. These plans basically involve playing the stock market, and as such > their performance cannot be guaranteed. The reality is that people on > average incomes cannot afford to set aside a sufficient amount of capital > for a retirement plan that does not resort to casino capitalism to make > returns. The whole pension system is predicated upon actuarial assumptions > that no longer hold true; it was never envisaged that people would live 20+ > years beyond their retirement age, and this flaw now represents a risk of > systemic failure in the pension system, especially in Europe. I'd say if > you're 30 years or more from pension age, putting capital into a pension is > likely to be a bad financial decision. > > Ross > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 22:18:40 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:18:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:45 PM, udend05 at aol.com wrote: (keith) >>This should topic drift into a discussion of being careful of what you > ask for, because you might get it. > > That needs a bit more unpacking, doesn't it? What makes it true - assuming you think > that it is? Any examples of it leading to negative outcomes (other than morality tales)? Lots of them. Mortality reduction without reduction in the birth rate leads to events like the Rwanda and Cambodia killings. >>If human desires are fulfilled, it is rather likely to be the end of > the species. > > One word alone suffices to refute this absurd reasoning: orgasm (which, I notice, > works on two levels in this context). I trust I don't have to unpack that. This red pill will give you continuous orgasm. Do you take it? Keith From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Jun 24 22:29:52 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 18:29:52 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20100624182952.be1y6ymb4sswoo8s@webmail.natasha.cc> Quoting Ross Evans : > ...do you have a pension plan? > > To hear people in their 20's and 30's talk about pension provision they have > either made, intend to make, or wish they could afford to make, is > incredibly dissonant for those of us who imagine the future being rather > radically different than the now. I'm 30, have no pension plan, nor any > intention to burden myself with one. Indeed, for those transhumanist/ > singularitarians in this age group, the ideology confers a distinct economic > advantage; the ability to turn their backs on a fiscally unsustainable ponzi > scheme, the need for which technological progress will obviate. Capital that > would otherwise be deployed into such schemes could be more usefully > employed in gaining new skills, travelling, and investing inthe very > companies that will build the future they want. Pension plan? Years ago, US employees obtained "pension plans" from their employers for retirment years. This is almost extinct, as most corporations do not offer "pension plans" any more. Social Security does help some people though. For my own savings plan, I have 401Ks, IRA, and real estate. None of these will provide a pension for me. They are simply saftety nets. I will have to continue working until I expire or get suspended. Smartest financial thing you can do for yourself, as a kind and loving gift to your future self, is to get an IRA, or something similar, ASAP. Natasha From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 22:31:17 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:31:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Emlyn wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm trying to crystallize a concept, and I need a word to help to do it. > > The online world is now full of APIs, which let code literate people > talk to online services (all the standard webby protocols, google's > many apis, amazons compute cloud ++, twitter APIs, facebook APIs, etc > etc etc). There are myriad ways of interacting with these things, from > having code on your own machines reach out to them, to hosting code > "out there" in online services. > > I'm conceptualizing this as a multidimensional space through which > code literate people can move, interact, create, in a very real sense > in which we partially can already live. What would you call this > space? It's a bit like a noosphere, but that term would be a bit trite > and not do the concept justice. And don't say cyberspace. Any ideas? I don't know what to call it (people have made good suggestions) but the long range effect is going to be like extended memory. It's been developing for a long time, since writing at least, where more and more of our memory is outside our skulls. Time will come when you get a neural implant and your mind will treat information in it as an extension of your memory. Considered as a computer, human brains tend to be long in processing power and short on memory. Keith From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 22:42:47 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:42:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Emlyn wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I'm trying to crystallize a concept, and I need a word to help to do it. > > > > The online world is now full of APIs, which let code literate people > > talk to online services (all the standard webby protocols, google's > > many apis, amazons compute cloud ++, twitter APIs, facebook APIs, etc > > etc etc). There are myriad ways of interacting with these things, from > > having code on your own machines reach out to them, to hosting code > > "out there" in online services. > > > > I'm conceptualizing this as a multidimensional space through which > > code literate people can move, interact, create, in a very real sense > > in which we partially can already live. What would you call this > > space? It's a bit like a noosphere, but that term would be a bit trite > > and not do the concept justice. And don't say cyberspace. Any ideas? > > I don't know what to call it (people have made good suggestions) but > the long range effect is going to be like extended memory. > > It's been developing for a long time, since writing at least, where > more and more of our memory is outside our skulls. Time will come > when you get a neural implant and your mind will treat information in > it as an extension of your memory. > > Considered as a computer, human brains tend to be long in processing > power and short on memory. > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > This isn't really true, and it demonstrates how using a digital computer as an analogus framework for the human brain, can lead to erroneous conclusions. The human brain both processes and stores vast amounts of information. The reason why the brain is not so wired that the average person can recite pi to a few thousands digits, is simply the lack of the necessary evolutionary pressure. To proffer a computing analogy that is germane, the hardware of the brain is very poorly utilised by its software. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Thu Jun 24 22:30:40 2010 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:30:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20100624223040.GA6506@ofb.net> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:44:54PM +0100, Ross Evans wrote: > Productive deployment of capital now will always beat passive > investment for the future. Pensions plans are the only way a person on > average income can ever hope to accumulate a fund big enough to > provide a meaningful retirement income. These plans basically involve > playing the stock market, and as such their performance cannot be One person's 'playing' the stock market is another's productive deployment of capital -- the productiveness of which generally can't be guaranteed. > guaranteed. The reality is that people on average incomes cannot > afford to set aside a sufficient amount of capital for a retirement > plan that does not resort to casino capitalism to make returns. The But a plan, like a mutual fund, can spread the risk across a large population and longer time. A guaranteed-benefit plan also can also take advantage of averages: a risk-averse individual planning for retirement via her own accounts needs to worry about living to be 95, which is inefficient if everyone does it, but a plan can target for the average life expectancy. > whole pension system is predicated upon actuarial assumptions that no > longer hold true; it was never envisaged that people would live 20+ I think you're confusing things. I'm sure private plans price their premiums with the latest actuarial data. Public plans are less flexible in their benefits, but conversely more flexible in their funding. Also, while life past retirement has increased, so has productivity. Plans aren't all that bankrupt, despite propaganda. As for Europe, some countries have retirement at 60; there's a flaw here, but it's not with the basic idea of pensions. -xx- Damien X-) From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 22:50:40 2010 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:50:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: <458268.53400.qm@web27006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <458268.53400.qm@web27006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 6:16 AM, Tom Nowell wrote: > I have two reactions to the Pew research: > > >From a cultural perspective, it seems the spirit of the age is apocalyptic - 41% believe in the second coming before 2050, 30% believe in world war III, a large number are worried about terrorist nukes - a lot of people possess fear of at least potentially existential risk for out civilisation. > > >From a Christian perspective - *sigh*. 41% of people have listened to a preacher talk about the second coming without checking the Bible passages themselves. In Mark's gospel, chapter 13, Jesus makes it clear that even he doesn't know when the second coming is, only God the Father - "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." (In respect of the many atheists on this list, I'm quoting the version used on the atheist/agnostic discussion on http://atheism.about.com/od/biblegospelofmark/a/mark13f.htm ) > > It is depressing to realise the folk beliefs of so many are so out of line with the "core texts" (to quote a phrase we've been using lately) they claim to believe. To use a Bertrand Russell quote Max More is fond of stating, "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." Most people would rather accept the word of an expert than review the arguments themselves(in this case their preacher; in the case of right-wing conspiracies, some articulate person on fox news; in the case of politics, whatever the latest media soundbite is). > > Luckily for us, most people who self-identify as transhumanists are willing to pay a little attention to arguments and source material, so our disagreements on this list are less dogmatic than on many internet fora. I hope this remains so for a long time to come, otherwise the "singularity cargo cultists" that Dale Carrico so enjoys attacking may actually come into existence. > > Tom > ### Dale Carrico is insane. He is a fervent leftist, violently opposed to human progress and flourishing, and a crude, foul-mouthed jerk to boot. Quite fitting to mention him in the context of religious insanity. Rafal From msd001 at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 22:54:09 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 18:54:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > This red pill will give you continuous orgasm. ?Do you take it? No. Red pills are always bad. From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Thu Jun 24 22:58:49 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:58:49 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: <20100624223040.GA6506@ofb.net> References: <20100624223040.GA6506@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:44:54PM +0100, Ross Evans wrote: > > > Productive deployment of capital now will always beat passive > > investment for the future. Pensions plans are the only way a person on > > average income can ever hope to accumulate a fund big enough to > > provide a meaningful retirement income. These plans basically involve > > playing the stock market, and as such their performance cannot be > > One person's 'playing' the stock market is another's productive > deployment of capital -- the productiveness of which generally can't be > guaranteed. > > guaranteed. The reality is that people on average incomes cannot > afford to set aside a sufficient amount of capital for a retirement > plan that does not resort to casino capitalism to make returns. The But a plan, like a mutual fund, can spread the risk across a large > population and longer time. A guaranteed-benefit plan also can also > take advantage of averages: a risk-averse individual planning for > retirement via her own accounts needs to worry about living to be 95, > which is inefficient if everyone does it, but a plan can target for the > average life expectancy. > But it's targeting a target that is moving upwards, and could well do so dramatically in the next decade or so > > > whole pension system is predicated upon actuarial assumptions that no > > longer hold true; it was never envisaged that people would live 20+ > > I think you're confusing things. I'm sure private plans price their > premiums with the latest actuarial data. Public plans are less flexible > in their benefits, but conversely more flexible in their funding. > And almost universally burdened with enormous funding blackholes. > > Also, while life past retirement has increased, so has productivity. > Plans aren't all that bankrupt, despite propaganda. As for Europe, some > countries have retirement at 60; there's a flaw here, but it's not with > the basic idea of pensions. > > > -xx- Damien X-) > _______________________________________________ > 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 ross.evans11 at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 00:56:25 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 01:56:25 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Stem cells reverse blindness caused by burns In-Reply-To: <201006240523.o5O5NB5m008358@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006240523.o5O5NB5m008358@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Max More wrote: > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37881663/ns/health-health_care/ > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > What really frustrates me is that we see stories like this coming out of basic research every day, and yet frontline treatment never seem to substantially advance as a result. The disconnect between what's happening in the lab, and begin trialled on a small scale, and what is available to the general population, seems to be getting larger. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brent.allsop at canonizer.com Fri Jun 25 01:38:45 2010 From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 19:38:45 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C2408A5.4020306@canonizer.com> On 6/24/2010 3:44 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > > Productive deployment of capital now will always beat passive > investment for the future. Pensions plans are the only way a person on > average income can ever hope to accumulate a fund big enough to > provide a meaningful retirement income. These plans basically involve > playing the stock market, and as such their performance cannot be > guaranteed. The reality is that people on average incomes cannot > afford to set aside a sufficient amount of capital for a retirement > plan that does not resort to casino capitalism to make returns. The > whole pension system is predicated upon actuarial assumptions that no > longer hold true; it was never envisaged that people would live 20+ > years beyond their retirement age, and this flaw now represents a risk > of systemic failure in the pension system, especially in Europe. I'd > say if you're 30 years or more from pension age, putting capital into > a pension is likely to be a bad financial decision. I've heard other transhumanists have this plan. I think most people are making several critical mistakes in their thinking. First off, you said: "their performance cannot be guaranteed", which is completely wrong if you invest in the entire world stock market. Always when there are long periods of stagnation in any one country, like Japan durring the 90s and the US durring the 70s, and Europe before that... this is only because some other country is eating their lunch, or undercutting their labor prices, and gaining on them, and so on, for the time being. Whenever there is a 'crash' the stock market always always always comes back, to continue it's exponential long term constant reliable exponential growth. After the depression it took about 50 years to recover. During the 70s, for the US, it took about 25 years (while the rest of the world exploded by undercutting our labor costs). After dot bomb, it took 6 years. And we're well on our way at beating this time interval, even though this one was much deeper than dot bomb (but nothing even close to the depression where we learned what not to do during such crashes) was. And thinking about how long you will be 'retired' and worrying about running out of money is also completely the wrong way to think about it. The whole idea is to become 'financially independent', and making more from your capital than your living costs, plus some for an exponentially growing lavish and capable future, so that you no longer have to be a slave to some employer to pay your living expenses. You work first, to pay your basic living expenses forever, and get this done as soon as possible, then you play at things like bringing about the singularity for the rest of eternity, with your exponentially growing financial assets. I'm now 50, and we almost had enough to quit my day job before the crash started. It was exciting to be that close. This crash will just make it so I have to work 5 or 10 more years, then I'll finally be there - forever. Brent Allsop From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 02:12:07 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 03:12:07 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: <4C2408A5.4020306@canonizer.com> References: <4C2408A5.4020306@canonizer.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 2:38 AM, Brent Allsop wrote: > On 6/24/2010 3:44 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > >> >> Productive deployment of capital now will always beat passive investment >> for the future. Pensions plans are the only way a person on average income >> can ever hope to accumulate a fund big enough to provide a meaningful >> retirement income. These plans basically involve playing the stock market, >> and as such their performance cannot be guaranteed. The reality is that >> people on average incomes cannot afford to set aside a sufficient amount of >> capital for a retirement plan that does not resort to casino capitalism to >> make returns. The whole pension system is predicated upon actuarial >> assumptions that no longer hold true; it was never envisaged that people >> would live 20+ years beyond their retirement age, and this flaw now >> represents a risk of systemic failure in the pension system, especially in >> Europe. I'd say if you're 30 years or more from pension age, putting capital >> into a pension is likely to be a bad financial decision. >> > > I've heard other transhumanists have this plan. I think most people are > making several critical mistakes in their thinking. First off, you said: > "their performance cannot be guaranteed", which is completely wrong if you > invest in the entire world stock market. Always when there are long periods > of stagnation in any one country, like Japan durring the 90s and the US > durring the 70s, and Europe before that... this is only because some other > country is eating their lunch, or undercutting their labor prices, and > gaining on them, and so on, for the time being. Whenever there is a 'crash' > the stock market always always always comes back, to continue it's > exponential long term constant reliable exponential growth. After the > depression it took about 50 years to recover. During the 70s, for the US, > it took about 25 years (while the rest of the world exploded by undercutting > our labor costs). After dot bomb, it took 6 years. And we're well on our > way at beating this time interval, even though this one was much deeper than > dot bomb (but nothing even close to the depression where we learned what not > to do during such crashes) was. > > And thinking about how long you will be 'retired' and worrying about > running out of money is also completely the wrong way to think about it. > The whole idea is to become 'financially independent', and making more from > your capital than your living costs, plus some for an exponentially growing > lavish and capable future, so that you no longer have to be a slave to some > employer to pay your living expenses. You work first, to pay your basic > living expenses forever, and get this done as soon as possible, then you > play at things like bringing about the singularity for the rest of eternity, > with your exponentially growing financial assets. > > I'm now 50, and we almost had enough to quit my day job before the crash > started. It was exciting to be that close. This crash will just make it so > I have to work 5 or 10 more years, then I'll finally be there - forever. > > Brent Allsop > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > Given your age group, your perspective is obviously going to be different with regards the fiscal cogency of pensions. I do think any bullishness about world markets is naive though. What little recovery there has been, has come on the back of massive economic stimulus, created by the governments of the world. What has seemingly been missed from the panopoly of trite analysis economists have come out with, is the obvious truth of the matter. The nominal value of labour across many sectors has been eroded, to the point where a worker can only support themselves, by resorting to credit to meet the difference between their wages and their living costs. This has been caused by wage arbitrage as a consequence of globalisation, and advances in mechanisation. These two forces in tandem have permamently removed millions of people from the workforce, and many will never find work in private industry again. Governments may well step in and create many wasteful public sector jobs (as happened in the UK) to try and address the issue, but these efforts are largely counter-productive. Our technology is doing what we design it to do, ameliorating the need for human toil. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 06:13:16 2010 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 15:43:16 +0930 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 25 June 2010 06:48, BillK wrote: > (And accumulated capital tends to attract females). ?;) > > BillK Only certain types of females, the type that make me glad I have no accumulated capital. -- Emlyn http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog Find me on Facebook and Buzz From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 07:12:14 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:12:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 25 June 2010 06:48, BillK wrote: > (And accumulated capital tends to attract females). ;) > > BillK Only certain types of females, the type that make me glad I have no accumulated capital. -- Emlyn >>> "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife." A classic line from "Pride and Predjudice," that still applies to our day (at least in the minds of many *though not all* single women). John : ) On 6/24/10, Emlyn wrote: > On 25 June 2010 06:48, BillK wrote: >> (And accumulated capital tends to attract females). ?;) >> >> BillK > > Only certain types of females, the type that make me glad I have no > accumulated capital. > > -- > Emlyn > > http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built > http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog > Find me on Facebook and Buzz > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 07:28:25 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:28:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Americans polled about their expectations of life in 2050 Message-ID: "And the results are..." http://people-press.org/report/625/ John From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Jun 25 07:31:04 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:31:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C245B38.8090400@mac.com> Ross Evans wrote: > ...do you have a pension plan? > > To hear people in their 20's and 30's talk about pension provision > they have either made, intend to make, or wish they could afford to > make, is incredibly dissonant for those of us who imagine the future > being rather radically different than the now. It is even more discombobulating that anyone would believe that in 30-40 years any pension will be likely to be paid including government promises of retirement security. > I'm 30, have no pension plan, nor any intention to burden myself with one. Generally you are much better off to save, even if only a couple of hundred a month and invest modestly without being greedy. Let compounding over three decades work for you. > Indeed, for those transhumanist/singularitarians in this age group, > the ideology confers a distinct economic advantage; the ability to > turn their backs on a fiscally unsustainable ponzi scheme, the need > for which technological progress will obviate. Capital that would > otherwise be deployed into such schemes could be more usefully > employed in gaining new skills, travelling, and investing inthe very > companies that will build the future they want. The unsustainable ponzi scheme is unfortunately on your backs as are the huge "public" debts. But lest you write off the "boomers", remember who build the good parts of the world you are inheriting as well. - samantha From bbenzai at yahoo.com Fri Jun 25 07:23:49 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:23:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <963758.48578.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Ross Evans wrote: > ...do you have a pension plan? > Hmm, I don't really think that someone's willingness to do without a backup plan is indicative of their commitment to something. For some people, their 'pension plan' is a cryonics contract, and some think the future will arrive later than generally anticipated, but still within their expected lifespan, and they might well need a pension of some kind in the meantime. That doesn't mean they're not convinced that the desired future won't happen. Ben Zaiboc From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Jun 25 07:53:06 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:53:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C246062.7090607@mac.com> Ross Evans wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:18 PM, BillK > wrote: > > On 6/24/10, Ross Evans wrote: > > I'm 30, have no pension plan, nor any > > intention to burden myself with one. Indeed, for those > > transhumanist/singularitarians in this age group, the ideology > confers a > > distinct economic advantage; the ability to turn their backs on > a fiscally > > unsustainable ponzi scheme, the need for which technological > progress will > > obviate. Capital that would otherwise be deployed into such > schemes could be > > more usefully employed in gaining new skills, travelling, and > investing > > inthe very companies that will build the future they want. > > > > > > > You should always have a Plan B. > > In the present economic crisis there are many problems attached to > pension schemes and investments of any kind really. Especially as > broke governments are looking to take over pension schemes (i.e. steal > them). > > But basically a pension scheme is just a wealth accumulation plan, > deferring present spending and accumulating the deferred money to > spend when you are no longer able to generate much income yourself. > Anything could be called a pension scheme if it ends up providing > capital to use when you are too old to work. > > Even if Kurzweil's accelerating change takes off, it is always handy > to have some capital accumulated. If it turns out that you don't need > a pension, the capital could still be handy to buy rejuvenation drugs > or treatments, etc. > (And accumulated capital tends to attract females). ;) > > > BillK > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > > Productive deployment of capital now will always beat passive > investment for the future. There are companies even today that you can make an easy 8% or so year in and year out. Do the math putting that money aside. Yes, you will not make as much as starting your own successful company or being part of one from its early days. But you will likely make more in this modest way than attempting to pick winners in high tech companies as an investor. Unless of course you are a qualified investor doing angel capital and really know your stuff. > Pensions plans are the only way a person on average income can ever > hope to accumulate a fund big enough to provide a meaningful > retirement income. Not so. Pensions today are unsound. The public employee pensions in the US are a huge burden that cannot be paid in full. The 401K plans are at the mercy of the economy which sucks of late. And some types of 401K investments are prohibited by law to play the down side of the mraket or to be less than 100% invested even if the markets are tanking. This in addition to the threat to nationalize some of these things "for our own good". If I had a large 401K fund I would be tempted to take the substantial hit, liquidate it and turn it to hard goods and/or gold. I don't think the economic nastiness has done much more than clear its throat. > These plans basically involve playing the stock market, and as such > their performance cannot be guaranteed. Yes. So don't do that. Invest in the handful of companies that have a decent but modest upside and pay nice dividends with most of your savings if you want to play there at all. Don't leave it to mutual funds or money markets. > The reality is that people on average incomes cannot afford to set > aside a sufficient amount of capital for a retirement plan that does > not resort to casino capitalism to make returns. Modest investing is not gambling. Compound interest is really your friend if you have decades left to work. > The whole pension system is predicated upon actuarial assumptions that > no longer hold true; it was never envisaged that people would live 20+ > years beyond their retirement age, Actually, things like Social Security were never expected to pay for themselves to be honest. Many private pension plans were insisted upon by unions and priced many workers out of the open labor market completely. The public pension plans are worse. > and this flaw now represents a risk of systemic failure in the pension > system, especially in Europe. I'd say if you're 30 years or more from > pension age, putting capital into a pension is likely to be a bad > financial decision. I think you are calling too much a "pension". The best way to make a pile of money, especially when young, is to start your own successful business or join up with a very young venture that succeeds. If that isn't your thing and you can't marry money or invent something spectacular then save and invest modestly yourself. Don't depend on someone or something else to take care of your future. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Jun 25 07:56:23 2010 From: sjatkins at mac.com (samantha) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:56:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C246127.1070206@mac.com> BillK wrote: > On 6/24/10, Ross Evans wrote: > >> The whole pension system is predicated upon actuarial assumptions >> that no longer hold true; it was never envisaged that people would live 20+ >> years beyond their retirement age, and this flaw now represents a risk of >> systemic failure in the pension system, especially in Europe. I'd say if >> you're 30 years or more from pension age, putting capital into a pension is >> likely to be a bad financial decision. >> >> >> > > I'm not really disagreeing, just saying keep your options open. > Many dot-com millionaires found their wealth disappeared overnight. > > You youngsters will be taxed to the hilt anyway to pay for the boomers > pensions as the population ages. The UK is already proposing moving to > a 70 retirement age and it will probably keep on increasing if life > expectancy keeps increasing. > Of course by far the best solution to the aging demographics is to get good, cheap enough, ubiquitous anti-aging and aging reversal technology really quickly. :) Seriously, without that and/or nanotech or fusion tomorrow nearly every economy is doomed by the expected costs. > If we get to the stage of life expectancy increasing by one year every > year then you won't *ever* get a government pension. > Which would be great if you can be kept in good health. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bbenzai at yahoo.com Fri Jun 25 07:55:26 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:55:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <249213.45577.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Mirco Romanato wrote: > It is so true. > This is because I always have problem writing and talking > about Islam. I > checked the texts (at least the translations in English) > and found that > "extremist"'s actions are not so out of the mainstream of > Islam. Good point. I'm sure the UN is aware of the concepts of Taqqiya and Kitman, and I wonder how they take this into consideration when dealing with the likes of Iran. Surely any Islamic state must realise that normal diplomatic procedures have to be modified to take into account that everyone knows that the very book they take their whole ethical and legal system from tells them to lie to non-muslims when it's advantageous? Ben Zaiboc From bbenzai at yahoo.com Fri Jun 25 08:20:17 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 01:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Stem cells reverse blindness caused by burns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <975355.44275.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Ross Evans observed: > > we see stories like this > coming out of > basic research every day, and yet frontline treatment never > seem to > substantially advance as a result. The disconnect between > what's happening > in the lab, and begin trialled on a small scale, and what > is available to > the general population, seems to be getting larger. This is actually a good sign. It's what you'd expect if progress in medical research is getting faster. This disconnection between lab work and what's available to the public is not likely to be an indefinitely-widening gap. Enough people will get frustrated by it that we'll come up with better ways of testing and bringing treatments to market. Don't be disheartened. To say that front-line treatment /never/ substantially advances isn't quite true. There are many people alive today that wouldn't have been if we were just 10 years behind in terms of medical tech. I expect this will be true in another 10 years, only moreso. Ben Zaiboc From udend05 at aol.com Fri Jun 25 09:34:54 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 05:34:54 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Old Dope Peddler In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CCE260CD3DF5C3-1FE4-6AD4@webmail-d028.sysops.aol.com> >Mortality reduction without reduction in the birth rate leads to events like the Rwanda and Cambodia killings So your suggestion is that we should not wish for something which has led to all the life-saving technologies we currently enjoy on the basis that the same wish might lead to the aberrations you mention? Are you being serious here? Lucky we didn't think that a few years back: 'Don't go wishing for the first tool which will be the breakthrough in our lives and re-shape everything we know and can do because - you never know - someone might bang their thumb with it.' >This red pill will give you continuous orgasm. Do you take it? That's not really the point I was making. 'Orgasm' was intended to refute the idea that our desires being fulfilled would lead to the end of our species, by pointing to the circular nature of pleasure. (Think of the best orgasm you ever had. Did you say, 'Ahhh, it doesn't get any better than this! So I won't bother having those any more.') The pleasure centre of our brain being stimulated is enough to leave us feeling rewarded, pleased, happy, elated, orgasmic, whatever. Getting to a position whereby we could maintain such 'hedonic' levels (to use the language of David Pearce) would be a desirable thing if we assume that pleasure is desirable. Do we? I think that certainly we would be prompted by that feedback system to go on further with our lives. I don't, for example, believe the argument that pleasure itself, or levels of pleasure, could become boring. (It doesn't make sense when you take the view that pleasure is a pattern of chemicals in the brain.) Someone once suggested to me that someone happy in this way wouldn't give a toss about a bus coming towards them in the street - they'd be too happy to care! I replied that the likelihood is surely rather that they would leap out of the way in order to go on enjoying their happiness. Which is precisely why we go on seeking and having orgasms. I for one can honestly say I have never had a boring orgasm. We are inspired by pleasure. But let's not get bogged down in pleasure. Don't forget that what I originally posted about was not pleasure per se, but rather the emotional and psychological ability to lead more effective lives. I'm not suggesting for one instant that I want to be in a constant state of orgasm. (That said, I would definitely like to be able to access orgasms more easily and have them last a lot longer!) But I would like to see crippling emotional problems and psychological issues reduced to a point where people can lead better lives. If pleasure is a by-product of that, are we really going to get our knickers in a twist about it? So in answer to your question: probably not - since I don't see orgasm as being a useful benchmark of pleasure or psychological efficacy - but not because I fear it becoming boring, but rather because I fear I would never do the thousands of other things I want to do! Best, Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 10:01:10 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 11:01:10 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Stem cells reverse blindness caused by burns In-Reply-To: References: <201006240523.o5O5NB5m008358@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 6/25/10, Ross Evans wrote: > What really frustrates me is that we see stories like this coming out of > basic research every day, and yet frontline treatment never seem to > substantially advance as a result. The disconnect between what's happening > in the lab, and begin trialled on a small scale, and what is available to > the general population, seems to be getting larger. > > There are two opposing forces at work. 1) Produce new treatments, help lots of people, make lots of money. (Implying that if the market or profit is small the new treatment won't be produced). 2) Carefully test new teatments to reduce the risk of damaging or killing people with unexpected side-effects and stop rank profiteering from producers. Sometimes one or the other is more significant, and it varies from country to country. Third world countries have major health and nutrition problems and until they get the basics fixed, innovation comes a poor second. Even in first world countries, there are some basic health and nutrition issues that need fixing and would have a much greater impact on the health of the nation than a new eye treatment (for example). BillK From pharos at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 14:35:58 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 15:35:58 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Sense of Touch Affects Our World View Message-ID: Study Shows Link Between Sense of Touch and the Decisions People Make By Bill Hendrick WebMD Health News Reviewed by Laura J. Martin, MD June 24, 2010 -- Our sense of touch profoundly affects how we view the world and other people, influencing thoughts and behavior, new research indicates. The researchers, for example, say that: * People sitting on hard, cushion-less chairs are less likely to compromise in price negotiations than people sitting on softer chairs. * Interviewers holding a heavy clipboard are likely to think job applicants take their work more seriously than if the clipboard is less weighty. The study, reported in the June 25 issue of Science, builds on previous work by Bargh that found people judge others to be more generous and caring after they had briefly held a cup of warm coffee rather than a cold drink. --------------------- This research provides the solution to the occasional over-heated list arguments. Just tell everyone to settle down in a comfy chair with a warm drink and they will feel more generous and considerate to the others. Problem solved! ;) BillK From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 07:25:04 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:25:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Americans polled about their views of the future Message-ID: "And the results are...." http://people-press.org/report/625/ John From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 16:18:51 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 09:18:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Human memory was Looking for a word Message-ID: On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Ross Evans wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Keith Henson wrote: snip >> Considered as a computer, human brains tend to be long in processing >> power and short on memory. > This isn't really true, and it demonstrates how using a digital computer as > an analogus framework for the human brain, can lead to erroneous > conclusions. Always happy for the state of my knowledge to be improved. > The human brain both processes and stores vast amounts of > information. As I understand it, to simulate human brain processing would take tens of TF while a lifetime of information at a few bits per second adds up to less than 200 M bytes. It's been well over a decade since I had a computer with less than a 200 M byte disk. The current desktop computer might run a few GF and a and a few hundred GB of disk. So to match this a ten TF brain simulation should have access to ten TB of storage rather than 200 M byte. > The reason why the brain is not so wired that the average > person can recite pi to a few thousands digits, is simply the lack of the > necessary evolutionary pressure. To proffer a computing analogy that is > germane, the hardware of the brain is very poorly utilised by its software. How would you suggest better utilizing the hardware? Keith From ryanobjc at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 20:18:28 2010 From: ryanobjc at gmail.com (Ryan Rawson) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:18:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Human memory was Looking for a word In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> This isn't really true, and it demonstrates how using a digital computer as >> an analogus framework for the human brain, can lead to erroneous >> conclusions. > > Always happy for the state of my knowledge to be improved. > >> The human brain both processes and stores vast amounts of >> information. > > As I understand it, to simulate human brain processing would take tens > of TF while a lifetime of information at a few bits per second adds up > to less than 200 M bytes. Where does the 'few bits per second' figure come from? I didn't think the brain explicitly stored bits or any memory unit really, but instead implicitly stored information by it's structure and neuron trigger levels? > > It's been well over a decade since I had a computer with less than a > 200 M byte disk. ?The current desktop computer might run a few GF and > a and a few hundred GB of disk. > > So to match this a ten TF brain simulation should have access to ten > TB of storage rather than 200 M byte. From colin.dodson at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 21:07:02 2010 From: colin.dodson at gmail.com (Colin D) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:07:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: <249213.45577.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <249213.45577.qm@web114404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: There is a big difference between Islamic and Islamist. That is to say, if anything an Islamic government simply means that the majority in power happen to be Muslim. Islamist governments actively write law based in Islam. On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 2:55 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Mirco Romanato wrote: > > > It is so true. > > This is because I always have problem writing and talking > > about Islam. I > > checked the texts (at least the translations in English) > > and found that > > "extremist"'s actions are not so out of the mainstream of > > Islam. > > Good point. I'm sure the UN is aware of the concepts of Taqqiya and > Kitman, and I wonder how they take this into consideration when dealing with > the likes of Iran. > > Surely any Islamic state must realise that normal diplomatic procedures > have to be modified to take into account that everyone knows that the very > book they take their whole ethical and legal system from tells them to lie > to non-muslims when it's advantageous? > > Ben Zaiboc > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 ryanobjc at gmail.com Fri Jun 25 21:28:51 2010 From: ryanobjc at gmail.com (Ryan Rawson) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 14:28:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 41% of people are insane In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > I suspect it may be different with people who have had a religious > upbringing. They may know it's all crap but be uncomfortable admitting > it, even to themselves. One of the items in Christian indoctrination > is that one must have faith, implying that there is a strong tendency > to doubt that needs to be stamped out. So the faithful are not so much > convinced that their religion is true as that it is bad to doubt that > it is true. If they are taught to feel guilty about the mere act of > doubting, they are more likely to lie in surveys. It would be easier > to throw off this mindset in secular countries but the US is not > really a secular country. > One of the most amazing things about the human brain is how people are able to have two completely contradictory beliefs without having to reconcile them in a unified internal universal view. There just isnt enough internal integrative power to reconcile every belief and scrap of knowledge in a universally cohesive world view. It is even probable that this evolved as it seems like it would have a specific evolutionary advantage (along with the ability to forget, change your beliefs, etc, etc). I personally believe many people believe that (a) jesus will return and (b) evolutionary science and (c) many other facts of modern science. All without having paradox absorbing crumble zones :-) From udend05 at aol.com Fri Jun 25 22:03:03 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 18:03:03 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: <4C246127.1070206@mac.com> References: <4C246127.1070206@mac.com> Message-ID: <8CCE2C9517E4B54-15CC-EB84@webmail-m067.sysops.aol.com> Does a lack of foresight really test one's transhumanist convictions? Even supposing the singularity does happen, it can't help to plan ahead, surely? One sense in which such planning may very well be useful is in recognising that the likelihood is - assuming capitalism goes on being the prevailing economic philosophy - the kinds of technology we all want to see developed will be extremely expensive. I for one want to have the cash ready for all the wonderful life-extension and mind-uploading techniques. I'd hate to have dreamt about them all these years only to discover I couldn't afford them when the time came! Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Jun 26 04:01:13 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:01:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Well, as I read through this thread I thought about General Zod and his followers (that's just how my mind works...) who were cast out into "The Phantom Zone" and so how about the "Codezone!" It's sort of catchy... John : ) On 6/24/10, Ross Evans wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Keith Henson > wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Emlyn wrote: >> >> > Hi all, >> > >> > I'm trying to crystallize a concept, and I need a word to help to do it. >> > >> > The online world is now full of APIs, which let code literate people >> > talk to online services (all the standard webby protocols, google's >> > many apis, amazons compute cloud ++, twitter APIs, facebook APIs, etc >> > etc etc). There are myriad ways of interacting with these things, from >> > having code on your own machines reach out to them, to hosting code >> > "out there" in online services. >> > >> > I'm conceptualizing this as a multidimensional space through which >> > code literate people can move, interact, create, in a very real sense >> > in which we partially can already live. What would you call this >> > space? It's a bit like a noosphere, but that term would be a bit trite >> > and not do the concept justice. And don't say cyberspace. Any ideas? >> >> I don't know what to call it (people have made good suggestions) but >> the long range effect is going to be like extended memory. >> >> It's been developing for a long time, since writing at least, where >> more and more of our memory is outside our skulls. Time will come >> when you get a neural implant and your mind will treat information in >> it as an extension of your memory. >> >> Considered as a computer, human brains tend to be long in processing >> power and short on memory. >> >> Keith >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > > This isn't really true, and it demonstrates how using a digital computer as > an analogus framework for the human brain, can lead to erroneous > conclusions. The human brain both processes and stores vast amounts of > information. The reason why the brain is not so wired that the average > person can recite pi to a few thousands digits, is simply the lack of the > necessary evolutionary pressure. To proffer a computing analogy that is > germane, the hardware of the brain is very poorly utilised by its software. > > Ross > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Jun 26 04:40:28 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:40:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The ultimate test of your transhumanist convictions... In-Reply-To: <8CCE2C9517E4B54-15CC-EB84@webmail-m067.sysops.aol.com> References: <4C246127.1070206@mac.com> <8CCE2C9517E4B54-15CC-EB84@webmail-m067.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: Damien U wrote: > One sense in which such planning may very well be > useful is in recognising that the likelihood is - > assuming capitalism goes on being the prevailing > economic philosophy - the kinds of technology > we all want to see developed will be extremely > expensive. I for one want to have the cash > ready for all the wonderful life-extension > and mind-uploading techniques. I'd hate to > have dreamt about them all these years only > to discover I couldn't afford them when the time > came. This is exactly my thinking! Many of the first Extro-list postings I read were about nanotech & "anything boxes," and the coming golden age these wonderful technologies were supposed to usher in for every person on the planet. But now as I get older and consider 2030, 2040 and 2050 not so far way, I do worry that I will be in a rather pathetic class of people who saw these wonder technologies decades before their actual development, and yet ironically could not financially afford to benefit from them. John From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Jun 26 05:27:12 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 22:27:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Empathic Civilization/RSA Animate Message-ID: I really enjoyed this educational application of "poor man's animation." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g To learn more about the RSA Animate... http://tutor2u.net/blog/index.php/economics/comments/rsa-animate-bringing-discourse-to-life/ John : ) From msd001 at gmail.com Sat Jun 26 06:17:46 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 02:17:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Psi octopus Message-ID: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/europe/10420131.stm I started to laugh but remembered the squid from Stephen Baxter's Manifold: Time... Then I laughed again at the silliness of sports betting on the game-predicting powers of a hungry squid. Given this group's past ... consideration for psi, I wanted to share. :) From spike66 at att.net Sat Jun 26 06:37:43 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 23:37:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <265905.67934.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Fri, 6/25/10, John Grigg wrote: ? >...so how about the "Codezone!"? It's sort of catchy... John? : ) Ja, might also be someone else's sorta intellectual property: ? http://www.thecodezone.com/ Doh!? ? But keep thinking Johnny!? {8-]? My suggestion of?reeth might be taken as well, a village in England, population about 700.? I don't know how?intellectual property?works with place names.? Intel uses?city names?for their chips.??Anyone know if city names are fair game?? Shall we consult the reeth? ? spike ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Jun 26 07:22:25 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 02:22:25 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: <265905.67934.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <265905.67934.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C25AAB1.4030403@satx.rr.com> On 6/26/2010 1:37 AM, Gregory Jones wrote: > Shall we consult the reeth? Sounds like some kind of beastly feral aliens in the sf of A. E. van Vogt or Keith Laumer. Consult at your peril! Damien Broderick From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Jun 26 09:58:44 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 02:58:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: <4C25AAB1.4030403@satx.rr.com> References: <265905.67934.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C25AAB1.4030403@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Uh Spike, who is this Gregory Jones guy?? John On 6/26/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 1:37 AM, Gregory Jones wrote: > >> Shall we consult the reeth? > > Sounds like some kind of beastly feral aliens in the sf of A. E. van > Vogt or Keith Laumer. Consult at your peril! > > Damien Broderick > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From pharos at gmail.com Sat Jun 26 10:30:42 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 11:30:42 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: References: <265905.67934.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C25AAB1.4030403@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 6/26/10, John Grigg wrote: > Uh Spike, who is this Gregory Jones guy?? > > He's Indiana Jones' alter ego. *Very* alter. BillK From spike66 at att.net Sat Jun 26 15:18:59 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 08:18:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <42011.82878.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? On 6/26/10, John Grigg? wrote: > Uh Spike, who is this Gregory Jones guy?? 'Tis I sir.? Had some email problems which I still haven't solved, and likely will not get to it for at least a few more days.? The other account is set up under this moniker.? {8^|? ? I will maintain the attitude and sense of humor in any case.? {8-] ? spike ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Jun 26 15:33:45 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 08:33:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Looking for a word In-Reply-To: <4C25AAB1.4030403@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <342515.70333.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Sat, 6/26/10, Damien Broderick wrote: ? >> Shall we consult the reeth? >Sounds like some kind of beastly feral aliens in the sf of A. E. van Vogt or Keith Laumer. Consult at your peril!...Damien Broderick ? Here's the challenge.? Find a single syllable word that Google fails to find a definition or previous use.? Failing that (which you will) find one that minimizes the previous use, to reduce the chances of lawsuit by an intellectual property holder.? It occurred to me that city names probably are fair game because their names were derived a long time ago.? Any patent on the names would have long since expired. ? Include in your challenge a "sounds like" such as Damien did.? I liked the sounds-like for reeth, because its homonym is a device made of living things within living things, such as plant cells still alive in the decorative leaves, the?colorful berries and nuts, the painted pine cones with their seed DNA, with the potential to create new lifeforms, the beasts living therein, such as the dust mites devouring skin cells, amoeba within those beasts, etc.? In?a loosely analogous?sense, the reeth contains cells, beasts within beasts, interdependent but fully independent lifeforms doing what?lifeforms do, all working together in an entirely different function than that for which they evolved. ? spike ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sat Jun 26 20:41:21 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 13:41:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 37 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 5:00 AM, Ryan Rawson wrote: > Where does the 'few bits per second' figure come from? Why not ask Google directly instead of asking me? If you Google human memory capacity in bytes the very first in the list is this one: How Many Bytes in Human Memory? by Ralph C. Merkle This article first appeared in Foresight Update No. 4, October 1988. A related article on the computational limits of the human brain is available on the web. http://www.merkle.com/brainLimits.html Today it is commonplace to compare the human brain to a computer, and the human mind to a program running on that computer. Once seen as just a poetic metaphor, this viewpoint is now supported by most philosophers of human consciousness and most researchers in artificial intelligence. If we take this view literally, then just as we can ask how many megabytes of RAM a PC has we should be able to ask how many megabytes (or gigabytes, or terabytes, or whatever) of memory the human brain has. Several approximations to this number have already appeared in the literature based on "hardware" considerations (though in the case of the human brain perhaps the term "wetware" is more appropriate). One estimate of 1020 bits is actually an early estimate (by Von Neumann in The Computer and the Brain) of all the neural impulses conducted in the brain during a lifetime. This number is almost certainly larger than the true answer. Another method is to estimate the total number of synapses, and then presume that each synapse can hold a few bits. Estimates of the number of synapses have been made in the range from 1013 to 1015, with corresponding estimates of memory capacity. A fundamental problem with these approaches is that they rely on rather poor estimates of the raw hardware in the system. The brain is highly redundant and not well understood: the mere fact that a great mass of synapses exists does not imply that they are in fact all contributing to memory capacity. This makes the work of Thomas K. Landauer very interesting, for he has entirely avoided this hardware guessing game by measuring the actual functional capacity of human memory directly (See "How Much Do People Remember? Some Estimates of the Quantity of Learned Information in Long-term Memory", in Cognitive Science 10, 477-493, 1986). Landauer works at Bell Communications Research--closely affiliated with Bell Labs where the modern study of information theory was begun by C. E. Shannon to analyze the information carrying capacity of telephone lines (a subject of great interest to a telephone company). Landauer naturally used these tools by viewing human memory as a novel "telephone line" that carries information from the past to the future. The capacity of this "telephone line" can be determined by measuring the information that goes in and the information that comes out, and then applying the great power of modern information theory. Landauer reviewed and quantitatively analyzed experiments by himself and others in which people were asked to read text, look at pictures, and hear words, short passages of music, sentences, and nonsense syllables. After delays ranging from minutes to days the subjects were tested to determine how much they had retained. The tests were quite sensitive--they did not merely ask "What do you remember?" but often used true/false or multiple choice questions, in which even a vague memory of the material would allow selection of the correct choice. Often, the differential abilities of a group that had been exposed to the material and another group that had not been exposed to the material were used. The difference in the scores between the two groups was used to estimate the amount actually remembered (to control for the number of correct answers an intelligent human could guess without ever having seen the material). Because experiments by many different experimenters were summarized and analyzed, the results of the analysis are fairly robust; they are insensitive to fine details or specific conditions of one or another experiment. Finally, the amount remembered was divided by the time allotted to memorization to determine the number of bits remembered per second. The remarkable result of this work was that human beings remembered very nearly two bits per second under all the experimental conditions. Visual, verbal, musical, or whatever--two bits per second. Continued over a lifetime, this rate of memorization would produce somewhat over 109 bits, or a few hundred megabytes. While this estimate is probably only accurate to within an order of magnitude, Landauer says "We need answers at this level of accuracy to think about such questions as: What sort of storage and retrieval capacities will computers need to mimic human performance? What sort of physical unit should we expect to constitute the elements of information storage in the brain: molecular parts, synaptic junctions, whole cells, or cell-circuits? What kinds of coding and storage methods are reasonable to postulate for the neural support of human capabilities? In modeling or mimicking human intelligence, what size of memory and what efficiencies of use should we imagine we are copying? How much would a robot need to know to match a person?" What is interesting about Landauer's estimate is its small size. Perhaps more interesting is the trend--from Von Neumann's early and very high estimate, to the high estimates based on rough synapse counts, to a better supported and more modest estimate based on information theoretic considerations. While Landauer doesn't measure everything (he did not measure, for example, the bit rate in learning to ride a bicycle, nor does his estimate even consider the size of "working memory") his estimate of memory capacity suggests that the capabilities of the human brain are more approachable than we had thought. While this might come as a blow to our egos, it suggests that we could build a device with the skills and abilities of a human being with little more hardware than we now have--if only we knew the correct way to organize that hardware. From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Jun 26 21:01:13 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 16:01:13 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second (was extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 37) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> On 6/26/2010 3:41 PM, Keith Henson quoted: > How Many Bytes in Human Memory? > > by Ralph C. Merkle > The remarkable result of this work was that human beings remembered > very nearly two bits per second under all the experimental conditions. > Visual, verbal, musical, or whatever--two bits per second. Continued > over a lifetime, this rate of memorization would produce somewhat over > 10^9 bits, or a few hundred megabytes. A rather different take on all this was offered by the late physicist Evan Harris Walker. I have serious doubts about his calculations, not to mention his theories, but here it is in brief: http://www.newdualism.org/papers/E.H.Walker/Dualism.html I await various squeals of rage. Don't shoot the messenger. From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sat Jun 26 21:46:24 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:46:24 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second (was extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 37) In-Reply-To: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 3:41 PM, Keith Henson quoted: > > How Many Bytes in Human Memory? >> >> by Ralph C. Merkle >> > > The remarkable result of this work was that human beings remembered >> very nearly two bits per second under all the experimental conditions. >> Visual, verbal, musical, or whatever--two bits per second. Continued >> over a lifetime, this rate of memorization would produce somewhat over >> 10^9 bits, or a few hundred megabytes. >> > > A rather different take on all this was offered by the late physicist Evan > Harris Walker. I have serious doubts about his calculations, not to mention > his theories, but here it is in brief: > > http://www.newdualism.org/papers/E.H.Walker/Dualism.html > > of consciousness and accounts for these characteristics, an answer is > impossible. There is no theory of consciousness that has been proposed that > even attempts to do this other than the quantum consciousness theory (QCT) > that I have proposed (see Walker, 2000). > > This quantum consciousness theory associates consciousness with an ongoing > continuum of quantum mechanical interactions in the brain that serve as the > interface between consciousness and physical phenomenology.3 At any moment > of this consciousness, this quantum interaction couples a subset of the > brain?s synapses. The specific interaction envisioned takes place by means > of quantum mechanical tunneling that produces successive "state vectors" (or > wave functions) followed, alternately, by successive individual states > describing specific synaptic firing events. The quantum states are the basis > for consciousness, the particular configurations of the synaptic firing > potentialities provide the content of the consciousness.4 > > Quantum theory tells us that this quantum coupling is a local process. That > is why we are conscious of what is going on in the brain. These states are > defined by the conditions of the brain. The number of synapses that are so > coupled provides a measure of how much information is carried. This > information data rate C?5? 10^8 bits/sec. > > Quantum theory is mute as to what causes specific synaptic firings to occur > out of these quantum possibilities. The cause cannot be physical in the > conventional sense. Quantum theory itself fails to give any mechanism > describing what causes a specific state of the state vector to occur. > Specific synaptic firings, however, do occur. Quantum mechanics tells us how > to compute the probabilities, and it tells us that these probabilities are > not classical probabilities that arise from an ignorance of an actual real > single state. Quantum theory insists that the state vector before > measurement is the complete physical description of the system. The cause of > specific synaptic firings, therefore, cannot be physical in any conventional > sense. > > One state will occur. Because this state selection happens in association > with consciousness, has a range of potentialities that could happen, and > that one specific "course of mental action"5 does happen as a result of the > state vector collapse, this cause (the nonphysical thing that causes the > state selection) satisfies the requirements of a philosophical definition of > "will."6 Will causes the collapse. Details as to how this state selection > can be triggered and as to its structure are given elsewhere by Walker > (1988). > > Now, we know how to calculate the Shannon information measure involved in > the state vector going from the potential for any one of the collection of > synapses firing to one specific synapse firing. The amount of information > associated with this will is W? 6? 10^4 bits/sec as an ongoing process.> > > I await various squeals of rage. Don't shoot the messenger. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > All this is essentially pure speculation. We don't know how the brain encodes information, and as such to even talk in terms of bits and bytes is to fall foul of the assumption, that the brain can be shoehorned into a conceptual framework, that sees it deemed to be little more than a digital computer. The other extreme is the promulgators of the quantum consciousness idea, which is little more than new age quackery dressed up as serious science. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Jun 26 22:02:33 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 17:02:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> On 6/26/2010 4:46 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > The other extreme is the promulgators of the quantum consciousness idea, > which is little more than new age quackery dressed up as serious science. You might well be right, but how do you know this? You're a neuroscientist, I take it? Or perhaps a quantum specialist on the order of Roger Penrose? Damien Broderick From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sat Jun 26 23:26:31 2010 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 19:26:31 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: I dare Ross to possibilify the wonders of conscious perception without sounding like a quack. Maybe it's just 22nd century science... ;) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Jun 26 23:37:31 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 18:37:31 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C268F3B.3040504@satx.rr.com> On 6/26/2010 6:26 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > I dare Ross to possibilify the wonders of conscious perception without > sounding like a quack. If it sounds like a quack, and is perceived as a quack, better duck. [that one was for you, spike :) ] Damien Broderick From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sat Jun 26 23:40:11 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 00:40:11 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 4:46 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > > The other extreme is the promulgators of the quantum consciousness idea, >> which is little more than new age quackery dressed up as serious science. >> > > You might well be right, but how do you know this? You're a neuroscientist, > I take it? Or perhaps a quantum specialist on the order of Roger Penrose? > > Damien Broderick > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > Is being either a requisite to dismiss a theory on the basis of lack of evidence? The consensus in the scientific community is that the idea is bunkum. Are you advocating that the unproven and preposterous should be considered factually valid, until such time sufficient proof is found to determine that they are in fact invalid? Neither Penrose nor Hameroff have provided any serious evidence in support of their theory Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sat Jun 26 23:53:47 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 00:53:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/27 Will Steinberg > I dare Ross to possibilify the wonders of conscious perception without > sounding like a quack. > > Maybe it's just 22nd century science... ;) > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > It's quite simple, for 'quack' is a label attached to to those that peddle theories with no credible evidence. What Penrose has done is exactly the kind of nonsense you likely criticise the faith based for doing; filling in gaps in knowledge with vaguely defined supernatural agency. Having read his work, and that of other people promoting this theory, there is a distinct whiff of religious fervour, and an appeal to human exceptionalism. I think this quote from Stenger sums it up nicely... *But, alas, quantum consciousness has about as much substance as the aether from which it is composed *-V J Stenger cite: http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Quantum/QuantumConsciousness.pdf Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 27 00:03:25 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 19:03:25 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> On 6/26/2010 6:40 PM, Ross Evans wrote: [Broderick:] >> You might well be right, but how do you know this? You're a >> neuroscientist, I take it? Or perhaps a quantum specialist on the >> order of Roger Penrose? > Is being either a requisite to dismiss a theory on the basis of lack of > evidence? The consensus in the scientific community is that the idea is > bunkum. It's tricky. Obviously Penrose and his scientist supporters, for example, are not *without evidence*--they have the same evidence everyone else does, and happen to be paying special attention to certain aspects of it. Besides, are their suggestions theories or hypotheses? I'd have thought the latter. Is appealing to Penrose's expertise, over (what I assume is, for lack of any evidence offered otherwise) your thirdhand magazine gossip, nothing better than the fallacy of appeal to authority? But of course you are appealing to the alleged authority of a larger group, "the scientific community." This can only be that small part of the community of scientists actually engaged in neuroscience and related work, plus some informed philosophers trying to make meta-sense of their findings. But then we run into the partial blindness of experts with a stake in their own programs; the consensus in the medical community for decades if not centuries was that ulcers are caused by stress and the notion that they were usually caused by infection was dismissed as bunkum. Granted, the key to accepting that idea was evidence gathered by dangerous self-experiments, but it's possible that solving consciousness might be a little bit more difficult. People make it that much more difficult to solve by shouting "bunkum" in a crowded room. Damien Broderick [not a Penrosian] From spike66 at att.net Sun Jun 27 00:11:21 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 17:11:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C268F3B.3040504@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <450648.83874.qm@web81508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Sat, 6/26/10, Damien Broderick wrote: ? >If it sounds like a quack, and is perceived as a quack, better duck. >[that one was for you, spike? :)? ] >Damien Broderick Thank you sir.? Now I know you guys are still alive.? spike ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 00:14:17 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 01:14:17 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:03 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 6:40 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > > [Broderick:] > > >> You might well be right, but how do you know this? You're a > >> neuroscientist, I take it? Or perhaps a quantum specialist on the > >> order of Roger Penrose? > > Is being either a requisite to dismiss a theory on the basis of lack of >> evidence? The consensus in the scientific community is that the idea is >> bunkum. >> > > It's tricky. Obviously Penrose and his scientist supporters, for example, > are not *without evidence*--they have the same evidence everyone else does, > and happen to be paying special attention to certain aspects of it. > > Besides, are their suggestions theories or hypotheses? I'd have thought the > latter. > > Is appealing to Penrose's expertise, over (what I assume is, for lack of > any evidence offered otherwise) your thirdhand magazine gossip, nothing > better than the fallacy of appeal to authority? But of course you are > appealing to the alleged authority of a larger group, "the scientific > community." This can only be that small part of the community of scientists > actually engaged in neuroscience and related work, plus some informed > philosophers trying to make meta-sense of their findings. > > But then we run into the partial blindness of experts with a stake in their > own programs; the consensus in the medical community for decades if not > centuries was that ulcers are caused by stress and the notion that they were > usually caused by infection was dismissed as bunkum. Granted, the key to > accepting that idea was evidence gathered by dangerous self-experiments, but > it's possible that solving consciousness might be a little bit more > difficult. People make it that much more difficult to solve by shouting > "bunkum" in a crowded room. > > Damien Broderick > [not a Penrosian] > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > In case you missed it in my other reply, here is some 'magazine gossip' regarding the scientific invalidity of the quantum consciousness theory. http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Quantum/QuantumConsciousness.pdf Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 27 00:36:48 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 19:36:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> On 6/26/2010 7:14 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > here is some 'magazine gossip' regarding the scientific invalidity of > the quantum consciousness theory. > > http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Quantum/QuantumConsciousness.pdf Ah. So "The Humanist" *isn't* a magazine? Stenger is an experimental physicist, so he certainly has some warrant for expressing his opinion on QT. He makes no mention of Penrose or Hameroff in that popular article--only Zukav, fer gawd's sake--and just expresses his own metaphysical presumptions (which are interesting, of course; I've published reviews of a number of his books, and fwiw alerted him to several errors of fact). Damien Broderick From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 01:21:45 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 02:21:45 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:36 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 7:14 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > > here is some 'magazine gossip' regarding the scientific invalidity of >> the quantum consciousness theory. >> >> >> http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Quantum/QuantumConsciousness.pdf >> > > Ah. So "The Humanist" *isn't* a magazine? Stenger is an experimental > physicist, so he certainly has some warrant for expressing his opinion on > QT. He makes no mention of Penrose or Hameroff in that popular article--only > Zukav, fer gawd's sake--and just expresses his own metaphysical presumptions > (which are interesting, of course; I've published reviews of a number of his > books, and fwiw alerted him to several errors of fact). > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > Of course it is, I was poking fun at your presumption that publication in a magazine somehow invalidates the content. I think the source of our seeming ideological divide, can be found by looking at some of your published works, specifically *Outside the Gates of Science: Why It's Time for the Paranormal to Come In >From The Cold * and *The Lotto Effect: Towards a Technology of the Paranormal* Tthe 'paranormal' endures such inclement clime, because great claims are made on the basis of evidence with no scientific validity. It just seems like you've brought a dousing rod to a science fair, and in the context of any debate this leaves me at a disadvantage. I am bound by scientific method, you merely by the bounds of your imagination. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 27 01:38:16 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 20:38:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> On 6/26/2010 8:21 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > I was poking fun What a good idea. I really should try that sometimes. > I think the source of our seeming > ideological divide, can be found by looking at some of your published > works, specifically > > /Outside the Gates of Science: Why It's Time for the Paranormal to Come > In From The Cold / Which you've read, obviously (because only a fool or a bigot would dismiss a popular science book unread), so let's hear your detailed objections. Speaking of Vic Stenger, I find it entertaining, in this context, that his web site displays some laudatory comments of mine, which can be seen in full on Richard Dawkins' site at http://richarddawkins.net/articles/1065 Damien Broderick From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 02:36:24 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 03:36:24 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 2:38 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 8:21 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > > I was poking fun >> > > What a good idea. I really should try that sometimes. > > I think the source of our seeming >> ideological divide, can be found by looking at some of your published >> works, specifically >> >> /Outside the Gates of Science: Why It's Time for the Paranormal to Come >> In From The Cold / >> > > Which you've read, obviously (because only a fool or a bigot would dismiss > a popular science book unread), so let's hear your detailed objections. > > Speaking of Vic Stenger, I find it entertaining, in this context, that his > web site displays some laudatory comments of mine, which can be seen in full > on Richard Dawkins' site at > > http://richarddawkins.net/articles/1065 > > > Damien Broderick > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > Of course I have not read either work, given that I have been aware of the existence of both books for only a few hours. That said, I did take the time to read a synopsis and and detailed review (Why It's Time for the Paranormal to Come in From the Cold), these alone were enough to raise any eyebrow. The same goes for 'The Lotto Effect', and again to me it just seems like so much new age nonsense. For example. the work of P.E.A.R is thus recorded with ciations on wikipedia... *PEAR closed its doors at the end of February 2007 with its founder, Robert G. Jahn , concluding that after tens of millions of trials they had demonstrated that human intention has a slight effect on random-event machines.[8]"For 28 years, we?ve done what we wanted to do, and there?s no reason to stay and generate more of the same data,"[1]Jahn said. Jahn felt that the work showed, on average, people can shift 2?3 events out of 10,000 from chance expectations.[8] * *These tiny deviations from chance have failed to convince mainstream scientists who feel that the effect is inconsistent and that relatively few negative studies would cancel it out.[4]Physicist Robert L. Park said of PEAR, "It?s been an embarrassment to science, and I think an embarrassment for Princeton".[1]Park maintains that if a coin is flipped enough times, even a slight imperfection can produce more than 50% heads, and that the "tiny statistical edges" PEAR reported are the result of statistical flaws.[8] * Cite: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princeton_Engineering_Anomalies_Research_Lab More rigorous statistical analysis of the data collected by P.E.A.R shows no measurable effect, and as Randi frequently comments, paranormal phenomena have a habit of vanishing in the presence of serious scrutiny. My issue is that when talking of 'evidence' for various 'paranormal' phenomena, what is offered up, are the myriad pseudo-religious conjectures, of people overly assertive of the healing power of crystals. Apropos, your review of Stenger's book. You seem to be conflating 'having an opinion on something', with being the peer of the person whose work on which you have opined. There is a reason Stenger's work has appeared in numerous peer reviewed scientific journals, concurrently, there is a reason yours has not. The latter, whilst entertaining, and assuredly well written, does not meet the standard of serious scientific inquiry, replete as it is with so much ideological baggage. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 27 03:00:37 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:00:37 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> On 6/26/2010 9:36 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > Of course I have not read either work...That said, I did take > the time to read a synopsis and and detailed review (Why It's Time for > the Paranormal to Come in From the Cold), these alone were enough to > raise any eyebrow. The same goes for 'The Lotto Effect', and again to me > it just seems like so much new age nonsense. Where were these reviews? Urls, please. If you mean those on Amazon, you must mean the long review by Ben Goertzel, among others. (Most people on this list know Ben as the genius behind Novamente, a promising AGI project.) Interesting case, there. Until he read my book, Ben was "curious but ambivalent" about the reality of psi. Now we're collaborating as co-editors on a technical book with the working title THE SCIENCE OF PSI. How did this happen? Why, he took the trouble to read the book, and followed that up by reading a number of the peer-reviewed papers I cited. Those who babble about "new age nonsense" in regard to my books about psi need to start by reading them. > You seem to be conflating > 'having an opinion on something', with being the peer of the person > whose work on which you have opined. This is genuinely hilarious. You probably don't see how you've just undercut yourself. And of course anyone who cites Wikipedia as an authoritative source must have been born yesterday. Damien Broderick From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 03:25:38 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 04:25:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 9:36 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > > Of course I have not read either work...That said, I did take >> >> the time to read a synopsis and and detailed review (Why It's Time for >> the Paranormal to Come in From the Cold), these alone were enough to >> raise any eyebrow. The same goes for 'The Lotto Effect', and again to me >> it just seems like so much new age nonsense. >> > > Where were these reviews? Urls, please. > > If you mean those on Amazon, you must mean the long review by Ben Goertzel, > among others. (Most people on this list know Ben as the genius behind > Novamente, a promising AGI project.) Interesting case, there. Until he read > my book, Ben was "curious but ambivalent" about the reality of psi. Now > we're collaborating as co-editors on a technical book with the working title > THE SCIENCE OF PSI. How did this happen? Why, he took the trouble to read > the book, and followed that up by reading a number of the peer-reviewed > papers I cited. Those who babble about "new age nonsense" in regard to my > books about psi need to start by reading them. > > You seem to be conflating >> >> 'having an opinion on something', with being the peer of the person >> whose work on which you have opined. >> > > This is genuinely hilarious. You probably don't see how you've just > undercut yourself. > > And of course anyone who cites Wikipedia as an authoritative source must > have been born yesterday. > > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > The wikipedia article contains citations from other sources. Feel free to check them out. The work of P.E.A.R has been debunked many times, I am surprised that this is news to you. Regarding the review... http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Outside+the+Gates+of+Science%3A+Why+It%27s+Time+for+the+Paranormal+to+...-a0176480171 What's this about the 'reality of psi'? It exists only in as much as your credulity convinces you of it. Please provide a link to just one of these scientifically credible papers in support of the phenomena you claim exist. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 27 03:59:33 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:59:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C26CCA5.20308@satx.rr.com> On 6/26/2010 10:25 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > The work of P.E.A.R has been debunked many times, I am surprised that > this is news to you. I suggest you read some of the detailed statistical reports from PEAR. Go to http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/publications.html and look at any of the experimental reports (not the discursive essays). (Of course you won't, you know in your bones, as John Clark does, that it's all BULLSHIT.) > Regarding the review... > > http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Outside+the+Gates+of+Science%3A+Why+It%27s+Time+for+the+Paranormal+to+...-a0176480171 More hilarity. This is your idea of a killer review of my book? Professor Caroline Watts' mostly positive reading? > Please provide a link to just one of these scientifically credible > papers in support of the phenomena you claim exist. Read Prof Bem and Charles Honorton Read linked from Utts, J. M. (1996) An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning, Journal of Scientific Exploration, 10 (1), 3-30. Also in Journal of Parapsychology, 59(4), 289-320. Hyman, R. (1996) Evaluation of Program on Anomalous Mental Phenomena Journal of Scientific Exploration 10(1), 31-58. Also in Journal of Parapsychology, 59(4), 321-352. Utts, J. M. (1996) Response to Ray Hyman's Report of September 11, 1995, "Evaluation of Program on Anomalous Mental Phenomena." Journal of Scientific Exploration 10(1), 59-61. Also in Journal of Parapsychology, 59(4), 353-356. May, E.C. (1996). The American Institutes for Research Review of the Department of Defense's STAR GATE Program: A Commentary. Journal of Scientific Exploration 10(1), 89-107. From ben at goertzel.org Sun Jun 27 05:00:55 2010 From: ben at goertzel.org (Ben Goertzel) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 01:00:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Hmmm... There is no real evidence that quantum physical phenomena underlie human consciousness, but IMO it's a credible hypothesis OTOH Penrose goes further, and suggests that **quantum gravity** phenomena, inexplicable by current quantum physics, underlie human consciousness and render human intelligent problem-solving fundamentally uncomputable... The latter is a lot more of a stretch than the "mere" quantum physics / consciousness connection.... The latter really does reek of wishful thinking, because none of the current theories of quantum gravity (including Penrose's twistor theory) *are* uncomputable... -- Ben G On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 6:40 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > > [Broderick:] > > >> You might well be right, but how do you know this? You're a > >> neuroscientist, I take it? Or perhaps a quantum specialist on the > >> order of Roger Penrose? > > Is being either a requisite to dismiss a theory on the basis of lack of >> evidence? The consensus in the scientific community is that the idea is >> bunkum. >> > > It's tricky. Obviously Penrose and his scientist supporters, for example, > are not *without evidence*--they have the same evidence everyone else does, > and happen to be paying special attention to certain aspects of it. > > Besides, are their suggestions theories or hypotheses? I'd have thought the > latter. > > Is appealing to Penrose's expertise, over (what I assume is, for lack of > any evidence offered otherwise) your thirdhand magazine gossip, nothing > better than the fallacy of appeal to authority? But of course you are > appealing to the alleged authority of a larger group, "the scientific > community." This can only be that small part of the community of scientists > actually engaged in neuroscience and related work, plus some informed > philosophers trying to make meta-sense of their findings. > > But then we run into the partial blindness of experts with a stake in their > own programs; the consensus in the medical community for decades if not > centuries was that ulcers are caused by stress and the notion that they were > usually caused by infection was dismissed as bunkum. Granted, the key to > accepting that idea was evidence gathered by dangerous self-experiments, but > it's possible that solving consciousness might be a little bit more > difficult. People make it that much more difficult to solve by shouting > "bunkum" in a crowded room. > > Damien Broderick > [not a Penrosian] > -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC CTO, Genescient Corp Vice Chairman, Humanity+ Advisor, Singularity University and Singularity Institute External Research Professor, Xiamen University, China ben at goertzel.org " ?When nothing seems to help, I go look at a stonecutter hammering away at his rock, perhaps a hundred times without as much as a crack showing in it. Yet at the hundred and first blow it will split in two, and I know it was not that blow that did it, but all that had gone before.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 05:24:48 2010 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 01:24:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: *"Are you advocating that the unproven and preposterous should be considered factually valid"* * * *-Ross Evens, recently* No--why do you immediately assume a confrontational stance? We are just lollygagging around the topic. Don't you think it's alright to allow for the possibility that quantum mechanics, which describe our entire universe, might be a factor in human cognition? Your denying it on logical grounds (based on ever-changing axioms) is worse than our considering it *because* we know that the axioms will change. Penrose might be too hopeful, but all you have against his "science might be magic" faith is your "science musn't be magic" faith. Denial just as categorical. A lot of things we have today would be magic to people of the past. Maybe I support the possibility because I *want* it to be true. But it seems like you *want* it to be false. Why? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 05:47:32 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:47:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second Message-ID: On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 3:41 PM, Keith Henson quoted: > >> How Many Bytes in Human Memory? >> >> by Ralph C. Merkle > >> The remarkable result of this work was that human beings remembered >> very nearly two bits per second under all the experimental conditions. >> Visual, verbal, musical, or whatever--two bits per second. Continued >> over a lifetime, this rate of memorization would produce somewhat over >> 10^9 bits, or a few hundred megabytes. > > A rather different take on all this was offered by the late physicist > Evan Harris Walker. I have serious doubts about his calculations, not to > mention his theories, but here it is in brief: > > http://www.newdualism.org/papers/E.H.Walker/Dualism.html > > characteristics of consciousness snip I was asked where I got a figure about human memory capacity. I provided it. I don't see where memory capacity is examined at all in this article. In fact, the article seems to be to be logically deficient, to quote: 1. Consciousness is something real. 2. Physics defines what constitutes physicality. 3. Measurement is the cornerstone of physics; if something is not physically measurable, it is not a part of physical reality. So far this is reasonable. 4. It is not possible to measure consciousness. What? My computer has a form of consciousness. I have no problem in making at least a binary determination about the state of its consciousness. Same with a cat. I can certainly tell the difference between a dead cat, a sleeping cat and a purring one I am petting. With humans, doctors have *scales* with which they measure consciousness. Responsiveness is the way they measure consciousness. Sheesh. Keith From spike66 at att.net Sun Jun 27 05:50:16 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <229045.83150.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Please,?a comment regarding the new guys.? There are several here now that joined in the past couple months.? I do urge caution for those who do not know the local players very well.? I have seen borderline?dismissive comments come across to those who have been around here a long time and have amassed a?truly impressive pile of credibility, for so many?excellent reasons.? New guys, we value your input very much.? Take your time, get to know who is who, review the archives if you wish, learn which posters deserve the utmost respect and why, thanks. ? Carry on! ? {8-] ? spike ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scerir at libero.it Sun Jun 27 08:19:13 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 10:19:13 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] few bits per second Message-ID: <29148497.64081277626753128.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> All this is essentially pure speculation. We don't know how the brain encodes information, and as such to even talk in terms of bits and bytes is to fall foul of the assumption, that the brain can be shoehorned into a conceptual framework, that sees it deemed to be little more than a digital computer. The other extreme is the promulgators of the quantum consciousness idea, which is little more than new age quackery dressed up as serious science. Ross ------------------- Ross, we don't know much about brain, consciousness, and all that. But we suppose to know there is only one physics, alttough it is possible there are "emergences" here and there, or it seems so. And we suppose to know that quantum physics gives us the essential tools to understand how UNIty (unitarity if you prefer) and diVERSity can coexist in this UNIVERSe. From giulio at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 08:56:06 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 10:56:06 +0200 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On the basis of (my knowledge and understanding of) current knowledge, I tend to think the brain is explainable a classical system, that is, quantum effects can be neglected in practice and the thinking mind can be derived from a classical approximation to brain's physics. At the same time, like Ben, I don't rule out the possibility that (yet undiscovered) quantum properties of the brain may play a central role. If this is the case, artificial minds will require a substrate that exhibits similar quantum properties. G. 2010/6/27 Ben Goertzel : > > Hmmm... > There is no real evidence that quantum physical phenomena underlie human > consciousness, but IMO it's a credible hypothesis > OTOH Penrose goes further, and suggests that **quantum gravity** phenomena, > inexplicable by current quantum physics, underlie human consciousness and > render human intelligent problem-solving fundamentally uncomputable... > The latter is a lot more of a stretch than the "mere" quantum physics / > consciousness connection.... ?The latter really does reek of wishful > thinking, because none of the current theories of quantum gravity (including > Penrose's twistor theory) *are* uncomputable... > -- Ben G > > On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Damien Broderick > wrote: >> >> On 6/26/2010 6:40 PM, Ross Evans wrote: >> >> [Broderick:] >> >> ? ?You might well be right, but how do you know this? You're a >> >> ? ?neuroscientist, I take it? Or perhaps a quantum specialist on the >> >> ? ?order of Roger Penrose? >> >>> Is being either a requisite to dismiss a theory on the basis of lack of >>> evidence? The consensus in the scientific community is that the idea is >>> bunkum. >> >> It's tricky. Obviously Penrose and his scientist supporters, for example, >> are not *without evidence*--they have the same evidence everyone else does, >> and happen to be paying special attention to certain aspects of it. >> >> Besides, are their suggestions theories or hypotheses? I'd have thought >> the latter. >> >> Is appealing to Penrose's expertise, over (what I assume is, for lack of >> any evidence offered otherwise) your thirdhand magazine gossip, nothing >> better than the fallacy of appeal to authority? But of course you are >> appealing to the alleged authority of a larger group, "the scientific >> community." This can only be that small part of the community of scientists >> actually engaged in neuroscience and related work, plus some informed >> philosophers trying to make meta-sense of their findings. >> >> But then we run into the partial blindness of experts with a stake in >> their own programs; the consensus in the medical community for decades if >> not centuries was that ulcers are caused by stress and the notion that they >> were usually caused by infection was dismissed as bunkum. Granted, the key >> to accepting that idea was evidence gathered by dangerous self-experiments, >> but it's possible that solving consciousness might be a little bit more >> difficult. People make it that much more difficult to solve by shouting >> "bunkum" in a crowded room. >> >> Damien Broderick >> [not a Penrosian] > > > > -- > Ben Goertzel, PhD > CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC > CTO, Genescient Corp > Vice Chairman, Humanity+ > Advisor, Singularity University and Singularity Institute > External Research Professor, Xiamen University, China > ben at goertzel.org > > " > ?When nothing seems to help, I go look at a stonecutter hammering away at > his rock, perhaps a hundred times without as much as a crack showing in it. > Yet at the hundred and first blow it will split in two, and I know it was > not that blow that did it, but all that had gone before.? > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 09:20:49 2010 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:20:49 +1000 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27 June 2010 15:47, Keith Henson wrote: > In fact, the article seems to be to be logically deficient, to quote: > > 1. Consciousness is something real. > 2. Physics defines what constitutes physicality. > 3. Measurement is the cornerstone of physics; if something is not > physically measurable, it is not a part of physical reality. > > So far this is reasonable. > > 4. It is not possible to measure consciousness. > > What? ?My computer has a form of consciousness. ?I have no problem in > making at least a binary determination about the state of its > consciousness. > > Same with a cat. ? I can certainly tell the difference between a dead > cat, a sleeping cat and a purring one I am petting. > > With humans, doctors have *scales* with which they measure > consciousness. ?Responsiveness is the way they measure consciousness. If philosophical zombies are possible, then it is not possible to measure consciousness. -- Stathis Papaioannou From bbenzai at yahoo.com Sun Jun 27 10:23:24 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 03:23:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <926440.30135.qm@web114416.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Ross Evans wrote: > All this is essentially pure speculation. We don't know how > the brain > encodes information, and as such to even talk in terms of > bits and bytes is > to fall foul of the assumption, that the brain can be > shoehorned into a > conceptual framework, that sees it deemed to be little more > than a digital > computer. You're right of course that we currently have to speculate, but your assertion that "to even talk in terms of bits and bytes is to fall foul of the assumption, that the brain can be shoehorned into a conceptual framework, that sees it deemed to be little more than a digital computer." is missing the point, I feel. I doubt that anyone seriously claims that the brain is 'little more than a digital computer', although it does display some signs of digital encoding. The point is that digital computers can emulate non-digital systems to an arbitrary degree of precision (given enough processing power and memory), and we don't currently know how much precision and how much memory will be needed to emulate a human brain. The estimates being thrown about are 'digital-equivalents', because talking in terms of bits is a very convenient way to quantify information. I expect that a working brain emulation will not just be 'a computer program', in the sense that a word-processor is. It will probably be an ecology of models of brain modules, which may themselves be interacting sets of smaller models - cortical columns, maybe - and only down at that level, or maybe lower down (individual cells, or even synapses) will you see anything like a computer program that deals in bits and bytes. The vast majority of a brain emulation will be at higher levels of abstraction. Ben Zaiboc From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 12:42:16 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:42:16 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C26CCA5.20308@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C26CCA5.20308@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 4:59 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 10:25 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > > The work of P.E.A.R has been debunked many times, I am surprised that >> this is news to you. >> > > I suggest you read some of the detailed statistical reports from PEAR. Go > to http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/publications.htmland look at any of the experimental reports (not the discursive essays). (Of > course you won't, you know in your bones, as John Clark does, that it's all > BULLSHIT.) The detail isn't the problem, the conclusions being drawn are. > > > Regarding the review... >> >> >> http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Outside+the+Gates+of+Science%3A+Why+It%27s+Time+for+the+Paranormal+to+...-a0176480171 >> > > More hilarity. This is your idea of a killer review of my book? Professor > Caroline Watts' mostly positive reading? No, it was me demonstrating that I had taken the time to find a review of the book. In this case from a particularly sympathetic audience. > > > > Please provide a link to just one of these scientifically credible > > papers in support of the phenomena you claim exist. > > Read Prof Bem and Charles Honorton > Yet, 16 years later, here we are, no replicable 'psi' phenomena are known to exist. > > Read linked from > > > > Utts, J. M. (1996) An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning, > Journal of Scientific Exploration, 10 (1), 3-30. Also in Journal of > Parapsychology, 59(4), 289-320. > > Hyman, R. (1996) Evaluation of Program on Anomalous Mental Phenomena > Journal of Scientific Exploration 10(1), 31-58. Also in Journal of > Parapsychology, 59(4), 321-352. > > Utts, J. M. (1996) Response to Ray Hyman's Report of September 11, 1995, > "Evaluation of Program on Anomalous Mental Phenomena." Journal of > Scientific Exploration 10(1), 59-61. Also in Journal of Parapsychology, > 59(4), 353-356. > > May, E.C. (1996). The American Institutes for Research Review of the > Department of Defense's STAR GATE Program: A Commentary. Journal of > Scientific Exploration 10(1), 89-107. The fact that seemingly educated people devote time to this nonsense, is not evidence of its validity. Geller managed to fool numerous scientists, into crediting him with some hitherto unexplained ability to manipulate matter with his mind. Scrutiny of these claims by persons not credulous of such claims, has without fail shown the to be rubbish. Ross > > _______________________________________________ > 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 reinhard.heil at googlemail.com Sat Jun 26 06:27:54 2010 From: reinhard.heil at googlemail.com (Reinhard H.) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 08:27:54 +0200 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?b?U2NpZW50aXN0cyBhcmUg4oCcbm9ybWFs4oCdIHBlb3BsZSwg?= =?utf-8?q?children_discover?= Message-ID: Scientists are ?normal? people, children discover In Drawings of Scientists, seventh graders draw and describe their image of scientists before and after a visit to Fermilab. http://restructure.wordpress.com/2010/06/11/scientists-are-normal-people-children-discover/ From scerir at libero.it Sun Jun 27 16:48:20 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:48:20 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] few bits per second Message-ID: <17412418.102501277657300894.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> samantha writes: > scerir wrote: >> All this is essentially pure speculation. We don't know how the brain >> encodes information, and as such to even talk in terms of bits and bytes is >> to fall foul of the assumption, > Are you saying that there is no way to quantify how much information a > human being can commit to memory per unit time currently? That quote (and the other quotation) is wrong, Ross said that, not me. Anyway I'm inclined to think that the concept of quantity of information must be defined properly here. In example what are the 'carriers' of this information? Is the process digital, sometimes also analogical, or mixed? Can we describe the carriers of informations, or the informations themselves, by means of a sequence of classical symbols on the tape of a Turing machine? From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 27 17:44:58 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 12:44:58 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C26CCA5.20308@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C278E1A.7000408@satx.rr.com> On 6/27/2010 7:42 AM, Ross Evans wrote: > > > Please provide a link to just one of these scientifically credible > > papers in support of the phenomena you claim exist. > > Read Prof Bem and Charles Honorton > > The fact that seemingly educated people devote time to this nonsense, > is not evidence of its validity. Uh huh. So you disingenuously ask for "just one" such paper, I give you more than one, you blow them all off without reading or any further analysis. Big surprise. > Scrutiny of these claims by persons not > credulous of such claims, has without fail shown the to be rubbish. Your grammar is as impressive as your reasoning. Goodbye. Damien Broderick From bbenzai at yahoo.com Sun Jun 27 17:42:03 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 10:42:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <331495.19834.qm@web114416.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Stathis Papaioannou observed: > If philosophical zombies are possible then it is not > possible to measure consciousness. If philosophical zombies are possible, that's the least of our worries! Ben Zaiboc From jonkc at bellsouth.net Sun Jun 27 17:31:46 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:31:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second (was extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 37) In-Reply-To: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <113E1569-CD02-4CA5-BA90-81656A0A9414@bellsouth.net> On Jun 26, 2010, at 5:01 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: >> > A rather different take on all this was offered by the late physicist Evan Harris Walker. I have serious doubts about his calculations, not to mention his theories, but here it is in brief: > > http://www.newdualism.org/papers/E.H.Walker/Dualism.html It seems to be utterly useless work to me. It all boils down to one sentence "The quantum states are the basis for consciousness"; well fine but how do those quantum states do it? How does that advance our understanding over neuron firing does it or my favorite that consciousness is just the way data feels when it is being processed? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 17:59:09 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:59:09 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C278E1A.7000408@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C26CCA5.20308@satx.rr.com> <4C278E1A.7000408@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/27/2010 7:42 AM, Ross Evans wrote: > >> >> > Please provide a link to just one of these scientifically credible >> > papers in support of the phenomena you claim exist. >> >> Read Prof Bem and Charles Honorton >> > > >> > > The fact that seemingly educated people devote time to this nonsense, >> is not evidence of its validity. >> > > Uh huh. So you disingenuously ask for "just one" such paper, I give you > more than one, you blow them all off without reading or any further > analysis. Big surprise. > > > Scrutiny of these claims by persons not >> credulous of such claims, has without fail shown the to be rubbish. >> > > Your grammar is as impressive as your reasoning. Goodbye. > > Damien Broderick > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > I addressed the paper you cited, and the issue remains, 16 years later, where are the reproducible psi phenomena? Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at bellsouth.net Sun Jun 27 17:40:39 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:40:39 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C26CCA5.20308@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C26CCA5.20308@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <3C25ABFA-2B57-49BA-950D-37F833EB4BCE@bellsouth.net> On Jun 26, 2010, at 11:59 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 10:25 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > >> The work of P.E.A.R has been debunked many times, I am surprised that >> this is news to you. > > I suggest you read some of the detailed statistical reports from PEAR. Go to http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/publications.html and look at any of the experimental reports (not the discursive essays). (Of course you won't, you know in your bones, as John Clark does, that it's all BULLSHIT.) I sent the following message to the list on February 10 2007, nothing has changed since then: Speaking of BULLSHIT, on the front page of today's New York Times there is an article about the ESP "lab" at Princeton (PEAR). It is closing down after 28 years. One of the chief witchdoctors there is quoted as saying something that to my surprise I agree with completely: "There is no reason to stay and generate more of the same data. If people don't believe us after all the results we've produced then they never will." More crappy data just will not help. The article also describes the joy many at the university felt about its demise and how none of the 700 full professors at Princeton had joined PEAR, and how they never got published in first rate science journals, and how they went to the National Enquire of science journals "The Society for Scientific Exploration" a rag that is never cited by anybody worth reading. Besides ESP it also loves UFOs, spoon bending, and of course cold fusion. But that august journal does not love everything, it prints attacks on relativity and evolution. John K Clark > >> Regarding the review... >> >> http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Outside+the+Gates+of+Science%3A+Why+It%27s+Time+for+the+Paranormal+to+...-a0176480171 > > More hilarity. This is your idea of a killer review of my book? Professor Caroline Watts' mostly positive reading? > > > Please provide a link to just one of these scientifically credible > > papers in support of the phenomena you claim exist. > > Read Prof Bem and Charles Honorton > > Read linked from > > Utts, J. M. (1996) An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning, Journal of Scientific Exploration, 10 (1), 3-30. Also in Journal of Parapsychology, 59(4), 289-320. > > Hyman, R. (1996) Evaluation of Program on Anomalous Mental Phenomena Journal of Scientific Exploration 10(1), 31-58. Also in Journal of Parapsychology, 59(4), 321-352. > > Utts, J. M. (1996) Response to Ray Hyman's Report of September 11, 1995, "Evaluation of Program on Anomalous Mental Phenomena." Journal of Scientific Exploration 10(1), 59-61. Also in Journal of Parapsychology, 59(4), 353-356. > > May, E.C. (1996). The American Institutes for Research Review of the Department of Defense's STAR GATE Program: A Commentary. Journal of Scientific Exploration 10(1), 89-107. > _______________________________________________ > 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 ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 18:32:44 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:32:44 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <3C25ABFA-2B57-49BA-950D-37F833EB4BCE@bellsouth.net> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C26CCA5.20308@satx.rr.com> <3C25ABFA-2B57-49BA-950D-37F833EB4BCE@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: 2010/6/27 John Clark > > On Jun 26, 2010, at 11:59 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > On 6/26/2010 10:25 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > > The work of P.E.A.R has been debunked many times, I am surprised that > > this is news to you. > > > I suggest you read some of the detailed statistical reports from PEAR. Go > to http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/publications.htmland look at any of the experimental reports (not the discursive essays). (Of > course you won't, you know in your bones, as John Clark does, that it's all > BULLSHIT.) > > > I sent the following message to the list on February 10 2007, nothing has > changed since then: > > Speaking of BULLSHIT, on the front page of today's New York Times there is > an article about the ESP "lab" at Princeton (PEAR). It is closing down > after > 28 years. One of the chief witchdoctors there is quoted as saying something > that to my surprise I agree with completely: "There is no reason to stay > and > generate more of the same data. If people don't believe us after all the > results we've produced then they never will." More crappy data just will > not > help. > > The article also describes the joy many at the university felt about its > demise and how none of the 700 full professors at Princeton had joined > PEAR, > and how they never got published in first rate science journals, and how > they went to the National Enquire of science journals "The Society for > Scientific Exploration" a rag that is never cited by anybody worth reading. > Besides ESP it also loves UFOs, spoon bending, and of course cold fusion. > But that august journal does not love everything, it prints attacks on > relativity and evolution. > > John K Clark > > > > Ah, so you're the John Clark in question. It seems we have both incurred Mr. Broderick's displeasure, for having the temerity to look upon a spade, and proclaiming it to be a spade. I had began to wonder if list ettiquete demanded that I let nonsense pass unopposed, so your interjection is very welcome, as it gives me some hope that this place isn't just a 'new age' quackfest. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 19:44:42 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 21:44:42 +0200 Subject: [ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy In-Reply-To: <4C20EC1A.7080901@satx.rr.com> References: <909862.6836.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4C1FE13C.2050005@satx.rr.com> <4C200BEA.2010607@satx.rr.com> <35D5C722F22947DA884B70F4FA473990@DFC68LF1> <4C20E2E5.9070608@satx.rr.com> <4C20E923.1040707@satx.rr.com> <4C20EC1A.7080901@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 22 June 2010 19:00, Damien Broderick wrote: > Worth adding that Max has an interesting essay in the Jan 2010 JET on "The > Overhuman in the Transhuman," where he notes (in regard to >H philosophical > development): > > BTW, an Italian translation of that text has just been published on paper in Divenire. Rassegna di studi interdisciplinari sulla tecnica e il postumano, vol.. IV, and will be online in a few months now. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 27 20:01:20 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 15:01:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <3C25ABFA-2B57-49BA-950D-37F833EB4BCE@bellsouth.net> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C26CCA5.20308@satx.rr.com> <3C25ABFA-2B57-49BA-950D-37F833EB4BCE@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <4C27AE10.4030008@satx.rr.com> On 6/27/2010 12:40 PM, John Clark wrote: > they went to the National Enquire of science journals "The Society for > Scientific Exploration" a rag that is never cited by anybody worth reading. That's not the name of the journal. Three urls I cited to review articles published there (Utts, Hyman, Utts) were commissioned by AIR (American Institutes for Research) on contract from CIA. Damien Broderick From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 20:13:10 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 21:13:10 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C27AE10.4030008@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C26CCA5.20308@satx.rr.com> <3C25ABFA-2B57-49BA-950D-37F833EB4BCE@bellsouth.net> <4C27AE10.4030008@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/27/2010 12:40 PM, John Clark wrote: > > they went to the National Enquire of science journals "The Society for >> Scientific Exploration" a rag that is never cited by anybody worth >> reading. >> > > That's not the name of the journal. Three urls I cited to review articles > published there (Utts, Hyman, Utts) were commissioned by AIR (American > Institutes for Research) on contract from CIA. > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > This would be the same CIA that bought into Geller's parlour tricks? Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From udend05 at aol.com Sun Jun 27 21:06:32 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 17:06:32 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <229045.83150.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8CCE453C0CBFBAD-16B0-134C7@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> >There are several here now that joined in the past couple months. Mmm. >I do urge caution for those who do not know the local players very well. I have seen borderline dismissive comments come across to those who have been around here a long time and have amassed a truly impressive pile of credibility, for so many excellent reasons. New guys, we value your input very much. Take your time, get to know who is who, review the archives if you wish, learn which posters deserve the utmost respect and why, thanks. I trust that if I have myself made any 'borderline dismissive comments', I may be forgiven for it. I had been under the impression that this was a forum for intellectual debate, not a private member's club for mutual sycophancy or hero-worship. The role of 'newbie', sitting at the feet of his masters, doesn't sit with me very well, I'm afraid. 'Truly impressive piles of credibility' notwithstanding, when a debate is open and honest, comments from either side must be given and taken with respect. I had an interesting debate with Damien which I feel came to a healthy conclusion, and one with Keith Henson which, sadly, just came to an end (I am still awaiting his reply); there may have been moments in either of those debates where a certain aggressive attitude was evident. I did not take offence, as in discussions of these kinds I try to exercise the respect which I mentioned above. However, if I stand corrected on this issue, and I am expected to keep quiet with an air of reverent awe, then I fear I may be in the wrong place. Best, Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 21:15:45 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 22:15:45 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <8CCE453C0CBFBAD-16B0-134C7@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> References: <229045.83150.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <8CCE453C0CBFBAD-16B0-134C7@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/27 > > >There are several here now that joined in the past couple months. > > Mmm. > > >I do urge caution for those who do not know the local players very > well. I have seen borderline dismissive comments come across to those who > have been around here a long time and have amassed a truly impressive pile > of credibility, for so many excellent reasons. New guys, we value your > input very much. Take your time, get to know who is who, review the > archives if you wish, learn which posters deserve the utmost respect and > why, thanks. > > I trust that if I have myself made any 'borderline dismissive comments', I > may be forgiven for it. I had been under the impression > that this was a forum for intellectual debate, not a private member's club > for mutual sycophancy or hero-worship. The role of > 'newbie', sitting at the feet of his masters, doesn't sit with me very > well, I'm afraid. > > 'Truly impressive piles of credibility' notwithstanding, when a debate is > open and honest, comments from *either side* must be > given and taken with respect. I had an interesting debate with Damien which > I feel came to a healthy conclusion, and one with > Keith Henson which, sadly, just came to an end (I am still awaiting his > reply); there may have been moments in either of those > debates where a certain aggressive attitude was evident. I did not take > offence, as in discussions of these kinds I try to exercise > the respect which I mentioned above. However, if I stand corrected on this > issue, and I am expected to keep quiet with an air > of reverent awe, then I fear I may be in the wrong place. > > Best, > Damian U. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > Hear, hear. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrd1415 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 21:17:37 2010 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 14:17:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] mind body dualism Message-ID: Sometime back, the list suffered through a thread which I will call "The thread that dare not speak its name". In that thread there was a wide ranging discussion of consciousness, mind, persona, cognition, sentience -- you know, all the basic mood groups. The feasibility of uploading, via the re-creation of mind in a "computronium" (ie artificial, synthetic, engineered-material substrate), was challenged based on a assertion of the inseparability of mind and body. Came across this today: Touch: How a hard chair creates a hard heart http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-06/yu-tha062210.php "The old concepts of mind-body dualism are turning out not to be true at all," Bargh said. "Our minds are deeply and organically linked to our bodies." Please forgive me. Best, Jeff Davis "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." Anais Nin From max at maxmore.com Sun Jun 27 20:57:45 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 15:57:45 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Limitless Life chapter in Death and Anti-Death Volume 7 Message-ID: <201006272124.o5RLOb2S020983@andromeda.ziaspace.com> For those who might be interested -- I have a chapter in a new book by Charles Tandy: Death And Anti-Death, Volume 7: Nine Hundred Years After St. Anselm http://www.amazon.com/Death-Anti-Death-Hundred-Anselm-1033-1109/dp/1934297054/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1277671986&sr=1-7 Chapter 8: Limitless Life: The Psychology Of Forever (originally written back in the 1990s for a book that I only partly wrote). Maybe one or two people will actually buy the book and raise its sales rank above the current 1,176,262... Max ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher The Proactionary Project Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 21:27:42 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 22:27:42 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <229045.83150.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <229045.83150.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/27 Gregory Jones > > Please, a comment regarding the new guys. There are several here now that > joined in the past couple months. I do urge caution for those who do not > know the local players very well. I have seen borderline dismissive > comments come across to those who have been around here a long time and have > amassed a truly impressive pile of credibility, for so many excellent > reasons. New guys, we value your input very much. Take your time, get to > know who is who, review the archives if you wish, learn which posters > deserve the utmost respect and why, thanks. > > Carry on! > > {8-] > > spike > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > Does this craven obsequiousness serve a purpose beyond ingratiating yourself with the 'local players'? Do you have any further sage advice to offer we untermenschen? Maybe there is a specific honorific we should employ when addressing those you hold in such esteem. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 27 21:28:55 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 16:28:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "an air of reverent awe" In-Reply-To: <8CCE453C0CBFBAD-16B0-134C7@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CCE453C0CBFBAD-16B0-134C7@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <4C27C297.7000608@satx.rr.com> On 6/27/2010 4:06 PM, udend05 at aol.com wrote: > in discussions of these kinds I try to exercise > the respect which I mentioned above. However, if I stand corrected on > this issue, and I am expected to keep quiet with an air > of reverent awe, then I fear I may be in the wrong place. No, of course not. But you are expected to keep your brain in gear (as you have done), do your due diligence, and be reasonably polite (ditto). Damien Broderick [not a moderator, just here for the conversation] From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Jun 27 21:37:50 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 16:37:50 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <229045.83150.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C27C4AE.20502@satx.rr.com> On 6/27/2010 4:27 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > Do you have any further sage advice to offer we untermenschen? You mean "us Untermenschen." > Maybe > there is a specific honorific we should employ when addressing those you > hold in such esteem. In my case, and that of Max More and some others here, that would be "Dr." But I rarely insist upon it, even when the deliberately rude address me as "Mr." Damien Broderick From max at maxmore.com Sun Jun 27 21:45:06 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 16:45:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second Message-ID: <201006272145.o5RLjG4f028939@andromeda.ziaspace.com> >spike: I urge caution for those who do not know the local players >very well. I have seen borderline dismissive comments come across >to those who have been around here a long time and have amassed a >truly impressive pile of credibility, for so many excellent >reasons. New guys, we value your input very much. Take your time, >get to know who is who, review the archives if you wish, learn which >posters deserve the utmost respect and why, thanks. Damian U: > >I trust that if I have myself made any 'borderline dismissive >comments', I may be forgiven for it. I had been under the impression >that this was a forum for intellectual debate, not a private >member's club for mutual sycophancy or hero-worship. The role of >'newbie', sitting at the feet of his masters, doesn't sit with me >very well, I'm afraid. How can you possibly think this is a reasonable characterization of what spike so politely asked for? Can you really not distinguish between respect for long-time list members who have contributed mightily and "mutual sycophancy or hero-worship"? ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher The Proactionary Project Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From udend05 at aol.com Sun Jun 27 22:14:55 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:14:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <201006272145.o5RLjG4f028939@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006272145.o5RLjG4f028939@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <8CCE45D4E753399-16B0-13BB5@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> >How can you possibly think this is a reasonable characterization of what spike so politely asked for? Can you really not distinguish between respect for long-time list members who have contributed mightily and "mutual sycophancy or hero-worship"? I suppose it depends what you mean by respect. As Damien has already pointed out, I myself have shown respect to those with whom I have been holding discussions; as such I believe I have stuck to the rules governing these things. But I reacted defensively, perhaps, in being urged to show 'caution'. Why that word? Why not urge us newbies to use mutual respect or politeness? Caution suggested something with a harder line. I wondered if 'respect' really boiled down to the kind of obsequiousness one shows towards a bully - that is, to someone by whom one feels threatened or intimidated. Again, in being reminded of the 'mighty contributions' by these fellows, I was put in mind of my own inferior status - being but newly born into this particular realm of cyberspace, I have yet to show my full worth, leaving me, relatively speaking, in a lowly position whereby I owed my elders not just respect (which, as I pointed out in my post, is a mutual thing) but something more. In an open list such as this one, any contribution has value, no matter where it might spring from. Damien in his response to me indicated as much. I don't believe I responded to Spike's post as though it was anything but polite - I was merely stating what I saw as a robust defence made on the basis of my interpretation. If that interpretation was misconstrued, I apologise. Yet there have been instances of rudeness on the part of those who hold these elevated positions on this list, so a call for respect goes both ways. I repeat: if this is not an open forum for debate, regardless of personalities, qualifications or anything else germane to these pursuits, I am in the wrong place. Let me also reiterate a fact that none of us, surely, can debate: that we are all here because we hold similar beliefs about the future of mankind. Does it need repeating that the goal of reaching that future is far more important than any of these really rather piffling issues? Best, Damian U. ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher The Proactionary Project Extropy Institute Founder 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 udend05 at aol.com Sun Jun 27 22:23:23 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:23:23 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: "an air of reverent awe" In-Reply-To: <8CCE45A1BBC2EE7-16B0-139D2@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CCE453C0CBFBAD-16B0-134C7@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> <4C27C297.7000608@satx.rr.com> <8CCE45A1BBC2EE7-16B0-139D2@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8CCE45E7D9A8EB3-16B0-13C75@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> -----Original Message----- From: udend05 at aol.com To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Sent: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 22:52 Subject: Re: [ExI] "an air of reverent awe" >No, of course not. But you are expected to keep your brain in gear (as you have done), do your due diligence, and be reasonably polite (ditto). Glad to hear it, Damien. Lists like this get nowhere intellectually when people start 'flaming' one another. The work and goals of transhumanism are too important for its advocates to become entrenched in personal warfare over perceived slights or offences. We are nurturing a delicate egg; let's not break it in squabbling over how best to bring it to life. Apologetically (that was rather a heavy-handed metaphor), Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From udend05 at aol.com Sun Jun 27 22:43:00 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:43:00 -0400 Subject: [ExI] (Exl) A delicate egg Message-ID: <8CCE4613ACDDF66-16B0-13E6E@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> Leaving aside issues of a more personal nature taking place on the list at the moment, what is to happen to this 'delicate egg' of transhumanism? How can it be portrayed in a healthy and sustainable way so that it is not only brought into the general arena, but also in a way that is acceptable to the mainstream? What political steps must be taken? Accepting that it is essential for there to be some kind of consensus in transhumanist thinking, how can that be reached? What is blocking it? Is there too much debate over particular technologies, leading to a clouding of the central issue of the desirability of using technology to improve our lot? Is enough attention being paid to push scientific progress at the legislative level? My own belief is that the first step must be towards creating a consistent body of academic work to form the foundation for a movement that is consistent on the inside. Debate over specific technologies and their desirability/feasibility must take a back seat to this overarching goal. But who is to take on this work? And how are others' to bring themselves in line with it without compromising their own beliefs? Food for thought. Best, Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Sun Jun 27 22:49:05 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:49:05 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <8CCE453C0CBFBAD-16B0-134C7@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> References: <229045.83150.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <8CCE453C0CBFBAD-16B0-134C7@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/27 > I trust that if I have myself made any 'borderline dismissive comments', I may be forgiven for it. I had been under the > impression that this was a forum for intellectual debate, not a private member's club for mutual sycophancy or > hero-worship. The role of 'newbie', sitting at the feet of his masters, doesn't sit with me very well, I'm afraid. > 'Truly impressive piles of credibility' notwithstanding, when a debate is open and honest, comments from either side > must be given and taken with respect. I had an interesting debate with Damien which I feel came to a healthy conclusion, > and one with Keith Henson?which, sadly, just came to an end (I am still awaiting his reply); there may have been > moments in either of those?debates where a certain aggressive attitude was evident. I did not take offence, as in > discussions of these kinds I try to exercise the respect which I mentioned above. However, if I stand corrected on this > issue, and I am expected to keep quiet with an air of reverent awe, then I fear I may be in the wrong place. Ouch. Clearly we can all use language with a cutting edge. While any thug can wield a knife, it takes far greater skill to perform beneficial surgery. I believe the original comment was a friendly reminder to respect the casual atmosphere of this list. Perhaps more care could have been taken to remove any tone of admonishment from that reminder. However, there is no need to respond as though it were an attack or to take offense. I consider myself "new" wrt the legacy members of this list (hear that, ya old-heads - you're legacy) and read the request for observance of protocol as a healthy dose of preemptive list maintenance. I think the best way to make a point is to convince others to concede it rather than stab it into their heart. From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Jun 27 22:28:43 2010 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (Gordon Swobe) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 15:28:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] mind body dualism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <326566.75496.qm@web36501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > "The old concepts of mind-body dualism are turning out not > to be true at all," Bargh said. "Our minds are deeply and organically > linked to our bodies." Heresy! lol. -gts From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Jun 27 22:40:02 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 17:40:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <8CCE45D4E753399-16B0-13BB5@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> References: <201006272145.o5RLjG4f028939@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <8CCE45D4E753399-16B0-13BB5@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: Damian wrote: Does it need repeating that the goal of reaching that future is far more important than any of these really rather piffling issues? Apparently it does. The goal of reaching the future is related to our ability to deal with "piffling issues". Small issues form larger issues. It is a our behavior that turns them into conflicts or solutions. Natasha Vita-More -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Jun 28 00:36:43 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:36:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] specific honorifics In-Reply-To: References: <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <229045.83150.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C27EE9B.4060909@satx.rr.com> On 6/27/2010 4:27 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > Maybe > there is a specific honorific we should employ when addressing those you > hold in such esteem. Okay, enough fooling around. It's time to come clean: Dr. Max More is always addressed by his true name, Dr. X-avier. Natasha Vita-More is properly called Madame Primo Posthuman. John K Clark is Father Pelagius. Barbara Lamar is known only by her Second Life nym, which has never been revealed. Spike is known as Gregory Jones, or sometimes, when we are assembled in our special robes, as The Amazingly Randi. Olga Bourlin is held to be The Lady Originally Not From Around Here. Jeff Davis is Raymond X Charles. MB is The Nightingale. Many others of the Elect must remain masked. I myself am... (but there are some thing Man is not meant to know) From natasha at natasha.cc Mon Jun 28 01:27:40 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 20:27:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] (Exl) A delicate egg In-Reply-To: <8CCE4613ACDDF66-16B0-13E6E@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CCE4613ACDDF66-16B0-13E6E@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: My own belief is that the first step must be towards creating a consistent body of academic work to form the foundation for a movement that is consistent on the inside. Debate over specific technologies and their desirability/feasibility must take a back seat to this overarching goal. But who is to take on this work? And how are others' to bring themselves in line with it without compromising their own beliefs? Then you share this belief / directive with many of us deeply and peripherally involved in academic pursuits that directly engage transhumanism. But let me ask, first, what academic institutions are you affiliated with? Natasha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From colin.dodson at gmail.com Mon Jun 28 00:32:55 2010 From: colin.dodson at gmail.com (Colin D) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:32:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] mind body dualism In-Reply-To: <326566.75496.qm@web36501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <326566.75496.qm@web36501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Wouldn't it be best for >H thought for the mind to arise out of physical interactions? That is, that the mind /is/ intrinsically linked to the body? I mean, if the mind can run away and hide in a place that isn't corporeal, that would make uploading very difficult, but if the mind is linked to the body that means it is just like any other pattern in data--the same regardless of medium, but requiring media for existence and meaning. -Colin D On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Gordon Swobe wrote: > > "The old concepts of mind-body dualism are turning out not > > to be true at all," Bargh said. "Our minds are deeply and organically > > linked to our bodies." > > Heresy! lol. > > -gts > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 colin.dodson at gmail.com Mon Jun 28 00:35:56 2010 From: colin.dodson at gmail.com (Colin D) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:35:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] mind body dualism In-Reply-To: References: <326566.75496.qm@web36501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Also, has P=NP been discussed with relation to the uploadability or augmentation of the human mind? It seems to me that such technology would be predicated on an affirmative proof that P=NP. -Colin D sorry for the faux pas (sending two emails when I could have sent just one), I hit the send button a bit hastily the first time On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Colin D wrote: > Wouldn't it be best for >H thought for the mind to arise out of physical > interactions? That is, that the mind /is/ intrinsically linked to the body? > I mean, if the mind can run away and hide in a place that isn't corporeal, > that would make uploading very difficult, but if the mind is linked to the > body that means it is just like any other pattern in data--the same > regardless of medium, but requiring media for existence and meaning. > > -Colin D > > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Gordon Swobe wrote: > >> > "The old concepts of mind-body dualism are turning out not >> > to be true at all," Bargh said. "Our minds are deeply and organically >> > linked to our bodies." >> >> Heresy! lol. >> >> -gts >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 brent.allsop at canonizer.com Mon Jun 28 04:51:35 2010 From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 22:51:35 -0600 Subject: [ExI] (Exl) A delicate egg In-Reply-To: <8CCE4613ACDDF66-16B0-13E6E@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CCE4613ACDDF66-16B0-13E6E@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <4C282A57.9030100@canonizer.com> Hi Damian U, I completely agree with your first step idea. But I think it needs to be more of a concise survey of what all transhumanists, want, value, and believe. In short, we need to measure, rigorously and quantitatively for what is the scientific consensus (and I bet there would be a big overlap between scientific consensus and transhumanist consensus) That is precisely why we are working on the wiki survey system at canonizer.com. Right now, there are not enough expert 'scientists' that know what they are talking about to be heard above all the primitive crazy noise from the general population. It's a lot of stupid talking to stupid. I think the solution is to have a rigorous way to find out who the experts are, and also who the transhumanists are (see: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/53 ) and to rigorously / quantitatively measure for scientific consensus. That way the general population will finally learn who to trust, and finally enable them to no longer trust all the primitive fear mongering religious leaders and crackpots just pandering to what the still primitive general population thinks they want to hear and fanning their fears. (And transhumanists, themselves, suffer from a bit of this not knowing what the real experts know...) It also may be a bit too late for the current generation, but at least we will be able to provide a good moral source of expert opinion to the next generation, instead of all the primitive popular fear mongering stupid moral advice the currently generation grew up with. For example, here is what I think is a good start: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/50 Other than it still being far from a comprehensive survey, are there any important issues not represented there yet? I also think we need to survey for what the experts think are the most important scientific research is to do next, which are being done in topics like this: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/90 Brent Allsop On 6/27/2010 4:43 PM, udend05 at aol.com wrote: > Leaving aside issues of a more personal nature taking place on the > list at the moment, what is to happen to this 'delicate egg' of > transhumanism? How can it be portrayed in a healthy and sustainable > way so that it is not only brought into the general arena, but also in > a way that is acceptable to the mainstream? What political steps must > be taken? Accepting that it is essential for there to be some kind of > consensus in transhumanist thinking, how can that be reached? What is > blocking it? Is there too much debate over particular technologies, > leading to a clouding of the central issue of the desirability of > using technology to improve our lot? Is enough attention being paid to > push scientific progress at the legislative level? > > My own belief is that the first step must be towards creating a > consistent body of academic work to form the foundation for a movement > that is consistent on the inside. Debate over specific technologies > and their desirability/feasibility must take a back seat to this > overarching goal. But who is to take on this work? And how are others' > to bring themselves in line with it without compromising their own > beliefs? > > Food for thought. > > Best, > Damian U. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 udend05 at aol.com Mon Jun 28 05:00:48 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 01:00:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] (Exl) A delicate egg In-Reply-To: References: <8CCE4613ACDDF66-16B0-13E6E@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8CCE49601F4143B-14C8-13D87@webmail-m079.sysops.aol.com> >But let me ask, first, what academic institutions are you affiliated with? None, I fear. I have worked with autistic children for twelve years since doing my MA. However, I am studying to become a counsellor, with a long-term view to doing doctoral work. At that time I hope my involvement with the transhumanist movement goes deeper, but for now I am simply on the margin, observing and thinking and sometimes making a suggestion or two. Best, Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Jun 28 06:10:53 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 23:10:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] for Udend05 Message-ID: "But I would like to see crippling emotional problems and psychological issues reduced to a point where people can lead better lives." If you are reasonably aware of evolutionary psychology these might interest you. # Henson, H. Keith: Sex, Drugs, and Cults. An evolutionary psychology perspective on why and how cult memes get a drug-like hold on people, and what might be done to mitigate the effects, The Human Nature Review 2002 Volume 2: 343-355 # H. Keith Henson: Evolutionary Psychology, Memes and the Origin of War. Also [7] Keith From bbenzai at yahoo.com Mon Jun 28 07:08:29 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 00:08:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] mind body dualism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <6963.23427.qm@web114419.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Jeff Davis wrote: > > Sometime back, the list suffered through a thread which I > will call > "The thread that dare not speak its name".? In that > thread there was a > wide ranging discussion of consciousness, mind, persona, > cognition, > sentience? -- you know, all the basic mood > groups.? The feasibility of > uploading, via the re-creation of mind in a "computronium" > (ie > artificial, synthetic, engineered-material substrate), was > challenged > based on a assertion of the inseparability of mind and > body. > > Came across this today: > > Touch: How a hard chair creates a hard heart > > http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-06/yu-tha062210.php > > "The old concepts of mind-body dualism are turning out not > to be true > at all," Bargh said. "Our minds are deeply and organically > linked to > our bodies." The feasibility of uploading was first realised as a result of exactly the same assertion. I think one of the big problems in these discussions is when people mean different things by the same term. In some cases, a person will insist that a purely materialist view of things is in fact dualist, and in others, a claimed materialist will put forward a dualist view. So we get a situation where some people are claiming that uploading is possible because of the inseparability of mind and body, and some who claim that it's impossible for exactly the same reason. To clarify things, you need to start precisely defining terms, and most people are just not interested in doing that. They know what they mean and if other people don't, well, it's just tough. Some people even use Humpty-Dumpty's tactic, and change the normal meaning of a word to suit themselves. I don't see how it's possible to have meaningful discussions under those circumstances, they always seem to degenerate into arguments about logical inconsistency, and/or get banned. Ben Zaiboc From udend05 at aol.com Mon Jun 28 09:20:55 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 05:20:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] for Udend05 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CCE4BA5895C947-1F98-1FBDE@webmail-m083.sysops.aol.com> Thanks for these references, Keith. Unhappily I am tied up at the moment in several things, so I wonder if you'd provide a precis of them. I admit I am struggling to see the relevance to my topic of the titles you list; perhaps you could illustrate in what ways they have a bearing on our discussion. Many thanks, Damian U. -----Original Message----- From: Keith Henson To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Sent: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 7:10 Subject: [ExI] for Udend05 "But I would like to see crippling emotional problems and psychological issues reduced to a point where people can lead better lives." If you are reasonably aware of evolutionary psychology these might interest you. # Henson, H. Keith: Sex, Drugs, and Cults. An evolutionary psychology perspective on why and how cult memes get a drug-like hold on people, and what might be done to mitigate the effects, The Human Nature Review 2002 Volume 2: 343-355 # H. Keith Henson: Evolutionary Psychology, Memes and the Origin of War. Also [7] 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 udend05 at aol.com Mon Jun 28 09:24:36 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 05:24:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <201006272145.o5RLjG4f028939@andromeda.ziaspace.com><8CCE45D4E753399-16B0-13BB5@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8CCE4BADC19C147-1F98-1FC2B@webmail-m083.sysops.aol.com> The 'piffling issues' I referenced were the ongoing dispute over personality clashes and the issue of defining 'respect' here on this list. Surely these issues aren't going to impact too much on the ongoing project of getting transhumanism accepted into the mainstream? If they are, it's no wonder it's taking such a long time! I agree completely that from small issues spring larger ones, but perhaps it would be of benefit to all if we discovered small issues that had some relevance to what we're all doing here in the first place. Just my humble submission, of course. Respectfully, Damian U. -----Original Message----- From: Natasha Vita-More To: 'ExI chat list' Sent: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 23:40 Subject: Re: [ExI] few bits per second Damian wrote: Does it need repeating that the goal of reaching that future is far more important than any of these really rather piffling issues? Apparently it does. The goal of reaching the future is related to our ability to deal with "piffling issues". Small issues form larger issues. It is a our behavior that turns them into conflicts or solutions. Natasha Vita-More _______________________________________________ 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 bbenzai at yahoo.com Mon Jun 28 12:39:30 2010 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 05:39:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Piffling issues In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <571134.73702.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> udend05 at aol.com wrote: > The 'piffling issues' I referenced were the ongoing dispute > over personality clashes and the issue of defining 'respect' > here on this list. Surely these issues aren't going to > impact too much on the ongoing project of getting > transhumanism accepted into the mainstream? If they are, > it's no wonder it's taking such a long time! I agree > completely that from small issues spring larger ones, but > perhaps it would be of benefit to all if we discovered small > issues that had some relevance to what we're all doing here > in the first place. Just my humble submission, of course. If we can solve these issues here on this list, perhaps we can apply the methods used here, in the wider world to good effect. The number of times that moderators have to intervene on here is remarkably low for an internet discussion list, I think. Flame wars are nipped in the bud almost before they start, and most posters are quite diligent about avoiding ad-hominem attacks. This is a most civilised place, I feel. Why is that? Imagine if we could distill the reason why, and actually use it in talking to people who've never heard of (or are hostile to) transhumanism and the various themes we want to promote. That could be some powerful piffle, I think. Ben Zaiboc From udend05 at aol.com Mon Jun 28 13:20:42 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 09:20:42 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Piffling issues In-Reply-To: <571134.73702.qm@web114405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8CCE4DBD809E129-1874-1A0AD@webmail-m047.sysops.aol.com> The only problem with this otherwise perfectly reasonable response is that the flaming began on the part of those diligent types of whom you speak. I can quite see that a necessary part of our corporate future is developing mutual respect - but let's treat that concept much as we are advised to treat charity, eh? On that note, if this discussion is to continue, let's take it out of the personal realm it has so far occupied (the wellspring of the 'piffle' I mentioned) and make it a more abstract examination of the politics of tolerance for diversity - a conversation I would be very happy to join, and which would elevate 'piffle', powerful or otherwise, to the status of serious intellectual concept. Best, Damian U. -----Original Message----- From: Ben Zaiboc To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Sent: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 13:39 Subject: Re: [ExI] Piffling issues udend05 at aol.com wrote: > The 'piffling issues' I referenced were the ongoing dispute > over personality clashes and the issue of defining 'respect' > here on this list. Surely these issues aren't going to > impact too much on the ongoing project of getting > transhumanism accepted into the mainstream? If they are, > it's no wonder it's taking such a long time! I agree > completely that from small issues spring larger ones, but > perhaps it would be of benefit to all if we discovered small > issues that had some relevance to what we're all doing here > in the first place. Just my humble submission, of course. If we can solve these issues here on this list, perhaps we can apply the methods used here, in the wider world to good effect. The number of times that moderators have to intervene on here is remarkably low for an internet discussion list, I think. Flame wars are nipped in the bud almost before they start, and most posters are quite diligent about avoiding ad-hominem attacks. This is a most civilised place, I feel. Why is that? Imagine if we could distill the reason why, and actually use it in talking to people who've never heard of (or are hostile to) transhumanism and the various themes we want to promote. That could be some powerful piffle, I think. Ben Zaiboc _______________________________________________ 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 udend05 at aol.com Mon Jun 28 13:21:13 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 09:21:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: few bits per second In-Reply-To: <8CCE4BB3EBF1CA7-1F98-1FC40@webmail-m083.sysops.aol.com> References: <229045.83150.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com><8CCE453C0CBFBAD-16B0-134C7@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> <8CCE4BB3EBF1CA7-1F98-1FC40@webmail-m083.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8CCE4DBEA992175-1874-1A0BF@webmail-m047.sysops.aol.com> -----Original Message----- From: udend05 at aol.com To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Sent: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 10:27 Subject: Re: [ExI] few bits per second >I think the best way to make a point is to convince others to concede it rather than stab it into their heart. I repeat: I have tried to show respect. But if respect is mutual (do you disagree?), then the 'admonition' should have been made across the board for reasons I have already given. And I think you'll find Damien did concede the point in his reply to me. Best, Damian U. _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Jun 28 13:44:39 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:44:39 -0500 Subject: [ExI] (Exl) A delicate egg In-Reply-To: <8CCE49601F4143B-14C8-13D87@webmail-m079.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CCE4613ACDDF66-16B0-13E6E@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> <8CCE49601F4143B-14C8-13D87@webmail-m079.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <928FFAFD3D074032903AED43B108732C@DFC68LF1> There are numerous transhumanist academics who are working very hard to break through the academic glass ceiling, and there is growing transhumanist student network. Surveying the number of transhumanists with PhDs sill give you a fairly solid indicator of the fact that transhumanists are in academia (as I said either directly or peripherally), not to mention masters degrees, and the academic institutions where transhumanist conferences are held over the past years an, especially transhumanist courses taught - such as at the University of Southern California in LA, as just one example. Also, you could check to see how many times the term "transhuman" or "transhumanism" has been referenced in academic papers. But to save you a little leg work, let me just add that the terms transhuman and transhumanism are references academic papers a lot. Natasha Vita-More _____ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of udend05 at aol.com Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 12:01 AM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] (Exl) A delicate egg >But let me ask, first, what academic institutions are you affiliated with? None, I fear. I have worked with autistic children for twelve years since doing my MA. However, I am studying to become a counsellor, with a long-term view to doing doctoral work. At that time I hope my involvement with the transhumanist movement goes deeper, but for now I am simply on the margin, observing and thinking and sometimes making a suggestion or two. Best, Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Mon Jun 28 13:45:59 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:45:59 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <8CCE4BADC19C147-1F98-1FC2B@webmail-m083.sysops.aol.com> References: <201006272145.o5RLjG4f028939@andromeda.ziaspace.com><8CCE45D4E753399-16B0-13BB5@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com> <8CCE4BADC19C147-1F98-1FC2B@webmail-m083.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <2ECC6950621645A5826E6507C3B05A0F@DFC68LF1> Hi Damian, We have list moderators to take care of these things. Natasha Vita-More _____ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of udend05 at aol.com Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 4:25 AM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] few bits per second The 'piffling issues' I referenced were the ongoing dispute over personality clashes and the issue of defining 'respect' here on this list. Surely these issues aren't going to impact too much on the ongoing project of getting transhumanism accepted into the mainstream? If they are, it's no wonder it's taking such a long time! I agree completely that from small issues spring larger ones, but perhaps it would be of benefit to all if we discovered small issues that had some relevance to what we're all doing here in the first place. Just my humble submission, of course. Respectfully, Damian U. -----Original Message----- From: Natasha Vita-More To: 'ExI chat list' Sent: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 23:40 Subject: Re: [ExI] few bits per second Damian wrote: Does it need repeating that the goal of reaching that future is far more important than any of these really rather piffling issues? Apparently it does. The goal of reaching the future is related to our ability to deal with "piffling issues". Small issues form larger issues. It is a our behavior that turns them into conflicts or solutions. Natasha Vita-More _______________________________________________ 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 udend05 at aol.com Mon Jun 28 14:06:46 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 10:06:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <2ECC6950621645A5826E6507C3B05A0F@DFC68LF1> References: <201006272145.o5RLjG4f028939@andromeda.ziaspace.com><8CCE45D4E753399-16B0-13BB5@webmail-m066.sysops.aol.com><8CCE4BADC19C147-1F98-1FC2B@webmail-m083.sysops.aol.com> <2ECC6950621645A5826E6507C3B05A0F@DFC68LF1> Message-ID: <8CCE4E24735C787-3C10-2D1C@Webmail-m111.sysops.aol.com> Hi Natasha, That was my thought. Let's hope now that it's been fairly done to death we can move on to other topics - though I think Ben's idea of respect being studied here in microcosm is a useful one. Best, Damian U. -----Original Message----- From: Natasha Vita-More To: 'ExI chat list' Sent: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:45 Subject: Re: [ExI] few bits per second Hi Damian, We have list moderators to take care of these things. Natasha Vita-More From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of udend05 at aol.com Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 4:25 AM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] few bits per second The 'piffling issues' I referenced were the ongoing dispute over personality clashes and the issue of defining 'respect' here on this list. Surely these issues aren't going to impact too much on the ongoing project of getting transhumanism accepted into the mainstream? If they are, it's no wonder it's taking such a long time! I agree completely that from small issues spring larger ones, but perhaps it would be of benefit to all if we discovered small issues that had some relevance to what we're all doing here in the first place. Just my humble submission, of course. Respectfully, Damian U. -----Original Message----- From: Natasha Vita-More To: 'ExI chat list' Sent: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 23:40 Subject: Re: [ExI] few bits per second Damian wrote: Does it need repeating that the goal of reaching that future is far more important than any of these really rather piffling issues? Apparently it does. The goal of reaching the future is related to our ability to deal with "piffling issues". Small issues form larger issues. It is a our behavior that turns them into conflicts or solutions. Natasha Vita-More _______________________________________________ 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 x at extropica.org Mon Jun 28 13:59:28 2010 From: x at extropica.org (x at extropica.org) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 06:59:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] mind body dualism In-Reply-To: <6963.23427.qm@web114419.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <6963.23427.qm@web114419.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 12:08 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > > To clarify things, you need to start precisely defining terms, and most people are just not interested in doing that. ?They know what they mean and if other people don't, well, it's just tough. ?Some people even use Humpty-Dumpty's tactic, and change the normal meaning of a word to suit themselves. Yes, many people fail to distinguish between "minds" (a matter of function) and "selves" (a matter of identification.) Then they compound the confusion with the Aristotelian (A = A) assumption of discreteness: that a particular mind is the same regardless of the environment of interaction (necessary to any process), or that a particular "self" is the same self regardless of the observer (necessary to any identification.) We will imagine/discuss/create so much more after we get past these basics. - Jef From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Jun 28 14:34:13 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 07:34:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 5:00 AM, udend05 at aol.com> wrote: > Surely these issues aren't going to impact too much on the ongoing project of getting transhumanism accepted into the mainstream? Max can speak up on this topic, but I never saw any point to getting transhumanism (or before that extropy) into the main stream. It was a discussion list of people who were concerned with the effects of nanotechnology, cryonics. uploading, and the emergence of vast computational power on the prospects for AI. If you want to see the list discussions for the first few years in fictional form, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerando_%28novel%29 Keith From algaenymph at gmail.com Mon Jun 28 14:36:40 2010 From: algaenymph at gmail.com (AlgaeNymph) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 07:36:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C28B378.1070204@gmail.com> Keith Henson wrote: > On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 5:00 AM, udend05 at aol.com> wrote: > > >> Surely these issues aren't going to impact too much on the ongoing project of getting transhumanism accepted into the mainstream? >> > > Max can speak up on this topic, but I never saw any point to getting > transhumanism (or before that extropy) into the main stream. Why's that? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Jun 28 15:25:15 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:25:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] for Udend05 Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 2:21 AM, wrote: > Thanks for these references, Keith. Unhappily I am tied up at the moment in several things, > so I wonder if you'd provide a precis of them. They both have abstracts and it's really old material on this list. The first article has been the number one hit on Google for sex drugs cults since it was published 8 years ago. If there are enough new list members who want to discuss it, I can go on at any length. If you need background on the subject, a good place to start is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moral_Animal It's 16 years old but still excellent. "The book explores many facets of our everyday life through the lens of evolutionary biology. Wright provides Darwinian explanations for human behavior and psychology, our social dynamics and structures, as well as our relationships with lovers, friends, and family." Of course for that material to make sense, you really need to have read an even older (1976) book, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selfish_gene There have been long discussions on this list about important books and Dawkin's famous work always makes the short list. >I admit I am struggling to see the relevance to my > topic of the titles you list; perhaps you could illustrate in what ways they have a bearing > on our discussion. If you want to mitigate "crippling emotional problems and psychological issues" it seems to me (as an engineer) that you need to understand psychology. Until evolutionary psychology came along (it cover much of the same ground as sociobiology) there was no unifying background, the way chemistry underpins biology. EP make sense of otherwise hard to understand human traits. For example, it provides an explanation for hazing, battered wife syndrome, Stockholm syndrome, the bonding effects of army basic training, BDSM, etc. It makes sense of the common features of cult membership and drug addiction. EP provides an understanding of human pair bonding, why pairs break up, and what might be done about it. There is so much low hanging fruit in this area that someone like me (without an academic background in psychology) can get published in the journals. (There is also a lot of nonsense published that claims to be EP. You need to understand it well enough to sort out the BS.) *Some* of the discussion on this list requires considerable background. Keith From spike66 at att.net Mon Jun 28 15:06:13 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:06:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Fwd: few bits per second In-Reply-To: <8CCE4DBEA992175-1874-1A0BF@webmail-m047.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <658070.56542.qm@web81502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Mon, 6/28/10, udend05 at aol.com wrote: ? >...the 'admonition' should have been made across the board for?reasons I have already given... ? It was.? I didn't name any names, and we have had several new guys in the past three or?four months.? I can think of about 8 or so without even consulting the records.? I didn't?see nor intend?any pointed accusations, although I realize the?term "caution" wasn't the right word.? ? But hey, I am an engineer.? We do equations, not verbiage.? {8-]? ? spike ? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Mon Jun 28 17:26:38 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 12:26:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: few bits per second In-Reply-To: <658070.56542.qm@web81502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <8CCE4DBEA992175-1874-1A0BF@webmail-m047.sysops.aol.com> <658070.56542.qm@web81502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/28 Gregory Jones > But hey, I am an engineer.? We do equations, not verbiage.? {8-] All this time, I thought they drove trains... From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Jun 28 18:37:25 2010 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 11:37:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Damien, just aside from any piffling issues that may have clouded the atmosphere around these parts recently, wouldn't you agree that the PEAR record is actually quite disappointing as evidence of psi goes? I mean, 2 events out of 100,000 is pretty low. Yeah, I know that particle physicists look at single atomic events against a background of so many billions of other events that it's not even funny, and still they claim five sigma confidence in their results but then, they have a theoretical framework that builds smooth transitions from other fields of physics, mutually reinforcing their conclusions and providing occasionally predictions that fit experiments sometimes to the seventh significant digit. In contrast, the psi work starts with a strong desire for it to be true (let's not deny it, it would be cool if it was true, I want it to be true too) but there is no theory meshing with the rest of our knowledge in a fashion that produces quantitative predictions - so we have both more reasons for the work to be derailed by biases and less of a support from the rest of science. In this situation the absence of really strong, absolutely unmistakable effects, coupled with lack of predictive theories is a bit of a problem, no? As I wrote here about 10 years ago, I wish psi was true, I really do but so far haven't been forced into believing it by sufficient evidence. I would express my views as follows: I am about 99% sure I have not seen credible evidence of any psi phenomena. I am about 85 - 95% percent sure that physics as we know it does not provide a basis for their existence (my poor understanding of QM being responsible for the low level of confidence I have in my dismissal of psi). By comparison, I am > 99.99 % sure the Christian god is a fairy tale, or that you can't fly an FTL ship by simply pushing it with rockets. What are your percentages here? Rafal From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Jun 28 19:14:56 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:14:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> On 6/28/2010 1:37 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > wouldn't you agree that the > PEAR record is actually quite disappointing as evidence of psi goes? The PEAR work wasn't just interested in looking for evidence of psi for the sake of it, over time it was more concerned with the process (and hence were prepared to accept low effect size). So even low effect size can be harnessed to investigate aspects such as whether number of bits per REG output unit influenced success rate,** gender correlates, etc. > I mean, 2 events out of 100,000 is pretty low. Some of their results were better than that (the remote viewing efforts, for example--but those have been seriously criticized from within the parapsych community); I think their insistence on getting the mechanisms bulletproof against critics meant that the tasks were unbearably drab and repetitive. Other protocols that are more natural and engaging, such as Ganzfeld and Remote Viewing, have shown much higher deviations from chance expectation without compromising their robustness. >I am about 99% sure I > have not seen credible evidence of any psi phenomena. I am about 85 - > 95% percent sure that physics as we know it does not provide a basis > for their existence... What > are your percentages here? 99% convinced. If it turns out that they're all lying or making some frightfully subtle procedural error, I'll change my mind, of course. And I've seen arguments by physicists who claim that psi looks to be consonant with the sorts of extensions that are needed to bridge the current gap between GR and QT. **see e.g. http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_12_3_ibison.pdf Damien Broderick From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Mon Jun 28 19:30:58 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 20:30:58 +0100 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/28/2010 1:37 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > wouldn't you agree that the >> PEAR record is actually quite disappointing as evidence of psi goes? >> > > The PEAR work wasn't just interested in looking for evidence of psi for the > sake of it, over time it was more concerned with the process (and hence were > prepared to accept low effect size). So even low effect size can be > harnessed to investigate aspects such as whether number of bits per REG > output unit influenced success rate,** gender correlates, etc. An accommodation no doubt made because their efforts to find evidence of psi phenomena were unsuccessful. It quickly reaches the point that outcomes being claimed as evidence of anonlymous activity, are in fact well within the realm of statistical normalcy. . > > > I mean, 2 events out of 100,000 is pretty low. >> > > Some of their results were better than that (the remote viewing efforts, > for example--but those have been seriously criticized from within the > parapsych community); I think their insistence on getting the mechanisms > bulletproof against critics meant that the tasks were unbearably drab and > repetitive. Other protocols that are more natural and engaging, such as > Ganzfeld and Remote Viewing, have shown much higher deviations from chance > expectation without compromising their robustness. > Or more accurately protocols in which viewers could give much more vague answers, and avoid what is always the death of any attempt to demonstrate remote viewing effects: specific questions that require specific answers. I am about 99% sure I >> have not seen credible evidence of any psi phenomena. I am about 85 - >> 95% percent sure that physics as we know it does not provide a basis >> for their existence... What >> are your percentages here? >> > > 99% convinced. If it turns out that they're all lying or making some > frightfully subtle procedural error, I'll change my mind, of course. And > I've seen arguments by physicists who claim that psi looks to be consonant > with the sorts of extensions that are needed to bridge the current gap > between GR and QT. > You'll find no such claims being made by scientists publishing in mainstream scientific journals. > **see e.g. > http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_12_3_ibison.pdf > > 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 jonkc at bellsouth.net Mon Jun 28 19:17:56 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:17:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second. In-Reply-To: <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Jun 26, 2010, at 11:00 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > If you mean those on Amazon, you must mean the long review by Ben Goertzel, among others. (Most people on this list know Ben as the genius behind Novamente, a promising AGI project.) Interesting case, there. Until he read my book, Ben was "curious but ambivalent" about the reality of psi. I recently had a mini debate with Ben about psi on another list, he tried to convince me that maybe one reason Science has so much trouble confirming the very existence of psi, never mind how it works, is not because of the obvious reason that psi does not exist, but instead this lack of confirmation is due to some vague unspecified flaw in the Scientific Method itself! So Science is good enough to prove that the entire universe is accelerating but it can't prove some magician has the ability to predict a nickel will come up heads or tails at better than 50% probability, even though the man does indeed have that remarkable power. The Scientific Method can detect and even weigh neutrinos that can pass effortlessly through light years of lead, but card tricks are beyond its abilities. I like Ben but that attitude is just embarrassing, there is no other word for it. > Now we're collaborating as co-editors on a technical book with the working title THE SCIENCE OF PSI. If that title accurately reflects what's in it you are in contention in writing the world's shortest book. Other worthy entrants in the field are "The Amish Phone Book" and "Five Hundred Years Of German Humor" and "Great Arab Scientists Of The Twentieth Century" and that great old depression era classic "Negros I Met While Yachting". John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at bellsouth.net Mon Jun 28 20:17:39 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:17:39 -0400 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second. In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Jun 26, 2010, at 5:46 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > All this is essentially pure speculation. It's speculation but not pure speculation, its a bit closer to an educated guess. > We don't know how the brain encodes information I think just recently were starting to understand how memories are stored, Long Term Potentiation, that is to say a physical change in the connection between two neurons. > and as such to even talk in terms of bits and bytes is to fall foul of the assumption, that the brain can be shoehorned into a conceptual framework, that sees it deemed to be little more than a digital computer. What's with this "little more" business? If the brain isn't a digital computer it can certainly be simulated by one, and that's all I need. > The other extreme is the promulgators of the quantum consciousness idea, which is little more than new age quackery dressed up as serious science. I agree. The thinking, if you can call it that, is that Quantum Mechanics is mysterious and consciousness is mysterious so the two must be related. I don't believe it's anything more profound than that. That said I must admit that it's possible, maybe even probable, that quantum principles can, not just theoretically but in the real world, exponentially speed up computation. In other words it may actually be possible to make a practical quantum computer; and that would change the world. With enough computation you can do anything. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From udend05 at aol.com Mon Jun 28 20:39:32 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:39:32 -0400 Subject: [ExI] for Udend05 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CCE51925D74F13-4E4-C3F@webmail-d010.sysops.aol.com> >*Some* of the discussion on this list requires considerable background. Indeed, and in this instance, I must admit, I think our boundaries, or specialisms if you prefer, are so blurred that we have lost one another entirely. I still don't see how anything you have mentioned here is relevant to what we were talking about previously - but I do agree about the background. As I said in another post, a considerable amount of background work would need to be done into diferent theories of counselling for anything I am saying to make sense. I do know about EP and have read Dawkins. I have also read Dennett and agree that a computational model of the brain (thus banishing, as an incidental point, mind-body dualism) works best. When taken with the EP model of how we developed our traits, behaviours and so on, I think the likelihood of the kinds of technology I have mentioned being developed (for reverse-engineering the brain for therapeutic ends) is increased ten-fold. Perhaps, after all, you and I are not so very far apart. Best, Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From udend05 at aol.com Mon Jun 28 20:46:35 2010 From: udend05 at aol.com (udend05 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:46:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CCE51A221B30CD-4E4-DD7@webmail-d010.sysops.aol.com> >Max can speak up on this topic, but I never saw any point to getting ranshumanism (or before that extropy) into the main stream. If that is the consensus round here, then I am in the wrong place. Part of my own agenda is the political desire to see transhumanism become more publicly known and accepted. Best, Damian U. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at bellsouth.net Mon Jun 28 21:11:21 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 17:11:21 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Important Books In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Jun 28, 2010, at 11:25 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > There have been long discussions on this list about important books > and Dawkin's famous work always makes the short list. Yes read anything by Dawkins, the man seems incapable of writing anything dull and stupidity is totally beyond his comprehension. I have never read a Dawkins book that wasn't a masterpiece. And Keith I wish you'd post more, you are a ferocious debater, one of the absolute best, that's why I value what you write even when I disagree. Especially when I disagree actually. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Jun 28 20:47:51 2010 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 13:47:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/28/2010 1:37 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > >> wouldn't you agree that the >> PEAR record is actually quite disappointing as evidence of psi goes? > > The PEAR work wasn't just interested in looking for evidence of psi for the > sake of it, over time it was more concerned with the process (and hence were > prepared to accept low effect size). So even low effect size can be > harnessed to investigate aspects such as whether number of bits per REG > output unit influenced success rate,** gender correlates, etc. > >> I mean, 2 events out of 100,000 is pretty low. > > Some of their results were better than that (the remote viewing efforts, for > example--but those have been seriously criticized from within the parapsych > community); I think their insistence on getting the mechanisms bulletproof > against critics meant that the tasks were unbearably drab and repetitive. > Other protocols that are more natural and engaging, such as Ganzfeld and > Remote Viewing, have shown much higher deviations from chance expectation > without compromising their robustness. > >> I am about 99% sure I >> have not seen credible evidence of any psi phenomena. I am about 85 - >> 95% percent sure that physics as we know it does not provide a basis >> for their existence... ?What >> are your percentages here? > > 99% convinced. If it turns out that they're all lying or making some > frightfully subtle procedural error, I'll change my mind, of course. And > I've seen arguments by physicists who claim that psi looks to be consonant > with the sorts of extensions that are needed to bridge the current gap > between GR and QT. > > **see e.g. http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_12_3_ibison.pdf > ### With an effect size this small you don't need all people lying - all you need is one guy skewing the data a few times. The inverse correlation between the resistance of protocol to being "bulletproof against critics" and the effect size is quite telling. Really, low effect size in the absence of predictive (this is very important, predictive, not post-dictive) theory is a very serious obstacle to obtaining reliable knowledge. One thing - my prior regarding existence of anything (and I mean really anything, from my belly to the Milky Way) is "It almost certainly didn't happen". Only as I stub my toe on it am I grudgingly admitting to its existence. When I say I am 99% sure I haven't seen convincing evidence of a phenomenon it doesn't mean that something swayed me into disbelief but rather that my initial 99.999 disbelief wasn't yet crushed by a force my mind (or toes) cannot resist. With psi there are faint inkllings, enough to push the needle on my existence-meter from -99.999% all the way to -99% but not any farther. To go from "99% didn't happen" to "99% happened" I need a lot more stubbing. Did the dry PEAR numbers sway you towards "99% happened" from a position of disbelief, or did you set out from a certain position of longing and eagerness towards psi? Rafal From max at maxmore.com Mon Jun 28 21:19:49 2010 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:19:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second Message-ID: <201006282120.o5SLK2Q5009802@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Keith's view certainly does not reflect my own. I see some good reasons for going beyond talking to a few other people and attempting to get transhumanist ideas more widely and fully appreciated in the mainstream. In fact, I think we are seeing that happening. Among other reasons, more mainstream acceptance of (or at least understanding of) transhumanist idea will influence public policy and perhaps the direction of technological advance. So, in my view, you are *not* in the wrong place, in relation to this issue. Max > >Max can speak up on this topic, but I never saw any point to getting >transhumanism (or before that extropy) into the main stream. > >If that is the consensus round here, then I am in the wrong place. > >Part of my own agenda is the political desire to see transhumanism > >become more publicly known and accepted. > >Best, > >Damian U. ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher The Proactionary Project Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From spike66 at att.net Mon Jun 28 21:38:04 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Important Books In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <570379.21322.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Mon, 6/28/10, John Clark wrote: ? >...Yes read anything by Dawkins, the man seems incapable of writing anything dull and stupidity is totally beyond his comprehension. I have never read a Dawkins book that wasn't a masterpiece... ? ? Ja!??Dawkins gave a talk at a local bookstore?nearly four?yrs ago, bunch of us ExI-chat types showed up with approximately?6 billion others.? It was difficult to find standing room in that place, even for me, and I don't?require much space in the lateral and transverse axes.? The late comers were out of luck, no room at the inn.? The fire chief would have had a cow had he known. ? Dawkins'?talk was so?good I wanted to grab him and hug him afterwards, but I am totally hetero and he might be squicked by the whole notion as well.? Dr. Graps was with us;?felt similarly compelled but failed to act on it.? Had we been expressive and impulsive protobonobos instead of these overly reserved and supressed humans into which we have?evolved,?perhaps we would have just done it.? ? That was a great time for the local ExI types.? We should do that again.? spike From: John Clark Subject: [ExI] Important Books To: "ExI chat list" Date: Monday, June 28, 2010, 2:11 PM On Jun 28, 2010, at 11:25 AM, Keith Henson wrote: There have been long discussions on this list about important books and Dawkin's famous work always makes the short list. Yes read anything by Dawkins, the man seems incapable of writing anything dull and stupidity is totally beyond his comprehension. I have never read a Dawkins book that wasn't a masterpiece. And Keith I wish you'd post more, you are a ferocious debater, one of the absolute best, that's why I value what you write even when I disagree. Especially when I disagree actually.? ?John K Clark ? -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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 scerir at libero.it Mon Jun 28 22:00:14 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 00:00:14 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] DNA: quantum correlations? Message-ID: <5506079.287441277762414909.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/25375/ The relevance of continuous variable entanglement in DNA http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.4053 Elisabeth Rieper, Janet Anders, Vlatko Vedral Abstract: We consider a chain of harmonic oscillators with dipole-dipole interaction between nearest neighbours resulting in a van der Waals type bonding. The binding energies between entangled and classically correlated states are compared. We apply our model to DNA. By comparing our model with numerical simulations we conclude that entanglement may play a crucial role in explaining the stability of the DNA double helix. [please notice that Vlatko Vedral is a real name in the field of quantish matters] From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 01:15:55 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 21:15:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second In-Reply-To: <201006282120.o5SLK2Q5009802@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <201006282120.o5SLK2Q5009802@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Max More wrote: > Keith's view certainly does not reflect my own. I see some good reasons for > going beyond talking to a few other people and attempting to get > transhumanist ideas more widely and fully appreciated in the mainstream. In > fact, I think we are seeing that happening. Among other reasons, more > mainstream acceptance of (or at least understanding of) transhumanist idea > will influence public policy and perhaps the direction of technological > advance. > > So, in my view, you are *not* in the wrong place, in relation to this issue. How much of transhumanism is inevitably manifested and how much is caretakers' willpower? Are there parallels that could be examined in recent technological history for examples of mainstreaming H+? Did anyone have to force TV into the mainstream? Sure there were early adopters, but once the critical mass was achieved the spread of television was practically unstoppable. TV no good? VHS? Cell Phones? Personal Computers? How much does transhumanism have to be watered down in order to be palatable to the masses? Would you be excited to craft a bland version geared towards the lowest common denominator currently represented in the mainstream? Perhaps Keith's suggestion maintains transhumanism's unique flavors for those who come looking for what it offers, rather than turning it into a mindless mush for the sake of greater consumption? From brent.allsop at canonizer.com Tue Jun 29 01:57:48 2010 From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 19:57:48 -0600 Subject: [ExI] mind body dualism In-Reply-To: References: <6963.23427.qm@web114419.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C29531C.6060707@canonizer.com> On 6/28/2010 7:59 AM, x at extropica.org wrote: > On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 12:08 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > >> To clarify things, you need to start precisely defining terms, and most people are just not interested in doing that. They know what they mean and if other people don't, well, it's just tough. Some people even use Humpty-Dumpty's tactic, and change the normal meaning of a word to suit themselves. >> > Yes, many people fail to distinguish between "minds" (a matter of > function) and "selves" (a matter of identification.) Then they > compound the confusion with the Aristotelian (A = A) assumption of > discreteness: that a particular mind is the same regardless of the > environment of interaction (necessary to any process), or that a > particular "self" is the same self regardless of the observer > (necessary to any identification.) > > We will imagine/discuss/create so much more after we get past these basics. > > - Jef > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > And there are many other problems. While some theories have been falsified, they haven't been sufficiently falsified for absolutely everyone to give up their charished beliefs. Also, there are still many theories that are still in the running for being "THE ONE". And of course, any time someone states something for one camp or another, everyone else in all the other camps feel compelled to explain why all other theories but their own are wrong. And this is always done in half backed off the cuff ways, with little or no work to make a good concise statement. There is never any summary going on with concise statements about what the net net of the conversation was, so it is all lost in the archive forever, where nobody can benefit from it. Another critical problem is, as soon as anyone agrees, the conversation stops. No reason to publish or say the same thing yet again. The only time people say things is when they disagree. Leading to a very false perception that there is no agree on anything, when in reality there is a great amount of agreement, especially amongst the experts. All of the problems everyone else has mentioned, and these problems, and so much more do not exist with the canonizer.com Consciousness Survey Project comunication system (see: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/105 ). All the people in similare camps can effeciently collaboratively develop the best statements and arguments as a team, and you can get a rigorous quantitative measure of how convincing each set of arguments are by how many people are in each camp. And the best part by far, is you don't have to ever repeat yourself again, in some lazy half baked way - you just say I'm in the expert consensus unanimously just agreed to call "Representational Qualia Theory" at: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/6. Finally no more confusion about the words, what you believe, or anything. Everyone can find out very easily from the concise statement. And the most important part is having the definitive indication of who is in what camps; the very exciting horse race way in which the leading camps pass each other - as ever more arguments and demonstrable scientific proof come in. We are clearly in a state much like when Galileo when he was one of the first in the heliocentric solar system camps, while the rest of the world was in the geocentric camp. Today, most people think a red quale is a property of a strawberry reflecting 650nm light. But as is being proved as ever more experts participate in the survey, and as the "Representational Qualia Theory" continues to extend the amount of scientific consensus (see: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/53/11) it has, it is clere that like in Galeleos time, the experts now clearly know the way things really are. There is now 4 years worth of extensive conversations and debates that have taken place in the camp forums, by experts like Chalmers, Hameroff, Lehar, Smythies, and so many more, to argue for and develop these concise camp statements. And anyone can get up to speed on all this 4 year history almost instantly by reading the camp statements. It's going to be fun to see how long it takes for the rest of the general population consensus to finally realize and catch up to what the experts consensus evidently already is. Brent Allsop From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 29 04:02:04 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 23:02:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] test Message-ID: <4C29703C.1040407@satx.rr.com> I posted a rely to Rafal three hours ago. It hasn't shown up here from ExI, nor do I see it in the archives--although Brent's subsequent message appeared. What's up? Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 29 04:07:17 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 23:07:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again (yet again) In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> [I sent this to the list three hours ago but it hasn't shown up, so here it is again:] On 6/28/2010 3:47 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > When I say I am 99% sure I haven't seen > convincing evidence of a phenomenon it doesn't mean that something > swayed me into disbelief but rather that my initial 99.999 disbelief > wasn't yet crushed by a force my mind (or toes) cannot resist. With > psi there are faint inkllings, enough to push the needle on my > existence-meter from -99.999% all the way to -99% but not any farther. > To go from "99% didn't happen" to "99% happened" I need a lot more > stubbing. Did the dry PEAR numbers sway you towards "99% happened" > from a position of disbelief, or did you set out from a certain > position of longing and eagerness towards psi? Here's what I wrote 20 years ago in THE LOTTO EFFECT: Rafal, you invoke Bayes--but how does Bayes accommodate the experience of those Victorian scientists who went pretty much in one enormous, grudging jump from unquestioned Divine Creation of each individual and unchanging species to Darwinian evolution? Huxley famously commented something like, "I couldn't believe I'd been stupid enough not to see this myself." I suppose in Kuhnian terms it was a paradigm transition, but how does Bayes account for a jump from priors set at 99.999999% for God, then in a flash switch to, say, 86% for evolution? I'm not claiming that "conversion" to the psi hypothesis is anything like that--the evidence is impressive when you take the trouble to look, but usually not *that* overwhelming. I'm just querying the universal applicability of Bayes. But I don't know enough about that to judge the issue. Do please inform me. Damien Broderick From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 03:49:51 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 20:49:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Important Books In-Reply-To: <570379.21322.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <570379.21322.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I remember when Dawkins spoke at ASU and every seat in the large auditorium was filled. He was a charming and fascinating speaker (though I obviously have my differences with him) and much funnier than I expected. There was a loooonnnng line for those who wanted a signature, photo and handshake. Two Tempe policemen flanked him at the table (probably a good idea). John On 6/28/10, Gregory Jones wrote: > > --- On Mon, 6/28/10, John Clark wrote: > >>...Yes read anything by Dawkins, the man seems incapable of writing >> anything dull and stupidity is totally beyond his comprehension. I have >> never read a Dawkins book that wasn't a masterpiece... > > > Ja!??Dawkins gave a talk at a local bookstore?nearly four?yrs ago, bunch of > us ExI-chat types showed up with approximately?6 billion others.? It was > difficult to find standing room in that place, even for me, and I > don't?require much space in the lateral and transverse axes.? The late > comers were out of luck, no room at the inn.? The fire chief would have had > a cow had he known. > > Dawkins'?talk was so?good I wanted to grab him and hug him afterwards, but I > am totally hetero and he might be squicked by the whole notion as well.? Dr. > Graps was with us;?felt similarly compelled but failed to act on it.? Had we > been expressive and impulsive protobonobos instead of these overly reserved > and supressed humans into which we have?evolved,?perhaps we would have just > done it. > > That was a great time for the local ExI types.? We should do that again. > > spike > > From: John Clark > Subject: [ExI] Important Books > To: "ExI chat list" > Date: Monday, June 28, 2010, 2:11 PM > > > > > On Jun 28, 2010, at 11:25 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > > There have been long discussions on this list about important books > and Dawkin's famous work always makes the short list. > > Yes read anything by Dawkins, the man seems incapable of writing anything > dull and stupidity is totally beyond his comprehension. I have never read a > Dawkins book that wasn't a masterpiece. > > > And Keith I wish you'd post more, you are a ferocious debater, one of the > absolute best, that's why I value what you write even when I disagree. > Especially when I disagree actually. > > > ?John K Clark > > > > > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Tue Jun 29 01:07:27 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 20:07:27 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C29474F.40205@satx.rr.com> On 6/28/2010 3:47 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > When I say I am 99% sure I haven't seen > convincing evidence of a phenomenon it doesn't mean that something > swayed me into disbelief but rather that my initial 99.999 disbelief > wasn't yet crushed by a force my mind (or toes) cannot resist. With > psi there are faint inkllings, enough to push the needle on my > existence-meter from -99.999% all the way to -99% but not any farther. > To go from "99% didn't happen" to "99% happened" I need a lot more > stubbing. Did the dry PEAR numbers sway you towards "99% happened" > from a position of disbelief, or did you set out from a certain > position of longing and eagerness towards psi? Here's what I wrote 20 years ago in THE LOTTO EFFECT: Rafal, you invoke Bayes--but how does Bayes accommodate the experience of those Victorian scientists who went pretty much in one enormous, grudging jump from unquestioned Divine Creation of each individual and unchanging species to Darwinian evolution? Huxley famously commented something like, "I couldn't believe I'd been stupid enough not to see this myself." I suppose in Kuhnian terms it was a paradigm transition, but how does Bayes account for a jump from priors set at 99.999999% for God, then in a flash switch to, say, 86% for evolution? I'm not claiming that "conversion" to the psi hypothesis is anything like that--the evidence is impressive when you take the trouble to look, but usually not *that* overwhelming. I'm just querying the universal applicability of Bayes. But I don't know enough about that to judge the issue. Do please inform me. Damien Broderick From arthur.breitman at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 04:32:07 2010 From: arthur.breitman at gmail.com (Arthur Breitman) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 00:32:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again In-Reply-To: <4C29474F.40205@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C29474F.40205@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/28/2010 3:47 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > Rafal, you invoke Bayes--but how does Bayes accommodate the experience of > those Victorian scientists who went pretty much in one enormous, grudging > jump from unquestioned Divine Creation of each individual and unchanging > species to Darwinian evolution? Huxley famously commented something like, "I > couldn't believe I'd been stupid enough not to see this myself." I suppose > in Kuhnian terms it was a paradigm transition, but how does Bayes account > for a jump from priors set at 99.999999% for God, then in a flash switch to, > say, 86% for evolution? > > Belief in God wasn't a Bayesian belief in the first place, given the evidence. The theistic Victorian scientists you mention were not theists because they were *ignorant* but because they were, if you will, *crazy*. Some snapped out of it and updated their beliefs, not only with the new findings of Darwin but also with the astronomical amount of evidence that there is no god, evidence they had crazily discarded before. In the parallel you draw, where is the astronomical, overwhelming, ironclad amount of evidence for "psi" ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Mon Jun 28 22:33:33 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 23:33:33 +0100 Subject: [ExI] DNA: quantum correlations? In-Reply-To: <5506079.287441277762414909.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> References: <5506079.287441277762414909.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 11:00 PM, scerir wrote: > > http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/25375/ > > The relevance of continuous variable entanglement in DNA > http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.4053 > Elisabeth Rieper, Janet Anders, Vlatko Vedral > Abstract: We consider a chain of harmonic oscillators with dipole-dipole > interaction between nearest neighbours resulting in a van der Waals type > bonding. The binding energies between entangled and classically correlated > states are compared. We apply our model to DNA. By comparing our model with > numerical simulations we conclude that entanglement may play a crucial role > in > explaining the stability of the DNA double helix. > > [please notice that Vlatko Vedral is a real name in the field > of quantish matters] > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > Classical physics serves as a sufficient explanation for this stability, and unless this trio can offer some serious experimental evidence, their speculations serve no useful purpose. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at bellsouth.net Tue Jun 29 04:38:12 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 00:38:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again (yet again) In-Reply-To: <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> On Jun 29, 2010, at 12:07 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Here's what I wrote 20 years ago in THE LOTTO EFFECT: [...] Damien does that book explain how in the past 20 years those lotteries have somehow managed to produce huge and CONSISTENT profits that bookkeepers can predict to several decimal places despite all these people running around who have the comic book superpower of being able to foretell the future? Lotteries are a tax on those who are bad at mathematics. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 29 05:29:51 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 00:29:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again (yet again) In-Reply-To: <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> On 6/28/2010 11:38 PM, John Clark wrote: >> Here's what I wrote 20 years ago in THE LOTTO EFFECT: [...] > > Damien does that book explain how in the past 20 years those lotteries > have somehow managed to produce huge and CONSISTENT profits Yes. From jonkc at bellsouth.net Tue Jun 29 05:55:36 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 01:55:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again (yet again) In-Reply-To: <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Jun 29, 2010, at 1:29 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: >>> Here's what I wrote 20 years ago in THE LOTTO EFFECT: [...] >> >> Damien does that book explain how in the past 20 years those lotteries >> have somehow managed to produce huge and CONSISTENT profits > > >Yes. Delightful, I wait with eager anticipation reports of venture capitalists, those most pragmatic of human beings, having invested billions of dollars in new start up psi profit making companies, or even millions of dollars, or even thousands of dollars, or even hundreds of dollars, or even one dollar. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giulio at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 06:21:03 2010 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 08:21:03 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <201006282120.o5SLK2Q5009802@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: It is not a binary, black/white, either/or choice. We can and should have both watered-down interpretations of transhumanism formulated in such a way as to be more appealing to the masses, AND true hardcore, radical and visionary interpretations of transhumanism. What is important is that these two "souls" of transhumanism collaborate behind the scene, instead of fighting each other like it happens now. I understand that in some cases transhumanism should be presented as bland technoprogressivism - what I don't accept is mistaking means for ends, and renouncing transhumanism for the sake of PCness. Transhumanism is bold, visionary, disruptive, revolutionary and unPC, and it must remain so. Diplomacy and war are very different - but every nation has a department of foreign affairs for diplomacy, AND a department of defense for war. They have a common interest, and they (should) collaborate behind the scene, and choose when to use diplomacy or war. G. On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 3:15 AM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Max More wrote: >> Keith's view certainly does not reflect my own. I see some good reasons for >> going beyond talking to a few other people and attempting to get >> transhumanist ideas more widely and fully appreciated in the mainstream. In >> fact, I think we are seeing that happening. Among other reasons, more >> mainstream acceptance of (or at least understanding of) transhumanist idea >> will influence public policy and perhaps the direction of technological >> advance. >> >> So, in my view, you are *not* in the wrong place, in relation to this issue. > > How much of transhumanism is inevitably manifested and how much is > caretakers' willpower? > > Are there parallels that could be examined in recent technological > history for examples of mainstreaming H+? > > Did anyone have to force TV into the mainstream? ?Sure there were > early adopters, but once the critical mass was achieved the spread of > television was practically unstoppable. ?TV no good? ?VHS? ?Cell > Phones? ?Personal Computers? > > How much does transhumanism have to be watered down in order to be > palatable to the masses? ?Would you be excited to craft a bland > version geared towards the lowest common denominator currently > represented in the mainstream? > > Perhaps Keith's suggestion maintains transhumanism's unique flavors > for those who come looking for what it offers, rather than turning it > into a mindless mush for the sake of greater consumption? > _______________________________________________ > 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 Tue Jun 29 06:51:27 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 01:51:27 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> On 6/29/2010 12:55 AM, John Clark wrote: >>> Damien does that book explain how in the past 20 years those lotteries >>> have somehow managed to produce huge and CONSISTENT profits >> >Yes. > Delightful, I wait with eager anticipation reports of venture > capitalists, those most pragmatic of human beings, having invested > billions of dollars in new start up psi profit making companies, or even > millions of dollars, or even thousands of dollars, or even hundreds of > dollars, or even one dollar. Do concentrate, John. I just agreed that lotto companies manage to be very profitable, despite the reality of psi. I was hoping you'd explain to me how and why you thought it would be otherwise. Here are some clues: "If $20 million is bet on a Lotto jackpot, the state will take between 40 and 50 percent out of that figure immediately. From the half left, smaller prizes are deducted. In most cases, you're left something like $5 to $8 million for winning a 14 million to 1 bet." So up to half the money goes in taxes *immediately*. How could psi winners modify that? Additionally, the companies take out their share *from the top*. How could psi winners modify that? Eventually, you might suggest this: if everyone has amazing psi powers and always guesses the right winning numbers, then everyone will share the major prize, which will (by design) pay only some 40 or 50% or less of what each ticket cost. So people will stop betting, and the companies will have to close. Boo hoo. Because we live in the real world, we actually can tell fairly easily that this story doesn't make any sense. Everyone *can't* predict the winning numbers all the time. Does this prove that psi does not exist, and in fact is impossible? Do some calculations. Think for a moment about what would be involved if such an impossible skill as precognition actually existed. How would a thing like that modify your betting behavior? Suppose you have to guess 6 numbers out of 44 or 49. Suppose psi enhances one guess in 1000, and either confirms your choice or causes you to switch to another number. How many extra division one winners would you expect to see in any draw? For full credit, please show your work. Damien Broderick From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 07:10:14 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 00:10:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again In-Reply-To: <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: John Clark wrote: Delightful, I wait with eager anticipation reports of venture capitalists, those most pragmatic of human beings, having invested billions of dollars in new start up psi profit making companies, or even millions of dollars, or even thousands of dollars, or even hundreds of dollars, or even one dollar. >>> I do wonder if a corporation would attempt to create a remote viewing program, akin to what the United States and it's rivals did. Corporate intelligence and espionage can tend toward extreme behavior to get an advantage. I think that if "psi" does exist then there are obviously genes for it, and so we can identify them, and then find ways to use genetic engineering to magnify their currently very limited power levels. We will finally have individuals who can do things straight out of science fiction novels about wild talents. John On 6/28/10, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/29/2010 12:55 AM, John Clark wrote: > >>>> Damien does that book explain how in the past 20 years those lotteries >>>> have somehow managed to produce huge and CONSISTENT profits > >>> >Yes. > >> Delightful, I wait with eager anticipation reports of venture >> capitalists, those most pragmatic of human beings, having invested >> billions of dollars in new start up psi profit making companies, or even >> millions of dollars, or even thousands of dollars, or even hundreds of >> dollars, or even one dollar. > > Do concentrate, John. I just agreed that lotto companies manage to be > very profitable, despite the reality of psi. I was hoping you'd explain > to me how and why you thought it would be otherwise. > > Here are some clues: > > > > "If $20 million is bet on a Lotto jackpot, the state will take between > 40 and 50 percent out of that figure immediately. From the half left, > smaller prizes are deducted. In most cases, you're left something like > $5 to $8 million for winning a 14 million to 1 bet." > > So up to half the money goes in taxes *immediately*. How could psi > winners modify that? > > Additionally, the companies take out their share *from the top*. How > could psi winners modify that? > > Eventually, you might suggest this: if everyone has amazing psi powers > and always guesses the right winning numbers, then everyone will share > the major prize, which will (by design) pay only some 40 or 50% or less > of what each ticket cost. So people will stop betting, and the companies > will have to close. Boo hoo. > > Because we live in the real world, we actually can tell fairly easily > that this story doesn't make any sense. Everyone *can't* predict the > winning numbers all the time. Does this prove that psi does not exist, > and in fact is impossible? > > Do some calculations. Think for a moment about what would be involved if > such an impossible skill as precognition actually existed. How would a > thing like that modify your betting behavior? > > Suppose you have to guess 6 numbers out of 44 or 49. Suppose psi > enhances one guess in 1000, and either confirms your choice or causes > you to switch to another number. How many extra division one winners > would you expect to see in any draw? For full credit, please show your work. > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From jonkc at bellsouth.net Tue Jun 29 07:40:52 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 03:40:52 -0400 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again In-Reply-To: <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> On Jun 29, 2010, at 2:51 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > Do concentrate, John. I just agreed that lotto companies manage to be very profitable, despite the reality of psi. YOU DID!!! I sleep less than most but I must have been sleeping you said that. Damien why art't you a Billionaire? You know how lotto companies make huge profits off a scam. a enormously profitable but don't even hint how that scam acutely works. I wouldn't either if I were a Billionaire > I was hoping you'd explain to me how and why you thought it would be otherwise. > > Here are some clues: > > > > "If $20 million is bet on a Lotto jackpot, the state will take between 40 and 50 percent out of that figure immediately. From the half left, smaller prizes are deducted. In most cases, you're left something like $5 to $8 million for winning a 14 million to 1 bet." > > So up to half the money goes in taxes *immediately*. How could psi winners modify that? > > Additionally, the companies take out their share *from the top*. How could psi winners modify that? > > Eventually, you might suggest this: if everyone has amazing psi powers and always guesses the right winning numbers, then everyone will share the major prize, which will (by design) pay only some 40 or 50% or less of what each ticket cost. So people will stop betting, and the companies will have to close. Boo hoo. > > Because we live in the real world, we actually can tell fairly easily that this story doesn't make any sense. Everyone *can't* predict the winning numbers all the time. Does this prove that psi does not exist, and in fact is impossible? > > Do some calculations. Think for a moment about what would be involved if such an impossible skill as precognition actually existed. How would a thing like that modify your betting behavior? > > Suppose you have to guess 6 numbers out of 44 or 49. Suppose psi enhances one guess in 1000, and either confirms your choice or causes you to switch to another number. How many extra division one winners would you expect to see in any draw? For full credit, please show your work. > > 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 emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 08:06:10 2010 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 17:36:10 +0930 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am pretty sure the aspirations of this list have always been to be at least into the KB/s. -- Emlyn http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog Find me on Facebook and Buzz From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 12:08:17 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:08:17 +0200 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second In-Reply-To: <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 27 June 2010 00:02, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/26/2010 4:46 PM, Ross Evans wrote: > >> The other extreme is the promulgators of the quantum consciousness idea, >> which is little more than new age quackery dressed up as serious science. > > You might well be right, but how do you know this? You're a neuroscientist, > I take it? Or perhaps a quantum specialist on the order of Roger Penrose? I am neither. OTOH,. it is certainly true that everything in principle has a "quantum" nature, including steam engines and biological brains and asteroids, but the problem is that nothing exists in the features of organic brains that seems to suggest that they may be profiting from quantum effects any more than steam engines or asteroids themselves. If I try for instance to factor a long integer, I quickly realise that I am even worse at that task than the PC sitting under my desk. Actually, psi is to the best of my knowledge the best but probably the *only* candidate which would allow to infer some interference between the ordinary working of bio brains and quantum effects, admitting of course that one is persuaded that we have evidence of psi phenomena which cannot be explained within classical physics. Moreover, even if this were true for some psi phenomena, such conclusion would remain perfectly consistent with an *ordinary* working of the brain in a 100% classical fashion. But, who knows, we might profit from prosthetic quantum computing in some future... -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 11:49:36 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 13:49:36 +0200 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second. In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/28 John Clark > What's with this "little more" business? If the brain isn't a digital computer it can certainly be simulated by one, and that's all I need. In fact, I sincerely doubt that anything exists which be not a "digital computer". With that I do not mean any profound metaphysical concept about the universe, but simply that all physical (i.e., existing) systems can be described as "digital computers" under Wolphram's Principle of Computational Equivalence. Of course, if one is interested in a biological brain, say, in respect of its metabolism of glucides, or as the meat involved in some recipes, its approach to the same may be different. > I agree. The thinking, if you can call it that, is that Quantum Mechanics is mysterious and consciousness is mysterious so the two must be related. I don't believe it's anything more profound than that. Exactly my view. > That said I must admit that it's possible, maybe even probable, that quantum principles can, not just theoretically but in the real world, exponentially speed up computation. In other words it may actually be possible to make a practical quantum computer; and that would change the world. With enough computation you can do anything. In fact, human brains, let alone other brains, are exceedingly poor at the kind of problems where we expect quantum computing to represent, well, a quantum leap. Even more so than ordinary, electronic computers. -- Stefano Vaj From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 15:27:45 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 08:27:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Debate, EP and psi was important books Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:05 PM, John Clark wrote: > And Keith I wish you'd post more, you are a ferocious debater, one of the absolute best, that's why I value what you write even when I disagree. Especially when I disagree actually. Thanks. It really isn't hard. If you want to back up your arguments, you have at your fingertips another window with a search engine. If you can frame a search, like the recent "few bits per second" thread then you look smart. Which is, if you are honest about it, the point of posting at all. I also post on the lifeboat list. Was posting about my EP based model for war. ^^^^^^^^^^^ >> If you think this is just ranting BS, I should probably take it >> elsewhere. > > I don't think it's "ranting BS" -- it's just not a great > conversation-starter. Your points are not very controversial, You are the first to say that. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ So the EP concepts are gaining traction. Along that line I recommend this: http://www.miller-mccune.com/culture/maslows-pyramid-gets-a-makeover-17782/?utm_source=Newsletter115&utm_medium=email&utm_content=0629&utm_campaign=newsletters "Given that we humans like to think of ourselves as special, this new pyramid will surely encounter strong resistance. But it could also become a shorthand way to clarify the often-misunderstood concepts of evolutionary psychology, which, its advocates insist, are not as meaning-denying and ego-deflating as we might think." (Some of the material published as EP is just awful recycled sociology bs. You have to understand the subject enough to sort it out.) Re psi, if there is some kind of psi ability existing and it depends to some extent on a genetic trait and the ability improves reproductive success just a little, then we would expect it to be as common as eyesight and as well developed, even if it only provided a slight reproductive edge. We don't see that, so the people proposing the existence of psi abilities have the interesting task of proposing a model in which something keeps psi abilities down close to the noise range. Such as: the ability to see into the future provides no reproductive advantage. I am not expressing an opinion, just pointing out the logical framework around the concept. Keith From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 29 16:44:30 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 11:44:30 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again In-Reply-To: <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> On 6/29/2010 2:40 AM, John Clark wrote: > Damien why art't you a Billionaire? You know how lotto companies make > huge profits off a scam. a enormously profitable but don't even hint > how that scam acutely works. I wouldn't either if I were a Billionaire This is probably the least responsive reply I've ever seen on this list. Lotto does make huge profits, but is it a scam? No--the fact has never been hidden that governments and the companies involve take a large profit off the top, before the rest is distributed to winners. By "how that scam acutely works" I assume you mean "Why do punters keep betting, even though their chances of winning are one in millions, and the prize pool is only half of what is invested?" The answer is obvious: punters are getting the thrill of anticipation each time they buy a moderately priced ticket. There is always the possibility that they might become instantly very wealthy. What's hard to grasp about this? I still look forward to reading your explanation of how psi that affects perhaps one guess in 1000 would destroy the profits of lotto companies, and how many extra winners it would yield, and why having a few extra winners would change anything at all. Is it possible that you *don't* understand how lotto profits are distributed? Damien Broderick From scerir at libero.it Tue Jun 29 16:40:11 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:40:11 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] DNA: quantum correlations? Message-ID: <13357998.419581277829611460.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> [scerir] >> http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/25375/ >> >> The relevance of continuous variable entanglement in DNA >> http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.4053 >> Elisabeth Rieper, Janet Anders, Vlatko Vedral >> Abstract: We consider a chain of harmonic oscillators with dipole-dipole >> interaction between nearest neighbours resulting in a van der Waals type >> bonding. The binding energies between entangled and classically correlated >> states are compared. We apply our model to DNA. By comparing our model with >> numerical simulations we conclude that entanglement may play a crucial role >> in >> explaining the stability of the DNA double helix. >> >> [please notice that Vlatko Vedral is a real name in the field >> of quantish matters] [Ross] > Classical physics serves as a sufficient explanation for this stability, and > unless this trio can offer some serious experimental evidence, their > speculations serve no useful purpose. [scerir] http://quantummoxie.wordpress.com/2010/06/28/entanglement-and-dna/ From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 29 17:09:24 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 12:09:24 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Debate, EP and psi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C2A28C4.4030607@satx.rr.com> On 6/29/2010 10:27 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > Re psi, if there is some kind of psi ability existing and it depends > to some extent on a genetic trait and the ability improves > reproductive success just a little, then we would expect it to be as > common as eyesight and as well developed, even if it only provided a > slight reproductive edge. Two possible factors: 1) You can only see when there's light. 2) Red Queen's race. Damien Broderick From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 17:11:42 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 19:11:42 +0200 Subject: [ExI] mind body dualism In-Reply-To: <326566.75496.qm@web36501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <326566.75496.qm@web36501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 28 June 2010 00:28, Gordon Swobe wrote: > > "The old concepts of mind-body dualism are turning out not > > to be true at all," Bargh said. "Our minds are deeply and organically > > linked to our bodies." > > Heresy! lol. > Really? Always thought that *this* was the orthodox position, beyond the monotheistic or thinly secularised stuff on souls and psyches. That is, the "mind" is not something especially more esoteric nor has a more independent reality than, say, "digestion". Both are simply bodily functions, both are to some extent still poorly understood, both can in principle be certainly emulated by any other physical system, of course with very different performances depending on its features. In generic as well as in specific, individual terms. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 17:03:36 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 19:03:36 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <201006282120.o5SLK2Q5009802@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 29 June 2010 08:21, Giulio Prisco wrote: > It is not a binary, black/white, either/or choice. We can and should > have both watered-down interpretations of transhumanism formulated in > such a way as to be more appealing to the masses, AND true hardcore, > radical and visionary interpretations of transhumanism. What is > important is that these two "souls" of transhumanism collaborate > behind the scene, instead of fighting each other like it happens now. > AND there exist as well other distinctions in the range of possible transhumanist discourses. By sector, for instance: those fascinated by wet transhumanism are not necessarily passionated with AGI experimenting. By level: divulgation and propaganda amongst teenagers is not exactly the same as philosophical debate or scientific papers published in peer-reviewed journals for an academic audience. By their "internal" vs "external" nature: even though I do not believe in esoteric circles ? la Scientology, there is some language which is perfectly acceptable amongst us which is not perhaps perfectly suited for an appearance in a TV show or an article in a mass newspaper. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 29 17:32:33 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 12:32:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second. In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2A2E31.6060708@satx.rr.com> On 6/29/2010 6:49 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote: >> > The thinking, if you can call it that, is that Quantum Mechanics is mysterious and consciousness is mysterious so the two must be related. I don't believe it's anything more profound than that. > Exactly my view. I have no strong feelings about possible QT explanations for consciousness, but this standard retort is way too glib. The books and papers I've read that try to explain aspects of the mind by reference to QT go a long way past "wow, man, mysterious!" Their authors find themselves stymied when they are limited to macroscale physics, and sometimes detect possible paths forward when quantum behavior at the micro scale is taken into account, or scaled up. This is very different from proposing, e.g., that "planets move round the sun because angels push them," because we have no independent good reason to think there *are* angels--but QM's behavior is well established. And those arxiv papers Serafino keeps citing show that serious non-mysterioso scientists are suggesting links between DNA stability and QT, photosynthesis and QT, etc etc. Damien Broderick From jonkc at bellsouth.net Tue Jun 29 17:19:40 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 13:19:40 -0400 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> On Jun 29, 2010, at 12:44 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > I still look forward to reading your explanation of how psi that affects perhaps one guess in 1000 would destroy the profits of lotto companies One in 1000, interesting. As Keith Henson just wrote: "so the people proposing the existence of psi abilities have the interesting task of proposing a model in which something keeps psi abilities down close to the noise range. Such as: the ability to see into the future provides no reproductive advantage". > Is it possible that you *don't* understand how lotto profits are distributed? Is it possible that you *don't* understand that not all lotteries are parimutuel? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 17:36:23 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:36:23 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Debate, EP and psi In-Reply-To: <4C2A28C4.4030607@satx.rr.com> References: <4C2A28C4.4030607@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/29/2010 10:27 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > > Re psi, if there is some kind of psi ability existing and it depends >> to some extent on a genetic trait and the ability improves >> reproductive success just a little, then we would expect it to be as >> common as eyesight and as well developed, even if it only provided a >> slight reproductive edge. >> > > Two possible factors: > > 1) You can only see when there's light. > > 2) Red Queen's race. > > Damien Broderick > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > Or... 3) False dichotomy Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 17:12:54 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:12:54 +0100 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 6/29/10, John Grigg wrote: > I do wonder if a corporation would attempt to create a remote viewing > program, akin to what the United States and it's rivals did. > Corporate intelligence and espionage can tend toward extreme behavior > to get an advantage. > > Most unlikely. That's why the CIA cancelled their remote viewing experiments. They had no way of knowing whether the guesses provided any useful intelligence unless an agent on the spot went and checked. And if you have an agent on the spot anyway,---- who needs a remote viewer? BillK From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 29 18:14:19 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 13:14:19 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> References: <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> On 6/29/2010 12:19 PM, John Clark wrote: >> Is it possible that you *don't* understand how lotto profits are >> distributed? > Is it possible that you *don't* understand that not all lotteries are > parimutuel? I was only talking about lotto. Why? Because you challenged me about my book THE LOTTO EFFECT. Still waiting for an answer to my question: how would a small psi effect modify expected chance outcomes for lotto? I have a very strong impression that you haven't given this a moment's thought, and that you're mocking some sort of X-MEN fantasy of mental omnipotence that has no bearing on the real situation. Others on the list can play, come on people, power up your machines and see what you get. The rule is that each guess at 6/49 possible winning numbers is independent, and 1 guess in 1000 is available for modification by precognition.** What changes? Does everyone suddenly win, destroying the lotto company (as John seems to imagine)? Do 1000 times as many people share the top division prize, flabbergasting the statisticians? Or what? Damien Broderick **one minor hint: Populations show strong biases for and against certain numbers. If by preference you are inclined to choose a given number, and by random chance it is going to win, your psychic perception of this future fact can't provide extra help. From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 17:34:55 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:34:55 +0100 Subject: [ExI] DNA: quantum correlations? In-Reply-To: <13357998.419581277829611460.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> References: <13357998.419581277829611460.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 5:40 PM, scerir wrote: > [scerir] > >> http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/25375/ > >> > >> The relevance of continuous variable entanglement in DNA > >> http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.4053 > >> Elisabeth Rieper, Janet Anders, Vlatko Vedral > >> Abstract: We consider a chain of harmonic oscillators with dipole-dipole > >> interaction between nearest neighbours resulting in a van der Waals type > >> bonding. The binding energies between entangled and classically > correlated > >> states are compared. We apply our model to DNA. By comparing our model > with > >> numerical simulations we conclude that entanglement may play a crucial > role > >> in > >> explaining the stability of the DNA double helix. > >> > >> [please notice that Vlatko Vedral is a real name in the field > >> of quantish matters] > > [Ross] > > Classical physics serves as a sufficient explanation for this stability, > and > > unless this trio can offer some serious experimental evidence, their > > speculations serve no useful purpose. > > [scerir] > http://quantummoxie.wordpress.com/2010/06/28/entanglement-and-dna/ > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > Where is the 'serious experimental evidence'? Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Jun 29 18:25:04 2010 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:25:04 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second In-Reply-To: References: <201006282120.o5SLK2Q5009802@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <20100629142504.o0fp0v0tes4g88c4@webmail.natasha.cc> Quoting Stefano Vaj : > On 29 June 2010 08:21, Giulio Prisco wrote: > >> It is not a binary, black/white, either/or choice. We can and should >> have both watered-down interpretations of transhumanism formulated in >> such a way as to be more appealing to the masses, AND true hardcore, >> radical and visionary interpretations of transhumanism. What is >> important is that these two "souls" of transhumanism collaborate >> behind the scene, instead of fighting each other like it happens now. >> > > AND there exist as well other distinctions in the range of possible > transhumanist discourses. > > By sector, for instance: those fascinated by wet transhumanism are not > necessarily passionated with AGI experimenting. Isn't "wet transhumanism" an oxymoron? I can easily see subpersonas of an agent as "wet" but not as a central person/agent. > By level: divulgation and propaganda amongst teenagers is not exactly the > same as philosophical debate or scientific papers published in peer-reviewed > journals for an academic audience. > > By their "internal" vs "external" nature: even though I do not believe in > esoteric circles ? la Scientology, there is some language which is perfectly > acceptable amongst us which is not perhaps perfectly suited for an > appearance in a TV show or an article in a mass newspaper. But many of us have talked about distributed cognition in the mass media - on TV and newspapers. Natasha From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 29 18:29:52 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 13:29:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> References: <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2A3BA0.2060203@satx.rr.com> On 6/29/2010 1:14 PM, I wrote: > If by preference you are inclined to choose a given number, and by > random chance it is going to win, your psychic perception of this future > fact can't provide extra help. That was less clear than it should have been. Instead of "inclined" I should have written "determined"; if you are only *inclined*, then a psi hint favoring this number could provide extra help. But close study of lotto results, in the aggregate and by looking at a large sample of actual coupons (some 20 years ago in Australia) showed that (a) very many people superstitiously prefer numbers in the range 1-31, birthdays, (b) many people used simple geometric patterns such as X or +, and (c) numbers on the outer edges of the form were less favored. I don't know if (b) and (c) apply any longer, maybe punters just choose numbers with no form to mark. But if there's a physical form, many guesses are constrained by these (b) and (c) preference factors. And they seem to be hard to budge. Damien Broderick From scerir at libero.it Tue Jun 29 18:49:46 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 20:49:46 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. Message-ID: <30935208.436931277837386044.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> Where is the 'serious experimental evidence'? Ross ----------------- Ross, what is the experimental *evidence* of Higgs bosons? of gravitational waves? of BH? of MWI? of quantum particles? of quantum waves? of Ross Evans? of the minimal initial entropy of the universe? They are trying to understand the stability of DNA. Did *classical* *physics* explain that? How? When? From scerir at libero.it Tue Jun 29 19:06:00 2010 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:06:00 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] DNA: quantum correlations? Message-ID: <23698111.438701277838360112.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> Where is the 'serious experimental evidence'? Ross ----------------- Ross, what is the experimental *evidence* of Higgs bosons? of gravitational waves? of BH? of MWI? of quantum particles? of quantum waves? of Ross Evans? of the minimal initial entropy of the universe? They are trying to understand the stability of DNA. Did *classical* *physics* explain that? How? When? From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 29 19:29:35 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:29:35 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again In-Reply-To: References: <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2A499F.4000203@satx.rr.com> On 6/29/2010 12:12 PM, BillK wrote: > That's why the CIA cancelled their remote viewing experiments. They weren't experiments, mostly; they were tasked, military-funded operations. The most regretable aspect of STAR GATE is that the military and intel communities funding it were not interested in research; they wanted operational results and they wanted them *now*. They got enough to keep funding the program for two decades. > They had no way of knowing whether the guesses provided any useful > intelligence unless an agent on the spot went and checked. And if you > have an agent on the spot anyway,---- who needs a remote viewer? There's some truth in this, except that you're missing the sometimes critical value in having a fairly exact place to send your agents on the (general) spot, knowing what to look for. Details on how this worked are available in a number of reports on STAR GATE and its predecessors (see below). Why the program was shut down is a rather complicated matter; in part it was due to program leaders and well trained RVers being moved on to other posts (you're not allowed to stay in one post in the military), their replacement by people who increasingly didn't follow the procedures worked out by earlier RV specialists, resistance by high placed Xian officers who stated their revulsion to this work which was clearly Satanic in origin (!) (but extropes have been keeping an eye on the dangerous infiltration of US armed forces by Xian fundamentalists, right?##), the collapse of the USSR, and finally because the results were less profitable than the use of emergent advanced technologies. None of this means that "CIA proved psi doesn't exist"; it means that CIA were tasked to shut down the program for motives that included all the above, while admitting that there was indeed an anomalous ability that had been utilized by the RVers. My friend Dr. Edwin May, the scientific director of STAR GATE, is working on a detailed history of the program even as we speak. Meanwhile, there are the AIR review reports, and books by military remote viewers such as Joe McMoneagle and Paul Smith (Smith's READING THE ENEMY'S MIND is rather good). Damien Broderick ## "We're Dealing with a Christian Taliban" From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 21:02:07 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 16:02:07 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> References: <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Others on the list can play, come on people, power up your machines and see > what you get. The rule is that each guess at 6/49 possible winning numbers > is independent, and 1 guess in 1000 is available for modification by > precognition.** ?What changes? Does everyone suddenly win, destroying the > lotto company (as John seems to imagine)? Do 1000 times as many people share > the top division prize, flabbergasting the statisticians? Or what? I think this is modified the same way 'predictive' analysis of the stock market by machines exacerbates instabilities. If the rate is 1/1000 and there are 3 psychics the effect may be accumulate to 1/(1000^3) So maybe it is common enough that the mere presence of 2 or more in the same contest negate their effect? Maybe some psychics are stronger than others and out-influence probability to benefit only the strongest? From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 29 21:38:03 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 16:38:03 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: References: <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2A67BB.9020805@satx.rr.com> On 6/29/2010 4:02 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > I think this is modified the same way 'predictive' analysis of the > stock market by machines exacerbates instabilities. If the rate is > 1/1000 and there are 3 psychics the effect may be accumulate to > 1/(1000^3) NOT what I'm saying. Blimey, how hard is this to follow? You buy a Lotto ticket (I use Australian data from 20 years ago, that's all I know about) and you cross off 6 of the 45 numbers. (Here I understand it's typically 6/44 or 6/49, and there are usually extra supplementary numbers that allow for smaller prizes--but let's ignore those for the moment). You mark your first guess. Let us imagine (think of it as a science fiction story if that steadies your nerves) that there's one chance in 1000 that a psi flash will cross your mind, either confirming your guess or tempting you to change your guess. You do this five more times, and submit your entry. 166 of your friends mark their own entries. One of those 167 entries will contain one extra correct number than it would without psi. Does this mean (as I suspect John Clark would have us believe, since he thinks psi would destroy Lotto) that 1 in 167 bettors will share in the major prize? Well, no. Here is the mean chance expectation of the distribution of guesses in the Tattslotto game I studied: All 6 correct 1.223 by 10^-7 5 of 6 2.726 by 10^-5 4 of 6 1.365 by 10^-3 Imagine an idealized 6/45 Lotto game in which exactly 8,145,060 people enter, but each person chooses a different pattern of six numbers. Note that LOW-scoring Lotto entries win NO prizes, and are therefore invisible. It's simple to calculate how many people should fail to pick any winning numbers, how many will get only one right, and so on. It's all too easy for players to slip to the bottom of the probability bucket. There's a little less than even money odds of choosing only a single winning number. Indeed, it turns out that it's slightly easier to guess one right than none at all, for the chances of getting all your guesses wrong drops a little, to two in five! Number right Mean chance expectation Probability - one chance in... out of 6 6 1 8,145,060.00 5 234 34,807.95 4 11,115 732.80 3 182,780 44.56 2 1,233,765 6.60 1 3,454,542 2.36 0 3,262,623 2.50 Due to the pyramid structure shown above, the great majority of players will select either 0, 1 or 2 of the 6 winning numbers. Forty percent will be wrong on every guess; another 42.4 percent will get only one of the 6 right; and a little over 15 percent will identify two of the 6 right. Added together, these worst outcomes make up nearly 98 percent of all bets. And there's very little chance that anyone in those categories could jump up to the top category when the chance of getting an extra guess right is only 1 in 1000, even if 10 million or even 100 million entries are made in a draw. I leave the rest for your exploration and entertainment. Damien Broderick From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 23:11:53 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 19:11:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <4C2A67BB.9020805@satx.rr.com> References: <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <4C2A67BB.9020805@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/29/2010 4:02 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > >> I think this is modified the same way 'predictive' analysis of the >> stock market by machines exacerbates instabilities. ?If the rate is >> 1/1000 and there are 3 psychics the effect may be accumulate to >> 1/(1000^3) > > NOT what I'm saying. > > Blimey, how hard is this to follow? I wasn't trying to follow. I was throwing out other ideas for why it doesn't seem to work. > And there's very little chance that anyone in those categories could jump up > to the top category when the chance of getting an extra guess right is only > 1 in 1000, even if 10 million or even 100 million entries are made in a > draw. > > I leave the rest for your exploration and entertainment. ok, now trying to follow... You're suggesting that even with incontrovertibly real psi at 1/1000 power to guess correctly (by whatever effect: precog or other) that simply getting another number right in the lottery fails to produce noteworthy outcomes anyway? I think there are rules other than applied statistics at work - I don't have any idea how to express them. From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Jun 29 23:45:01 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:45:01 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: References: <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <4C2A67BB.9020805@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2A857D.7040709@satx.rr.com> On 6/29/2010 6:11 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > You're suggesting that even with > incontrovertibly real psi at 1/1000 power to guess correctly (by > whatever effect: precog or other) that simply getting another number > right in the lottery fails to produce noteworthy outcomes anyway? I'm raising that possibility, which is apparently so counter-intuitive that even people as smart as my friend Pelagius aka John Clark appear to miss it. (By the way, by hypothesis 1 in a million punters could get 2 extra guesses right by psi, and 1 in a billion could get 3 right by psi. Since nearly everyone selects 2 or fewer winning numbers by chance, this isn't likely to have a big visible impact either.) Incidentally, the 1 in 1000 extra correct is not just an arbitrary postulate; it derives from a lot of results in somewhat similar forced-choice parapsychology experiments. (Ganzfeld and remote viewing by trained operators tend to have better results, but they take a lot more intensive work). I studied nearly a billion aggregated Lotto guesses made available to me by the Tattslotto company in Melbourne. (All the computer work of recording the data was done by the government-overseen company, so there's no likelihood that they screwed with the data to give a false impression of psi.) I looked at the scores for numbers 1-45 when they won compared to those when they were not winners. See if you can guess what the mean deviation I found was? (by-the-way-2: I'm not directing these posts only to whichever individuals I happen to be citing at the top, but to everyone who's reading this thread...) Damien Broderick From msd001 at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 02:05:35 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 22:05:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <4C2A857D.7040709@satx.rr.com> References: <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <4C2A67BB.9020805@satx.rr.com> <4C2A857D.7040709@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Incidentally, the 1 in 1000 extra correct is not just an arbitrary > postulate; it derives from a lot of results in somewhat similar > forced-choice parapsychology experiments. (Ganzfeld and remote viewing by > trained operators tend to have better results, but they take a lot more > intensive work). Do you consider remote viewing to be in the same class of phenomenon as precognition? Are there no well-controlled studies of precog because they're more difficult to construct than remote viewing experiments? I imagine the number of parameters to get a good read on fusion also requires a very carefully controlled environment (I immediately hear John Clark's "That's bullshit too!") If not something so new, perhaps something more mundane like EMF detectors corroborating the creepy feelings people have in old, poorly wired houses (or under ceiling fans with shorted motor windings) In the case of EMF, those less-sensitive will claim to feel nothing at all - while those more sensitive do actually have central nervous system responses. I imagine EMF-sensitivity could be dismissed. What about the alleged danger of death by peanut. Millions of people eat peanuts with no ill effects, others suffer anaphylactic shock from surprisingly small amount of the antigens. Are we to dismiss people with peanut allergies as freaks who don't really count because they're abnormal? Or EMF-sensitive? Or are coincidentally in the right place at apparently the right time? > (by-the-way-2: I'm not directing these posts only to whichever individuals I > happen to be citing at the top, but to everyone who's reading this > thread...) Hopefully they'll stop merely lurking and add their $0.02. We'll be lucky if we get a dime among us. I think game shows would be an interesting body of data to study for psi. I have previously mentioned Jeopardy answers leaping to mind right before the answer is spoken (answers I could not even imagine encountering previously). I also imagine the format of Match Game would yield interesting questions (if not answers) Why, for example, was Richard Dawson chosen for the big-money match so frequently that they had to implement a semi-random celebrity chooser in later years? Is it because Dawson was the quintessential every-man with the most-popular answer always at the ready or was he able to sense the answer to be chosen by the contestant? Of course the number of likely answers was usually limited by the zeitgeist of 1960's & 1970's but casual observation makes me wonder why he seemed so much better at matching answers than any other celebrities. Also the $XXk Pyramid would be a source for distilling psychology from parapsychology given that some clues must be paired with answers in much the same way as matches on Match Game (or even Rorschach's ink blots have most-common answers) However, some players (and celebrities) seemed noticeably better at exploiting these pairings of clue+answer. Were they simply more intelligent and their better play explained-away by high IQ or is there a possibility there was another channel of communication between clue and answer? Maybe there wasn't enough control in the environment to be a good experiment. Surely John will claim Bullshit. I concede immediately that subtle body language conveys a great deal of content to those perceptive enough to utilize the information. The same can be observed at any bar/club. I imagine Keith would be explain the EP advantages of exploiting this kind of game for mate selection. The suggestion that psi-enabled individuals should have an edge is a compelling argument. I haven't had that idea completely saturate every facet of this topic yet. From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 30 02:33:26 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:33:26 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: References: <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <4C2A67BB.9020805@satx.rr.com> <4C2A857D.7040709@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2AACF6.30808@satx.rr.com> On 6/29/2010 9:05 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > > Do you consider remote viewing to be in the same class of phenomenon > as precognition? Quite a few remote viewing (and Ganzfeld) implementations *are* deliberately precognitive, to avoid, as much as possible, suspicion of cheating. > Are there no well-controlled studies of precog There are plenty of such studies. What makes you suppose otherwise? That's precisely what presentiment (pre-stimulus response) studies, and controlled, blinded attempts of say who is about to call on the phone or text, are, among others kinds. > because they're more difficult to construct than remote viewing > experiments? RV is a specific protocol of psi implementation, that's all. (Of course the net is filled with liars or psychotics claiming to be able to do and teach it, and boasting of their lofty roles in STAR GATE, which generally they had nothing or very little to do with. David Morehouse is probably the most egregious example.##) > I think game shows would be an interesting body of data to study for > psi. I have previously mentioned Jeopardy answers leaping to mind > right before the answer is spoken (answers I could not even imagine > encountering previously). I also imagine the format of Match Game > would yield interesting questions (if not answers) Why, for example, > was Richard Dawson chosen for the big-money match so frequently that > they had to implement a semi-random celebrity chooser in later years? I don't know anything at all about such games, sorry. Damien Broderick ##"Dr" David Morehouse, a Mormon major not quite honorably discharged from the army for a series of offences that don't strike me as especially offensive--"sodomy" was one--after he had a nervous breakdown where he spoke to angels, published a book titled Psychic Warrior (1997) that Major Ed Dames (another soldier who overstates his official RV role) claims is largely based on his life, rather than Morehouse's.... While Jim Schnabel's book Remote Viewers was cautious and very fleeting on the topic of Morehouse's alleged exploits, Schnabel gave free vent to his distaste in an article posted widely on the Internet but now rather hard to find: "To me, his story is not just about the depths to which one human can sink. (Morehouse is, in the end, perhaps only a sleazier, crazier version of the old Sgt. Bilko character.) Somehow his story also reflects the current state of things in America, a country that seems to be going insane... What else to call a people who feed hungrily, via The X-Files and other forms of that hugely popular genre, on paranoid conspiracy fantasies otherwise found only on psychiatric wards?" Morehouse's own account of his life shows an honorable man tragically misused by evil manipulators, but saved from suicidal depression by eternal love for his angelic wife plus some actual kitschy angels and his patriotism and decency. It's intriguing to compare this with Schnabel's relentless savaging in his article, which looks rather like a chapter excluded mysteriously from his book: Morehouse the scummy womanizer, the guy with "a small home improvement business, House Tech, that he ran on the side." Can this be the same Morehouse who rails against the shocking state of morale and morals in the spook business (the other sort of spooks)? "And some of their private lives! A few staff members hardly bothered to conceal extramarital affairs... It was a real Peyton Place, and I hated it... Let me top my description off with the colonel who sold Afghani rugs out of the trunk of his car in the parking lot" (Morehouse, 157). The major's alleged sexual improprieties, even his goldbricking while on the payroll of the Defense Intelligence Agency, are finally irrelevant. We all have our little quirks. It is notable, though, that none of this material was touched in his own book, not even to rebut it. The jacket mentions his PhD (in Education Administration). "My doctorate is from LeSalle University in Mandeville, LA.," he told me by email. He meant La Salle. In a rather odd disclaimer, he added: "I did not simply buy my degree--believe it or not, I had to work for it" (personal email communication). It would be easiest, obviously, to discount Morehouse as a former, or feigned, psychotic with schmaltzy style and delusions of grandeur. But we are meant to accept that this kind of operative provided the psychic material that the CIA and DIA and other dark powers once found impressive. Something about all this stinks to me of a disinformation package, rich in odors attractive to New Age nostrils and old X-Files fans but just as certain to wrinkle the snooty noses of skeptics. [from OUTSIDE THE GATES OF SCIENCE] From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 02:24:24 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 19:24:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Debate, EP and psi Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/29/2010 10:27 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > >> Re psi, if there is some kind of psi ability existing and it depends >> to some extent on a genetic trait and the ability improves >> reproductive success just a little, then we would expect it to be as >> common as eyesight and as well developed, even if it only provided a >> slight reproductive edge. > > Two possible factors: > > 1) You can only see when there's light. Yes, but eyes are very well evolved in spite of darkness. You would have to assume that "psi light" comes only on rare occasions. In which case, where does it come from? > 2) Red Queen's race. That would require either other humans to have evolved anti psi powers or something else to be evolving and blocking psi powers. In both cases you would need to show that something benefits (in terms of reproductive success) from blocking human psi powers. Not saying psi doesn't exist, just that biology puts some hard filters on the concept. Keith From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 20:48:16 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:48:16 +0100 Subject: [ExI] DNA: quantum correlations? In-Reply-To: <23698111.438701277838360112.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> References: <23698111.438701277838360112.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 8:06 PM, scerir wrote: > Where is the 'serious experimental evidence'? > Ross > > ----------------- > > Ross, what is the experimental *evidence* of Higgs bosons? > of gravitational waves? of BH? of MWI? of quantum > particles? of quantum waves? of Ross Evans? > of the minimal initial entropy of the universe? > They are trying to understand the stability of DNA. > Did *classical* *physics* explain that? How? When? > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > The Higgs boson is a theoretical particle,the search for which is backed up by previous observations made in particle physics.To quote from the piece you posted... *Now a group of physicists say that the weird laws of quantum mechanics may be more important for life than biologists could ever have imagined. Their new idea is that DNA is held together by quantum entanglement* Thus, this is just another speculation, in which the seemingly weirdness of quantum level effects, is wheeled in to explain something for which we do not yet have an explanation. It's a close to a scientific theory, as a Christian suggesting that quanum spookiness provides evidence for God. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 04:25:40 2010 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:25:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Debate, EP and psi was important books In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Keith Henson wrote: Re psi, if there is some kind of psi ability existing and it depends to some extent on a genetic trait and the ability improves reproductive success just a little, then we would expect it to be as common as eyesight and as well developed, even if it only provided a slight reproductive edge. We don't see that, so the people proposing the existence of psi abilities have the interesting task of proposing a model in which something keeps psi abilities down close to the noise range. Such as: the ability to see into the future provides no reproductive advantage. I am not expressing an opinion, just pointing out the logical framework around the concept. >>> Perhaps the forces of evolution have only *gotten started (relatively speaking)* in developing human psi powers. You may need to wait another 100,000 years to see some amazing results... Oh, wait, science and technology to the rescue (play cavalry charge music)!! I bet that within a century or less, our mastery of genetic engineering could greatly speed that process up (if our genetics are the key to this phenomena). John : ) On 6/29/10, Keith Henson wrote: > On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:05 PM, John Clark wrote: > >> And Keith I wish you'd post more, you are a ferocious debater, one of the >> absolute best, that's why I value what you write even when I disagree. >> Especially when I disagree actually. > > Thanks. It really isn't hard. If you want to back up your arguments, > you have at your fingertips another window with a search engine. If > you can frame a search, like the recent "few bits per second" thread > then you look smart. Which is, if you are honest about it, the point > of posting at all. > > I also post on the lifeboat list. Was posting about my EP based model for > war. > > ^^^^^^^^^^^ > >>> If you think this is just ranting BS, I should probably take it >>> elsewhere. >> >> I don't think it's "ranting BS" -- it's just not a great >> conversation-starter. Your points are not very controversial, > > You are the first to say that. > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > So the EP concepts are gaining traction. Along that line I recommend this: > > http://www.miller-mccune.com/culture/maslows-pyramid-gets-a-makeover-17782/?utm_source=Newsletter115&utm_medium=email&utm_content=0629&utm_campaign=newsletters > > "Given that we humans like to think of ourselves as special, this new > pyramid will surely encounter strong resistance. But it could also > become a shorthand way to clarify the often-misunderstood concepts of > evolutionary psychology, which, its advocates insist, are not as > meaning-denying and ego-deflating as we might think." > > (Some of the material published as EP is just awful recycled sociology > bs. You have to understand the subject enough to sort it out.) > > Re psi, if there is some kind of psi ability existing and it depends > to some extent on a genetic trait and the ability improves > reproductive success just a little, then we would expect it to be as > common as eyesight and as well developed, even if it only provided a > slight reproductive edge. > > We don't see that, so the people proposing the existence of psi > abilities have the interesting task of proposing a model in which > something keeps psi abilities down close to the noise range. Such as: > the ability to see into the future provides no reproductive > advantage. > > I am not expressing an opinion, just pointing out the logical > framework around the concept. > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From jonkc at bellsouth.net Wed Jun 30 04:38:13 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 00:38:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> References: <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> On Jun 29, 2010, at 2:14 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Still waiting for an answer to my question: how would a small psi effect modify expected chance outcomes for lotto? Many states have a game where you pay a dollar and pick a number from 000 to 999, if you guess correctly you get $500. These games have been going on for many years and the profit they make for the state is always highly predictable. Year in and year out the amount of money the state will have to pay out in prizes can be calculated and it always conforms to the laws of probability you'd get if the numbers were picked randomly. You say that the psi effect is very small but it can't be all that small if two bit researchers with a shoestring budget can detect it easily. If even they can see it then Psi should stand out like a blinding beacon in state lotteries with their VASTLY larger number of test subjects, but all they see is noise in the data. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 30 05:30:42 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 22:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game, was psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <474060.35670.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 6/29/10, John Clark wrote: ? >...Many states have a game where you pay a dollar and pick a number from 000 to 999, if you guess correctly you get $500... ? Here's a game for you.? In the above, most people, even halfwits, can see that you are paying a buck for a 1 in a 1000 shot at 500 bucks.? Terrible deal, but what if the state ran a deal where a prole gets 1000 bucks?she guesses correctly a three digit number, and make it tax free, since the state is going to take the profit from the game.? ? The catch is this: the state isn't claiming the winning number is chosen randomly.? Rather, the state gets everyone's guesses, then it gets to choose which is the winning number, which would be the least chosen number.? So it appears to the prole she has a 1 in 1000 chance at 1000 bucks, but the state always wins in that deal.? ? That would be a cool game!? In fact, we could spice it up a bit by offering 1100 bucks to the winners.? The mathematically sophisticated proles might then calculate that they have a mathematical expectation of profit in this game: 1 buck for a 1 in 1000 chance at a tax-free 1100 bucks!? ? Would you play?? Explain please. ? spike ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 30 05:34:52 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 00:34:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> References: <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <4C2AD77C.2090901@satx.rr.com> On 6/29/2010 11:38 PM, John Clark wrote: > Many states have a game where you pay a dollar and pick a number from > 000 to 999, if you guess correctly you get $500. These games have been > going on for many years and the profit they make for the state is always > highly predictable. Year in and year out the amount of money the state > will have to pay out in prizes can be calculated and it always conforms > to the laws of probability you'd get if the numbers were picked randomly. Okay, so you admit you can't respond to my questions based on the playing field you first chose: lotto. Unfortunately I don't know anything about the wager you mention. Have you got links to sites where there's more precise information on numbers of players betting, payouts, etc? From what you are saying, it sounds as if roughly half the money is always forfeit to the state and perhaps the private corp (?) that runs the game. Are you sure the cumulative amount paid in prizes is very close to 50%, year after year? Would the despairing owners abandon this "scam," this "tax on the ignorant," if they only pulled in, on average, 49.9% of the takings? How often are the winning numbers posted? Given the noise created by population preferences, there must be a fair amount of volatility from draw to draw (if that's how it works). When 007 or 017 or 333 comes up, I expect there will be a significant excess of winners. But if, say, 082 or 614 comes up, I'd expect somewhat fewer than m.c.e.. (You'd need to look at many hundreds of millions of guesses to know exactly what the bias factors are, and how stable they are.) Do you have this information available? Suppose for the sake of argument that beneath this noise there is a tendency to get one more winner per thousand entrants, would this be noticed and make any serious difference? (This of course assumes that it's as easy to choose a three digit number via psi as a one or two digit number, something that would have to be tested. In general, it's known that experienced remote viewers don't respond very well to numbers, but they tend to acquire gestalts of a scene--so most attempted psi applications first blind-code numeric targets and decoys into high entropic shapes and activities.) Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 30 05:42:54 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 00:42:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game In-Reply-To: <474060.35670.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <474060.35670.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4C2AD95E.1010709@satx.rr.com> On 6/30/2010 12:30 AM, Gregory Jones wrote: > make it tax free, since the state is going to take the profit from the > game. Lotto in Australia, UK, Ireland, German and Italy is already tax free. It's digraceful that it's not in the USA. Damien Broderick From jonkc at bellsouth.net Wed Jun 30 06:12:26 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 02:12:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <4C2AD77C.2090901@satx.rr.com> References: <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> <4C2AD77C.2090901@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Jun 30, 2010, at 1:34 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Okay, so you admit you can't respond to my questions based on the playing field you first chose: lotto. Damien, I honestly don't know what the hell you're talking about. Go back and look at my past messages, I never mentioned the word "lotto", I was referring to lotteries in general. > Are you sure the cumulative amount paid in prizes is very close to 50%, year after year? Yep. > Would the despairing owners abandon this "scam," this "tax on the ignorant," if they only pulled in, on average, 49.9% of the takings? Nope, but one hell of a lot of statistically savvy scientists would sit up and take notice, and a hell of a lot of accountants would be scratching their heads trying to figure out what to do about the unexpected shortfall in profits, money that the laws of probability told them they should see but for some mysterious reason they don't. > How often are the winning numbers posted? In Florida it's twice a day. > > Have you got links to sites where there's more precise information on numbers of players betting, payouts, etc? I'd like to introduce you to a wonderful new invention, it's called "Google". John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 30 06:55:41 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 01:55:41 -0500 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: References: <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> <4C2AD77C.2090901@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2AEA6D.8090604@satx.rr.com> On 6/30/2010 1:12 AM, John Clark wrote: >> Okay, so you admit you can't respond to my questions based on the >> playing field you first chose: lotto. > Damien, I honestly don't know what the hell you're talking about. Go > back and look at my past messages, I never mentioned the word "lotto", I > was referring to lotteries in general. Really! So it wasn't you who wrote in response to my citation >> Here's what I wrote 20 years ago in THE LOTTO EFFECT: [...] > Damien does that book explain how in the past 20 years those lotteries > have somehow managed to produce huge and CONSISTENT profits What could "Those lotteries" mean in this context EXCEPT Lotto? Give me a break. And who was it that wrote under your name "You know how lotto companies make huge profits off a scam. a enormously profitable but don't even hint how that scam acutely works. I wouldn't either if I were a Billionaire"? Okay, I'm abandoning this dialogue, as usual, as a total waste of time. Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 30 06:39:36 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 23:39:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game In-Reply-To: <474060.35670.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5793.77403.qm@web81505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 6/29/10, Gregory Jones wrote: ? > ...That would be a cool game!? In fact, we could spice it up a bit by offering 1100 bucks to the winners.? The mathematically sophisticated proles might then calculate that they have a mathematical expectation of profit in this game: 1 buck for a 1 in 1000 chance at a tax-free 1100 bucks!? ...spike ? ? OK I just wrote a sim for this, and I am having a hard time believing my results.? I decided to run it over night so I have a ton of data.? In the mean time, do speculate what would be the results: the state gets to pick which is the winning number, and I arbitrarily chose 50,000 proles playing.? The state pays 1100 clams, for picking a 3 digit number, tax free.? What a deal!? You?pay a buck for a 1 in?1000 chance at 1100.? ? Use your intuition to speculate, then calculate it closed form if you are able and so inclined, but do feel free to post your guess before you do your reckons.? I have already ruined my guess with the sim, but had I posted before I saw the sim results, I would have estimated the state would pocket an average of about 10k per game. ? What say ye? ? spike ? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 06:35:42 2010 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 16:05:42 +0930 Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game In-Reply-To: <4C2AD95E.1010709@satx.rr.com> References: <474060.35670.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C2AD95E.1010709@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 30 June 2010 15:12, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/30/2010 12:30 AM, Gregory Jones wrote: > >> make it tax free, since the state is going to take the profit from the >> game. > > Lotto in Australia, UK, Ireland, German and Italy is already tax free. It's > digraceful that it's not in the USA. > > Damien Broderick Yep, and so are pokies... or wait, no... -- Emlyn http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog Find me on Facebook and Buzz From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 30 06:46:26 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 23:46:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game Message-ID: <368891.80365.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 6/29/10, Gregory Jones wrote: ? > ...That would be a cool game!? In fact, we could spice it up a bit by offering 1100 bucks to the winners.? The mathematically sophisticated proles might then calculate that they have a mathematical expectation of profit in this game: 1 buck for a 1 in 1000 chance at a tax-free 1100 bucks!? ...spike ? Oooooo ouch.? Did anyone here discover a fatal flaw in the design of my game? ? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at bellsouth.net Wed Jun 30 07:20:15 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 03:20:15 -0400 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <4C2AEA6D.8090604@satx.rr.com> References: <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> <4C2AD77C.2090901@satx.rr.com> <4C2AEA6D.8090604@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <95449D21-3799-40EC-B738-91BBA257ED42@bellsouth.net> On Jun 30, 2010, at 2:55 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > And who was it that wrote under your name > "You know how lotto companies make huge profits off a scam. a enormously profitable but don't even hint how that scam acutely works. I wouldn't either if I were a Billionaire"? Ok, you're right and I'm wrong, I did use the word "lotto" after all. Do you find that fact significant, does it detract one bit from my point that state run lotteries could easily detect a variation from randomness if it were anywhere near as large as these psi "scientists" claim to have found? Of course it does not! Does my use of the word "lotto" distract from my point that psi "scientists are full of shit? You can only hope so. > Okay, I'm abandoning this dialogue You're no fool, you know when to abandon ship. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 30 08:09:41 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 03:09:41 -0500 Subject: [ExI] never say never In-Reply-To: References: <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> <4C2AD77C.2090901@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2AFBC5.9050400@satx.rr.com> I said I was abandoning this dialogue, but what the hell... On 6/30/2010 1:12 AM, John Clark wrote: > >> How often are the winning numbers posted? > > In Florida it's twice a day. >> >> Have you got links to sites where there's more precise information on >> numbers of players betting, payouts, etc? > > I'd like to introduce you to a wonderful new invention, it's called > "Google". So not even the courtesy of a few search terms. Okay, I assume you're talking about a Florida game called Cash 3. If so, here's an interesting fact: <...the Lottery has established a $10 million liability limit for Cash 3 for any particular three-digit number for each drawing. Should any three digit combination (for example 777) be purchased often enough in a single drawing that would result in the liability limit being exceeded, the Lottery will "cut off" further sales of that specific number combination. In addition, no Front Pair or Back Pair that involves the first two or last two digits, respectively, of the three-digit number will be allowed for that drawing.> So even if a quarter of the population of Florida was suddenly struck with psychic powers and all saw the winning number, they wouldn't be able to make more than a certain dent in the distribution. Secondly, as I predicted, 333 is highly favored--and so are other triples: "The last time 777 hit, Dec. 3, 2006, there were 18,542 people with winning tickets worth a total of $4,545,275." In the latest results posted, I find these numbers of winners and their payouts: 7-2-9 1,547 $239,810.00 6-6-4 952 $165,285.00 With that sort of extreme volatility, it might be difficult to calculate just how many winners to expect, even with the mandatory cut-off that effectively prevents the data from telling us how many people really wanted to select certain combinations. A quick search has not found a comprehensive formal statistical study of the results. But you, John, must of course have this information at your fingertips, since you are so certain what it contains. Damien Broderick From florent.berthet at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 07:55:12 2010 From: florent.berthet at gmail.com (Florent Berthet) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 09:55:12 +0200 Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game, was psi yet again. In-Reply-To: <474060.35670.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> <474060.35670.qm@web81506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: First, we should check if most of the times there are numbers that people tend to choose at least 10% less than the average picking of the others. If there are, then the odds are the on side the of the state, and we shouldn't play (unless we have a good way to guess the less chosen number). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From florent.berthet at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 08:34:17 2010 From: florent.berthet at gmail.com (Florent Berthet) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 10:34:17 +0200 Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game In-Reply-To: <368891.80365.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <368891.80365.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > > > > Oooooo ouch. Did anyone here discover a fatal flaw in the design of my > game? > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > I'll give it a try (it's kind of a repost from the other thread, sorry) : the higher the number of people who play, the more evenly distributed the choices are, then it's possible that even the less chosen number is chosen by too many people to make the game profitable for the state. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 08:59:36 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 10:59:36 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Important Books In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2010/6/28 John Clark > Yes read anything by Dawkins, the man seems incapable of writing anything dull and stupidity is totally beyond his comprehension. I have never read a Dawkins book that wasn't a masterpiece. Yet there was if I am not mistaken some not-so-clever anti-transhumanist remark in Why the Evolution is True or elsewhere, but hard to believe as it may be, it sounded as some unreflected tangential lip service to political correctness, and I read other more recent stuff where he seemed to revise such alignment with the mainstream view of posthuman changes... -- Stefano Vaj From pharos at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 08:41:52 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 09:41:52 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Debate, EP and psi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6/30/10, Keith Henson wrote: > That would require either other humans to have evolved anti psi powers > or something else to be evolving and blocking psi powers. In both > cases you would need to show that something benefits (in terms of > reproductive success) from blocking human psi powers. > > Not saying psi doesn't exist, just that biology puts some hard filters > on the concept. > > Damien keeps pointing out that psi appears to be a very weak effect (1 in 1000). That could indicate that psi is the remnant of a left-over never-developed ability after much stronger EP effects have almost wiped it out from humans. For example, if psychic prehumans occasionally had a feeling that they shouldn't go by the waterfall today because of danger, they would have to be right much more than 1 in 1000 times before anyone paid any attention to them. Other much more prosaic abilities, like not going where the lions live or not going out when thunderstorms approach, or saving some meat for tomorrow in case you can't go hunting would produce far greater benefits. Basically, as Damien points out, if you can't affect lottery results, or reliably base future behaviour on such 'feelings' (only right 1 in 1000 cases) then it is much more practical to just ignore such feelings. You'll only be rarely wrong if you do and getting it right the other 999 times will really impress prospective mates. ;) BillK From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 09:30:51 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 11:30:51 +0200 Subject: [ExI] few bits per second. In-Reply-To: <4C2A2E31.6060708@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2A2E31.6060708@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 29 June 2010 19:32, Damien Broderick wrote: > And those arxiv papers Serafino keeps citing show that serious > non-mysterioso scientists are suggesting links between DNA stability and QT, > photosynthesis and QT, etc etc. I am well persuaded that the entire universe is ultimately quantum mechanics-based. Carbon-based systems of course would not make any exception in this respect, including with regard to non-cognitive aspects of the brain or of other organs. What I do not see is biological brains exhibiting any typical *quantum-computing* features, as we can on the contrary confidently assume, e.g., that they have a massively parallel architecture. -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 11:07:21 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:07:21 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second In-Reply-To: <20100629142504.o0fp0v0tes4g88c4@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <201006282120.o5SLK2Q5009802@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <20100629142504.o0fp0v0tes4g88c4@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: On 29 June 2010 20:25, wrote: > Isn't "wet transhumanism" an oxymoron? ?I can easily see subpersonas of an > agent as "wet" but not as a central person/agent. "Wet" meaning "with an emphasis on bio rather than nano or info". >> By their "internal" vs "external" nature: even though I do not believe in >> esoteric circles ? la Scientology, there is some language which is >> perfectly >> acceptable amongst us which is not perhaps perfectly suited for an >> appearance in a TV show or an article in a mass newspaper. > > But many of us have talked about distributed cognition in the mass media - > on TV and newspapers. Sure. And I expect that in the framework of a consistent, uniform language some level of fine-tuning in view of the channel and its audience is certainly adopted by most of us. If I write for instance a msg to this list, I assume that I can take a few things for granted which may require instead some further clarifications or qualifications when I am adressing, say, a group of patent attorneys without any prior exposure to H+ ideas, or a high-school classroom. That's all that I am saying. -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 11:07:21 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:07:21 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second In-Reply-To: <20100629142504.o0fp0v0tes4g88c4@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <201006282120.o5SLK2Q5009802@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <20100629142504.o0fp0v0tes4g88c4@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: On 29 June 2010 20:25, wrote: > Isn't "wet transhumanism" an oxymoron? ?I can easily see subpersonas of an > agent as "wet" but not as a central person/agent. "Wet" meaning "with an emphasis on bio rather than nano or info". >> By their "internal" vs "external" nature: even though I do not believe in >> esoteric circles ? la Scientology, there is some language which is >> perfectly >> acceptable amongst us which is not perhaps perfectly suited for an >> appearance in a TV show or an article in a mass newspaper. > > But many of us have talked about distributed cognition in the mass media - > on TV and newspapers. Sure. And I expect that in the framework of a consistent, uniform language some level of fine-tuning in view of the channel and its audience is certainly adopted by most of us. If I write for instance a msg to this list, I assume that I can take a few things for granted which may require instead some further clarifications or qualifications when I am adressing, say, a group of patent attorneys without any prior exposure to H+ ideas, or a high-school classroom. That's all that I am saying. -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 11:07:21 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:07:21 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Purpose of list was a few bits per second In-Reply-To: <20100629142504.o0fp0v0tes4g88c4@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <201006282120.o5SLK2Q5009802@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <20100629142504.o0fp0v0tes4g88c4@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: On 29 June 2010 20:25, wrote: > Isn't "wet transhumanism" an oxymoron? ?I can easily see subpersonas of an > agent as "wet" but not as a central person/agent. "Wet" meaning "with an emphasis on bio rather than nano or info". >> By their "internal" vs "external" nature: even though I do not believe in >> esoteric circles ? la Scientology, there is some language which is >> perfectly >> acceptable amongst us which is not perhaps perfectly suited for an >> appearance in a TV show or an article in a mass newspaper. > > But many of us have talked about distributed cognition in the mass media - > on TV and newspapers. Sure. And I expect that in the framework of a consistent, uniform language some level of fine-tuning in view of the channel and its audience is certainly adopted by most of us. If I write for instance a msg to this list, I assume that I can take a few things for granted which may require instead some further clarifications or qualifications when I am adressing, say, a group of patent attorneys without any prior exposure to H+ ideas, or a high-school classroom. That's all that I am saying. -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 11:20:44 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:20:44 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Debate, EP and psi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 30 June 2010 10:41, BillK wrote: > Damien keeps pointing out that psi appears to be a very weak effect (1 in 1000). ... which would make it scientifically interesting, but not very relevant for practical purposes (say, in determining whether and how much a casino should adjust its margins to take into account the infinitesimally better guessing by gamblers than statistics would allow). In fact, I am inclined to believe that "psi-like" effects are much more widespread than that, especially if one includes things such as telepathy between two people in front of each other trying to guess what the other thinks or is going to do. Needless to say, at least some of them can probably be explained in many circumstances with not-especially-esoteric, albeit perfectly unconscious, mechanisms. But this does not make them any less real or important in everyday life. -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 11:32:42 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:32:42 +0200 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 29 June 2010 19:12, BillK wrote: > On 6/29/10, John Grigg wrote: >> I do wonder if a corporation would attempt to create a remote viewing >> ?program, akin to what the United States and it's rivals did. >> ?Corporate intelligence and espionage can tend toward extreme behavior >> ?to get an advantage. > > Most unlikely. That's why the CIA cancelled their remote viewing experiments. > > They had no way of knowing whether the guesses provided any useful > intelligence unless an agent on the spot went and checked. And if you > have an agent on the spot anyway,---- who needs a remote viewer? All depends on whether you have to have some degree of confidence about the results of the remote viewing, or you have to decide anyway and anything goes. In the latter scenario, it may be worth reminding that Napoleon, before appointing a new general, used to inquire whether the candidate was a lucky person. Similarly, there is nothing wrong in choosing to profit from a "guesser" with a good track record, even when the guess does not appear to be possiibly based on any kind of factual competence, since there is no reason to believe that the good guesser would be performing in average worse than anybody else in the guess at hand. To do otherwise would mean to be prey of the fallacy according to which if "3" came out five times in a row, it would be somewhat more unlikely to come out also the fifth. -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 12:09:01 2010 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:09:01 +0200 Subject: [ExI] never say never In-Reply-To: <4C2AFBC5.9050400@satx.rr.com> References: <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> <4C2AD77C.2090901@satx.rr.com> <4C2AFBC5.9050400@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 30 June 2010 10:09, Damien Broderick wrote: > A quick search has not found a comprehensive formal statistical study of the > results. But you, John, must of course have this information at your > fingertips, since you are so certain what it contains. I think we should work on some simplified, more rigorous game. Take roulette. In a perfect roulette all numbers have equal probabilities, but the banc pays 36 times the winner, not 37 as it should taking into account the zero, which allows for casinos' margins on single-number bets. Are casinos' results infinitesimally but consistently worse over years and years than they should on a purely statistical basis? No idea... Now that I think of it, we could impose a mandatory collection of statistical data for research purposes on all casinos, I think they make more than enough money to contribute to the progress of science in this area. :-) -- Stefano Vaj From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Wed Jun 30 12:36:19 2010 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 22:36:19 +1000 Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game In-Reply-To: <368891.80365.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <368891.80365.qm@web81507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20100630223619.6f06a376@optusnet.com.au> On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 23:46:26 -0700 (PDT) Gregory Jones wrote: > > > --- On Tue, 6/29/10, Gregory Jones wrote: > ? > > ...That would be a cool game!? In fact, we could spice it up a bit > > by offering 1100 bucks to the winners.? The mathematically > > sophisticated proles might then calculate that they have a > > mathematical expectation of profit in this game: 1 buck for a 1 in > > 1000 chance at a tax-free 1100 bucks!? ...spike > ? > > Oooooo ouch.? Did anyone here discover a fatal flaw in the design of > my game? > spike Since no one else has answered, "I'll take a guaranteed return of 10% for fatal flaws, Mr Trebeck". :) -David. From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 30 14:48:12 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 09:48:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Debate, EP and psi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C2B592C.2080308@satx.rr.com> On 6/30/2010 6:20 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > On 30 June 2010 10:41, BillK wrote: >> > Damien keeps pointing out that psi appears to be a very weak effect (1 in 1000). > > ... which would make it scientifically interesting, but not very > relevant for practical purposes (say, in determining whether and how > much a casino should adjust its margins to take into account the > infinitesimally better guessing by gamblers than statistics would > allow). > > In fact, I am inclined to believe that "psi-like" effects are much > more widespread than that, especially if one includes things such as > telepathy between two people in front of each other trying to guess > what the other thinks or is going to do. I'm not saying psi is always that weak, just that this is the order of magnitude found in a lot of lab experiments that are, e.g., boring and repetitive, or in lotteries where behavior tends to be highly driven by patterns such as choosing birthdays, etc. Significant psi experiments using college students with no special aptitude or training typically produce low effect sizes, but trained remote viewers using disciplined protocols tend to get much more reliable results (but that doesn't mean every time or even half the time). Even autonomic responses like those detected in most "presentiment" experiments need machine analysis to make them visible--but my guess is that the same process, "in the wild," is what gives good soldiers, cops, etc, that gut feeling advantage on patrol. Certainly this is reported as the experience of a star remote viewer like former Vietnam soldier Joe McMoneagle. Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 30 16:03:08 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 09:03:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game, plus epsilon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <540879.5202.qm@web81505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? If you aren't following this thread but are mildly interested in psi, please read the last paragraph only thanks. Oooooo ouch.? Did anyone here discover a fatal flaw in the design of my game? ? spike --- On Wed, 6/30/10, Florent Berthet wrote: ? >...I'll give it a try (it's kind of a repost from the other thread, sorry) : the higher the number of people who play, the more evenly distributed the choices are, then it's possible that even the less chosen number is chosen by too many people to make the game profitable for the state... Ja, that is one of two problems with my game design.? I started deriving the closed form equation to describe the filthy lucre I would earn, then?found that the profit actually goes down as the number of players goes up.? I want more profit with more customers.? The other problem is that any prole?with 1000 bucks could buy one of each of the three digit numbers, assuring herself of winning 1100 bucks.? Such a deal!? Not. ? If I would need to patch the game in two ways: make it so that it 1) automatically starts a new round when the number of tickets sold reaches 50,000 and 2) defeats the 1000-ticket buyers by some means, such as offering a computer generated random number, which is a buy-or-no-buy. ? The second strategy offers the state an unlimited opportunity to cheat, by rigging the machines to hand out the same couple hundred numbers and seldom or never offering the winning one.? But there may be other ways to defeat the 1000 ticket buyers. ? In any case, I ran the numbers over night, and found that with 50,000 tickets sold per round, randomly chosen, the state would need to pay off an average of 28.7 winners per round, at 1100 would cost about 31,600 per round, for a profit of about 18,400.? In 5000 games I simulated, I found a minimum of 18 winners and a maximum of 34 winners, with a standard deviation of 2.04 winners. ? Now, here this the important point of all this.? There is a phenomenon in this game which?might look exactly like psi, but really isn't.? Imagine you play the 1100 version of this game, with a non-cheating random number generator?in the ticket sales machine as described above, to defeat the 1000 ticket buyers.? If you ran that game, the?number of winners?would mysteriously?be slightly?higher than the numbers I ran last night!? Why?? Becaaaaaauuussseee... (stop reading and think it over first if you wish, otherwise read on...)? because the ticket buyers at the machines would reject any duplications of ticket numbers they already hold or that their pool holds.? The effect wouldn't be large, but over time it would cause the average number of winners to go over 28.7, ja? ? {8^] ? spike ? ? ? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 30 16:31:14 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 09:31:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game In-Reply-To: <20100630223619.6f06a376@optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: <866532.19492.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 6/30/10, David wrote: ? > Oooooo ouch.? Did anyone here discover a fatal flaw in the design of > my game? ... spike Since no one else has answered, "I'll take a guaranteed return of 10% for fatal flaws, Mr Trebeck".? :)? -David. ? Ja.? Now can you think of a way to defeat that?? ? While you are thinking of that, do you guys know about video poker and video slot machines?? When those games started appearing in Vegas in the early 80s, I confidently predicted that no one would play them, because it hands the software maker arbitrary power to cheat.? I was wrong, proles play video gambling like crazy. ? ?spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at bellsouth.net Wed Jun 30 16:31:20 2010 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:31:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] never say never In-Reply-To: <4C2AFBC5.9050400@satx.rr.com> References: <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> <4C2AD77C.2090901@satx.rr.com> <4C2AFBC5.9050400@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <26C8D291-8DAE-4945-B913-8A5E1977832A@bellsouth.net> On Jun 30, 2010, at 4:09 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > >here's an interesting fact: > > > <...the Lottery has established a $10 million liability limit for Cash 3 for any particular three-digit number for each drawing. Should any three digit combination (for example 777) be purchased often enough in a single drawing that would result in the liability limit being exceeded, the Lottery will "cut off" further sales of that specific number combination. In addition, no Front Pair or Back Pair that involves the first two or last two digits, respectively, of the three-digit number will be allowed for that drawing.> What's interesting about that? As I said before it's not a parimutuel so for legal reasons you can't make a bet you can't theoretically cover, in fact I did something similar on this very list. Three years ago I made a bet, I said that if an article favorable to cold fusion is published in the next year in Science or Nature or Physical Review Letters I will pay you one thousand dollars and if such an article does not appear you will pay me one hundred dollars. A few years before that I made the same bet regarding psi. In both cases I considered upping the reward to $10,000 but I wasn't sure how many people would take me up on my offer and it would be immoral to make a bet I couldn't cover. I need not have worried, not one person took my bet and if they had I would have been $100 richer. > >as I predicted, 333 is highly favored--and so are other triples: It's not surprising that people have illogical reasons for favoring one number over another. It would be very surprising indeed if one of those favorite numbers ended up winning more often than probability says it should. If that had happened it would be legitimate evidence for the existence of psi, but that's not what we see. > >The last time 777 hit, Dec. 3, 2006, there were 18,542 people with winning tickets And in the many hundreds of drawings since then those 18,542 people lost money when betting their favorite number, even when they used psi to help them out. > >With that sort of extreme volatility, it might be difficult to calculate just how many winners to expect, With 730 drawings a year, each with a FAR larger sample size than any psi researcher could hope to see, and at least 25 years worth of data, I don't think it would be difficult at all to figure out how many winners you'd expect to see. > >even with the mandatory cut-off that effectively prevents the data from telling us how many people really wanted to select certain combinations. Not much of a problem as I very much doubt the mandatory cut-off has ever actually been used in practice. John K Clark > > A quick search has not found a comprehensive formal statistical study of the results. But you, John, must of course have this information at your fingertips, since you are so certain what it contains. > > 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 ross.evans11 at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 20:58:10 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:58:10 +0100 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again In-Reply-To: <4C2A499F.4000203@satx.rr.com> References: <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <4C2A499F.4000203@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/29/2010 12:12 PM, BillK wrote: > > That's why the CIA cancelled their remote viewing experiments. >> > > They weren't experiments, mostly; they were tasked, military-funded > operations. The most regretable aspect of STAR GATE is that the military and > intel communities funding it were not interested in research; they wanted > operational results and they wanted them *now*. They got enough to keep > funding the program for two decades. The CIA thought Uri Geller had magic powers. The fact that a group to whom you attribute credability spent time investigating this , does not extend that credability to what they were investigating. > > > They had no way of knowing whether the guesses provided any useful >> intelligence unless an agent on the spot went and checked. And if you >> have an agent on the spot anyway,---- who needs a remote viewer? >> > > There's some truth in this, except that you're missing the sometimes > critical value in having a fairly exact place to send your agents on the > (general) spot, knowing what to look for. Details on how this worked are > available in a number of reports on STAR GATE and its predecessors (see > below). > Seemingly not valuable enough for prevent the cancellation of the research > > Why the program was shut down is a rather complicated matter; in part it > was due to program leaders and well trained RVers being moved on to other > posts (you're not allowed to stay in one post in the military), their > replacement by people who increasingly didn't follow the procedures worked > out by earlier RV specialists, resistance by high placed Xian officers who > stated their revulsion to this work which was clearly Satanic in origin (!) > (but extropes have been keeping an eye on the dangerous infiltration of US > armed forces by Xian fundamentalists, right?##), the collapse of the USSR, > and finally because the results were less profitable than the use of > emergent advanced technologies. > > > None of this means that "CIA proved psi doesn't exist"; it means that CIA > were tasked to shut down the program for motives that included all the > above, while admitting that there was indeed an anomalous ability that had > been utilized by the RVers. My friend Dr. Edwin May, the scientific director > of STAR GATE, is working on a detailed history of the program even as we > speak. Meanwhile, there are the AIR review reports, and books by military > remote viewers such as Joe McMoneagle and Paul Smith (Smith's READING THE > ENEMY'S MIND is rather good). > > Damien Broderick > ## "We're Dealing with a Christian Taliban" < > http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18334.htm Right, so having observed the utilisation of psi phenomena of incalculable utility to national security, they walked away. > _______________________________________________ > 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 ross.evans11 at gmail.com Tue Jun 29 17:42:38 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:42:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] psi yet again In-Reply-To: <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:51 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/29/2010 12:55 AM, John Clark wrote: > > Damien does that book explain how in the past 20 years those lotteries >>>> have somehow managed to produce huge and CONSISTENT profits >>>> >>> > >Yes. >>> >> > Delightful, I wait with eager anticipation reports of venture >> capitalists, those most pragmatic of human beings, having invested >> billions of dollars in new start up psi profit making companies, or even >> millions of dollars, or even thousands of dollars, or even hundreds of >> dollars, or even one dollar. >> > > Do concentrate, John. I just agreed that lotto companies manage to be very > profitable, despite the reality of psi. I was hoping you'd explain to me how > and why you thought it would be otherwise. > > Here are some clues: > > > > "If $20 million is bet on a Lotto jackpot, the state will take between 40 > and 50 percent out of that figure immediately. From the half left, smaller > prizes are deducted. In most cases, you're left something like $5 to $8 > million for winning a 14 million to 1 bet." > > So up to half the money goes in taxes *immediately*. How could psi winners > modify that? > > > Additionally, the companies take out their share *from the top*. How could > psi winners modify that? > > Eventually, you might suggest this: if everyone has amazing psi powers and > always guesses the right winning numbers, then everyone will share the major > prize, which will (by design) pay only some 40 or 50% or less of what each > ticket cost. So people will stop betting, and the companies will have to > close. Boo hoo. > > Because we live in the real world, we actually can tell fairly easily that > this story doesn't make any sense. Everyone *can't* predict the winning > numbers all the time. Does this prove that psi does not exist, and in fact > is impossible? > > Do some calculations. Think for a moment about what would be involved if > such an impossible skill as precognition actually existed. How would a thing > like that modify your betting behavior? > > Suppose you have to guess 6 numbers out of 44 or 49. Suppose psi enhances > one guess in 1000, and either confirms your choice or causes you to switch > to another number. How many extra division one winners would you expect to > see in any draw? For full credit, please show your work. > > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > So your argument (if we can call it that) is that psi phenomena exist, because nobody has proven that they don't with 100% confidence. On this basis, are you anticipating the return of the Nazarene any time soon? Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 30 17:11:07 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:11:07 -0500 Subject: [ExI] never say never In-Reply-To: <26C8D291-8DAE-4945-B913-8A5E1977832A@bellsouth.net> References: <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> <4C2AD77C.2090901@satx.rr.com> <4C2AFBC5.9050400@satx.rr.com> <26C8D291-8DAE-4945-B913-8A5E1977832A@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <4C2B7AAB.8020603@satx.rr.com> On 6/30/2010 11:31 AM, John Clark wrote: > With 730 drawings a year, each with a FAR larger sample size than any > psi researcher could hope to see, and at least 25 years worth of data, I > don't think it would be difficult at all to figure out how many winners > you'd expect to see. Since you are so confident in your opinion, why don't you try that (or locate a study by statisticians who have already done so) and let us know how it works out. Damien Broderick From msd001 at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 18:38:50 2010 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:38:50 -0500 Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game In-Reply-To: <866532.19492.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20100630223619.6f06a376@optusnet.com.au> <866532.19492.qm@web81503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2010/6/30 Gregory Jones > While you are thinking of that, do you guys know about video poker and video slot machines?? When those games > started appearing in Vegas in the early 80s, I confidently predicted that no one would play them, because it hands the > software maker arbitrary power to cheat.? I was wrong, proles play video gambling like crazy. Somebody else worries about ensuring the games are fair. Just like somebody else worries about the safety and efficacy of medical products. Just like somebody worries about the warning that coffee is hot and electric hair driers are not to be used in the tub. As long as public opinion is that the gov'ment keeps the proles safe from liars and cheats, it is free to be both. From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 30 19:07:18 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <929358.55279.qm@web81505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 6/30/10, Mike Dougherty wrote: ? 2010/6/30 Gregory Jones >> ...video poker and video slot machines?? ... >>?... I confidently predicted that no one would play them, because it hands the >> software maker arbitrary power to cheat.? I was wrong, proles play video gambling like crazy. >...Somebody else worries about ensuring the games are fair...? Mike? ? Here is where I was going with the comment: in the 1100 game I proposed earlier,?assume we came up with a means of defeating the 1000-ticket buyers, such as offering a randomly selected 3 digit number, then the machine offers only a buy or no buy decision.? Now assume the machines do not have an intentional "feature" in the code which would favor a couple hundred previously selected numbers, and assume?the ticket sales machines do not communicate with each other or do any funny business. ? Under those circumstances, a group could still get together and defeat that game, and even make a profit (as a group)?if carried to an extreme.? Imagine 20 players get together and each selects or is assigned a unique number between 0 and 19.? Now when the game starts, each goes to a machine and asks for a deal-or-no-deal number.? If that number, when divided by 20, gives a remainder matching each prole's assigned number, then the decision is deal, otherwise no deal.? If the number matches a number already held by that prole, it would also be a no-deal.? It would take some patience and discipline, but such a system would increase the chances that someone in the group would get a payoff, for it would more evenly distribute the purchases. ? If something like that were taking place, the outcome of the game would likely still be profitable to the lotto maker, but anomalously,?the profit?would be slightly lower than theory would predict.? The mathematical expectation of the group of 20 would be higher than a mathematical expectation of 57 cents per dollar invested.? ? If the game is modified to where one inserts the money and then is given a randomly generated number, then the game comes out as I calculated, but greatly reduces the incentive to play, for it hands the lotto maker an open?invitation to cheat.? But video slots have that feature, and the proles still play.? I don't get that. ? spike ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Jun 30 19:19:32 2010 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:19:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game, plus epsilon In-Reply-To: <540879.5202.qm@web81505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <173717.38302.qm@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Wouldn't rejection of duplicates allow someone to - with enough patience - build up a set of 1000 uniquely-numbered tickets anyway? Although, if one could only buy one ticket at a time, making the process of getting 1000 tickets somewhat labor intensive, that would be a disincentive for 1000-ticket buyers.? Anyone with $1000 to invest, might have better things to do than spend all day to make a $100 profit.? In fact, if it literally took a standard 8 hour day to buy 1000 tickets (that is, can only buy 1 ticket at a time, and it takes an average of 28.8 seconds to process the order - which might be frustratingly slow for honest players), that's the equivalent of working for a $25,000 wage (assuming Monday-Friday, working 50 weeks - 250 days - out of the year). Granted, that's free from state (but not federal) taxes. Then again, such a scheme might be useful as a safety net/redistribution of income for the competent but unemployed, such as in the current economy.? But, that would invite abuses (paying even less of that for someone to process orders for you; you provide the capital that gets invested) and automation ("sure, honest, this terminal is open to the public and otherwise obeys regulations designed to defeat automation...at least, it is when any inspectors come around..."), and of course there's the question of where this money comes from (even the stupid might not provide all the revenue for such a scheme). Even just $1000 per payout might be useful toward this end, though. Those who know a bit about human psychology would know there are certain numbers that many idiots will always pick regardless - such as 123 and 111 - and simply assign those a practically 0% chance of winning.? Said idiots might provide the payout indefinitely. Now, here this the important point of all this.? There is a phenomenon in this game which?might look exactly like psi, but really isn't.? Imagine you play the 1100 version of this game, with a non-cheating random number generator?in the ticket sales machine as described above, to defeat the 1000 ticket buyers.? If you ran that game, the?number of winners?would mysteriously?be slightly?higher than the numbers I ran last night!? Why?? Becaaaaaauuussseee... (stop reading and think it over first if you wish, otherwise read on...)? because the ticket buyers at the machines would reject any duplications of ticket numbers they already hold or that their pool holds.? The effect wouldn't be large, but over time it would cause the average number of winners to go over 28.7, ja? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lubkin at unreasonable.com Wed Jun 30 18:44:45 2010 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:44:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Spies among us Message-ID: <201006301950.o5UJoCj9005979@andromeda.ziaspace.com> One of the alleged Russian spies, Anna Chapman, was just featured on the news. The reporter mentioned that she is on LinkedIn and Facebook. Curious, I checked her LinkedIn profile. She's in a group for entrepreneurs I'm in, and 14 of my friends know friends of hers. All but two are long-time extropians; the others are at financial firms. -- David. From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 30 20:09:38 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:09:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] alternative gambling game, plus epsilon In-Reply-To: <173717.38302.qm@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <397448.78989.qm@web81502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 6/30/10, Adrian Tymes wrote: ? Adrian wrote many interesting comments.? Among these: ? >Wouldn't rejection of duplicates allow someone to - with enough patience - build up a set of 1000 uniquely-numbered tickets anyway? ? Ja.? I wrote (later on)?of how a team or non-duplication pool could get together and do this.? Good point, that just having individual buyers eliminate thier own duplicates would cause a slight anomaly to the buyers favor, from my sim,? ---* creating a very slight but marginally detectable anomaly that would look a little like weak?psi. *---? ? It wouldn't be at all obvious how it was happening.? Is that cool or what?? {8-] ? ? >...But, that would invite abuses (paying even less of that for someone to process orders for you; you provide the capital that gets invested)... ? Puzzling comment Adrian.? That isn't an abuse, but rather perfectly good business practice,?ethcially legitimate in this setting.? It provides a job to a prole otherwise unemployed, utilizing capital to create more capital.? Granted it doesn't actually create weath, but merely redistributes it.? So much of our activity does exactly that, very inefficiently I might add. ? >...Even just $1000 per payout might be useful toward this end, though. Those who know a bit about human psychology would know there are certain numbers that many idiots will always pick regardless - such as 123 and 111 - and simply assign those a practically 0% chance of winning. No need to put a feature in the software, for the game as proposed would never choose the favored numbers.? No sneaky code necessary.? {8-]? You might have reverse-cold-slot-machine effect, where several proles jump on the last winning number.? No problem, that number will not win again, for the same reason: if more than about 30 (of 50,000 players) try that scheme, they automatically ensure themselves of no payday.? In the 50k limited game will always be won by the proles who chose a number that only 28 to 30 other proles chose.? Any actual strategy would likely be shared by others, who would defeat themselves.? No cheating is necessary in this game to make a profit. ? Your comment is interesting and I think true: the maximum profit for the lotto maker in this case might well be to just offer a 1000 dollar tax free prize, instead of the 1100.? The 1100 prize?would bring in big numbers of players, but would encourage hiring of ticket buyers and the formation of non-duplication pools as you mentioned and as I describe in another post. ? spike ? ? From: Adrian Tymes wingcat at pacbell.net ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Jun 30 20:15:08 2010 From: spike66 at att.net (Gregory Jones) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:15:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Spies among us In-Reply-To: <201006301950.o5UJoCj9005979@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <785843.9590.qm@web81505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 6/30/10, David Lubkin wrote: ? >...One of the alleged Russian spies, Anna Chapman...She's in a group for entrepreneurs I'm in, and 14 of my friends know friends of hers. All but two are long-time extropians; the others are at financial firms... David ? JAYSUS!? A commie spy, right here all along!? OY FREAKING VEY!? They walk among us my friends.? They quit carrying actual cards, back in the 1950s, but they are here.? I see commies,? walking around like regular people.? They don't see each other.? They only see what they want to see.? They don't even know they are commies.? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 19:59:47 2010 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:59:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: psi yet again In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C294EAB.7060902@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: accidentally posted off-list ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Rafal Smigrodzki Date: Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:33 PM Subject: Re: psi yet again To: Damien Broderick On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 6:38 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > Rafal, you invoke Bayes--but how does Bayes accommodate the experience of > those Victorian scientists who went pretty much in one enormous, grudging > jump from unquestioned Divine Creation of each individual and unchanging > species to Darwinian evolution? Huxley famously commented something like, "I > couldn't believe I'd been stupid enough not to see this myself." I suppose > in Kuhnian terms it was a paradigm transition, but how does Bayes account > for a jump from priors set at 99.999999% for God, then in a flash switch to, > say, 86% for evolution? > > I'm not claiming that "conversion" to the psi hypothesis is anything like > that--the evidence is impressive when you take the trouble to look, but > usually not *that* overwhelming. I'm just querying the universal > applicability of Bayes. But I don't know enough about that to judge the > issue. Do please inform me. ### I think that a rational thinker does not need to be aware of the theory of evolution to start questioning religion. There are intrinsic problems with religions (viz. being risible bullshit) which usually prevent the vast majority of non-believers from developing a belief after merely perusing e.g. a Mormon a Hare Krishna booklet. Hardly any adults convert to new religions and most humans will deride the droll stories of other people's gods. The vulnerability to religions afflicts mostly children who under considerable social pressure acquire habits of thought that prevent them from clearly thinking about whatever their parents funneled in early. Still, a rational thinker, starting from a position of disbelief in Allah, Yahwe, Flying Spaghetti and others, should fail to acquire a belief in any of them. Knowing about evolution merely ties a few loose ends with your own story of the world, and for the non-believer does not reinforce non-belief. While it's hard for me to theorize about the innermost convictions of Victorian scientists, I would doubt that any of them had a switch from 99.999% for god to 86% against god and for evolution. I would guess that those who were secret non-believers or agnostics felt empowered to talk about creation after hearing about evolution. It is easier to smack down opponents if you actually have a predictive theory that makes intrinsic sense. Those scientists who truly believe in god even now find ways of either rejecting evolutionary theory or somehow cramming both in their minds (like Francis Collins). This is not to say that radical reinterpretations of data leading the wannabe Bayesian to dramatic flip-flopping on a belief system cannot be triggered by relatively small bits of evidence - however, usually there is a long build-up of tension in the system with large amounts of data forcing more and more arcane adjustments of the system to fit, until one last piece of information triggers a collapse of the system and replacement with a new paradigm. You need that build-up of contradictory data and the need to introduce implausible modifications to orthodoxy for this paradigm shift to occur. So far I haven't had to make up implausible stories to explain away reports of psi. Either, the reports are spectacular but come from tainted sources (professional psychics making money on it, internet stories about Russian secret research programs) or else they come from presumably honest and rigorous researchers but are underwhelming. The former have essentially no Bayesian weight at all, and the latter are weak signals, just barely pinging my belief-gauge up. BTW, I don't buy into the Lotto argument against psi: if psi is a faculty dependent on complex features of the brain to work (like intelligence), then its absence in most people is not suprising even if does give replicative advantage. If you need a 100 genes for it to work but the increase in fitness is small, then the overall selection for it will be weak. A capability manifesting in 2 out 100,000 guesses just won't manifest in the noisy world of casinos and lotteries - why, it's hard to detect even under ideal conditions in the lab. Rafal -- Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD Chief Clinical Officer, Gencia Corporation 706 B Forest St. Charlottesville, VA 22903 tel: (434) 295-4800 fax: (434) 295-4951 This electronic message transmission contains information from the biotechnology firm of Gencia Corporation which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify us by telephone (434-295-4800) or by electronic mail (fportell at genciabiotech.com) immediately. From pharos at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 20:27:55 2010 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 21:27:55 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Spies among us In-Reply-To: <785843.9590.qm@web81505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <201006301950.o5UJoCj9005979@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <785843.9590.qm@web81505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 6/30/10, Gregory Jones wrote: > JAYSUS!? A commie spy, right here all along!? OY FREAKING VEY! > They walk among us my friends.? They quit carrying actual cards, back > in the 1950s, but they are here.? I see commies,? walking around like regular people. > They don't see each other.? They only see what they want to see. > They don't even know they are commies. > > I've just had a look at her Facebook pages. Maybe the FBI has a different interpretation of 'deep-cover' spies. Her Facebook is filled with Russian friends and messages in Russian on her wall. I think if I was a 'deep-cover' spy I wouldn't flaunt my Russian friends and contacts. But maybe it was a double-bluff???? BillK From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 30 20:36:46 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:36:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: psi yet again In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C294EAB.7060902@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2BAADE.9070909@satx.rr.com> On 6/30/2010 2:59 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > accidentally posted off-list and here's my offlist reply: On 6/30/2010 2:33 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > You need that build-up of > contradictory data and the need to introduce implausible modifications > to orthodoxy for this paradigm shift to occur. My guess is that if and when psi is satisfactorily demonstrated to be real, cmplete with theory, former disbelieves will have no lack of prior experiences to confirm this. "Oh, yeah, there was that time when my sister had her heart attack 1000 miles away and I was on the phone a minute later trying to call her, full of terror," etc. I'm not sure about the following (because Sheldrake's "morphic resonance" shtick sounds like the purest woowoo to me), but it sounds as if they took good precautions in the recent telephone experiments: > if psi is a > faculty dependent on complex features of the brain to work (like > intelligence), then its absence in most people is not suprising even > if does give replicative advantage. If you need a 100 genes for it to > work but the increase in fitness is small, then the overall selection > for it will be weak. A capability manifesting in 2 out 100,000 guesses > just won't manifest in the noisy world of casinos and lotteries - why, > it's hard to detect even under ideal conditions in the lab. There's something to that; I recall replying to Lee Corbin that IQs above 150 are obviously impossible, because you could test just about anyone in the street without their getting over, say, 125. (Certainly the STAR GATE evidence seems to show that you need highly selected psi-gifted people before you can train them to moderately successful levels.) But I think it might also be that psi tends to kick in when it is ethologically appropriate rather than when scientists try to elicit it--knowing when someone or something is watching you, about to call you on the phone, etc. Damien Broderick From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 21:04:58 2010 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:04:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: psi yet again In-Reply-To: <4C2BAADE.9070909@satx.rr.com> References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C294EAB.7060902@satx.rr.com> <4C2BAADE.9070909@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > My guess is that if and when psi is satisfactorily demonstrated to be real, > cmplete with theory, former disbelieves will have no lack of prior > experiences to confirm this. "Oh, yeah, there was that time when my sister > had her heart attack 1000 miles away and I was on the phone a minute later > trying to call her, full of terror," etc. ### Not me :) I really do not have any spiritual/eldritch experiences to tell about. Mine is a robot mind. Although, yesterday I saw one of the most beautiful rainbows in my life - a huge 180 degree arc, resplendent against a backdrop of leaden clouds, evergreen and snow-capped mountains, shining in the rays of the sun setting over the Puget sound. There were even two secondary rainbows flanking it. Robots feel too. Rafal From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 30 21:24:05 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 16:24:05 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: psi yet again In-Reply-To: References: <4C266A99.8030706@satx.rr.com> <4C2678F9.4050801@satx.rr.com> <4C26954D.5020704@satx.rr.com> <4C269D20.8090005@satx.rr.com> <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C294EAB.7060902@satx.rr.com> <4C2BAADE.9070909@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4C2BB5F5.70106@satx.rr.com> On 6/30/2010 4:04 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > I really do not have any spiritual/eldritch experiences to tell about. Please don't imagine that I'm putting forward eldritch experiences as evidence for psi or spirit--most of them probably have quite commonplace explanations of the sort we all can enumerate in a few seconds. However, if psi *is* ever generally accepted and suitably theorized, people will surely backwardly modify their assessment of some such events, which after all *might* be due to more than chance coincidence, paradeilia, forgetfulness of disconfirming instances, etc. It's a bit like evolutionary biology or, better still, history: you usually can't *predict* something from first principles, but after it happens you can often see how and why it happened, and observe that this comports with your general theory (if it's sound). I liked the rainbow description! Yer a poet, Rafal! Damien Broderick From sparge at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 20:02:35 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 16:02:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Debate, EP and psi In-Reply-To: <4C2B592C.2080308@satx.rr.com> References: <4C2B592C.2080308@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > I'm not saying psi is always that weak, just that this is the order of > magnitude found in a lot of lab experiments... And, of course, there's always the possibility of enhancing it through training and technology. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 22:37:33 2010 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:37:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Oxytocin and Intergroup Conflict Message-ID: >From AAAS Science Roundup snip "The results thus suggest that there may be a neurobiological basis for intergroup conflict in humans." Keith From sparge at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 23:10:25 2010 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 19:10:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Hitchens diagnosed with cancer Message-ID: BREAKING -- From Huffingtonpost.com Christopher Hitchens' Cancer: Author Undergoing Chemotherapy For Esophageal cancer More: Christopher Hitchens, Christopher Hitchens Cancer, Christopher Hitchens Esophageal Cancer, Media News Christopher Hitchens has been diagnosed with esophageal cancer. The Vanity Fair and Slate columnist and author of recent memoir Hitch 22 recently suspended his book tour for what was described as "personal reasons." Now, he reveals in a statement: I have been advised by my physician that I must undergo a course of chemotherapy on my esophagus. This advice seems persuasive to me. I regret having had to cancel so many engagements at such short notice. Hitchens, a well-known smoker, attempted in 2008 to quit but reportedly still smokes, according to a recent Washington Post article. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Frankmac at ripco.com Wed Jun 30 23:30:50 2010 From: Frankmac at ripco.com (Frank McElligott) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 19:30:50 -0400 Subject: [ExI] alternate gambling game Message-ID: <00ad01cb18ac$4ab79d60$ad753644@sx28047db9d36c> Every month casino's report wins and losses to Atlantic City and Nevada gaming commissions. They are part of the public record for all to see. Average win at roulette is 12% average win at Craps is 18% Both figures are larger than they should be as Craps is 1.414 house advantage, and Roulette because it zero and double zero figures at 1/19 or 6% Blackjack also wins for the house with an over ten percent figure too. These larger figures than what should happen based upon probabilities is caused by poor play, drunks, and some say fear of winning, but that is another story for another day Frank -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Frankmac at ripco.com Wed Jun 30 23:50:56 2010 From: Frankmac at ripco.com (Frank McElligott) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 19:50:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] roulette players Message-ID: <00b401cb18af$1832ffd0$ad753644@sx28047db9d36c> A long time ago, some Englishman went to China with a team to play roulette for 30 days 24 hours a day. Each roll was recorded and the results run though filters looking for a pattern, any pattern at all, just one would pay them for a life time. None were found, so the book was written and published. What I found interesting was some numbers slept(never won) for over 500 spins. Have friends who work as dealers on the boats(casinos) in Indiana and Illinois, and they say they can hit a section of the wheel anytime they want, I believe them, but anyone who attempts to win that way loses, as the thrill of the unknown is removed when you can not guess,,, Gambling requires the guess for the fix, without the guess you are a machine(computer like) Sample In the NBA playoffs when a series goes to a seventh game, the home team wins at a rate of 7 to 1. Everyone knows this ratio who bets on Basketball in fact ESPN tells them it over and over. But when the Lakers played the Celtics, the money flows were are 50% for each team in Las Vegas. When it come to Championship's you bet with your heart not some 7 to 1 ratio of success. Frank -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Jun 30 23:58:42 2010 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:58:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] gaming reports In-Reply-To: <00ad01cb18ac$4ab79d60$ad753644@sx28047db9d36c> References: <00ad01cb18ac$4ab79d60$ad753644@sx28047db9d36c> Message-ID: <4C2BDA32.10206@satx.rr.com> On 6/30/2010 6:30 PM, Frank McElligott wrote: > > Every month casinos report wins and losses to Atlantic City and Nevada > gaming commissions. They are part of the public record for all to see. Good tip! Some interesting looking data here: e.g.: where the house hold percentage jumps around a fair bit, year by year (6.04% in 2003 to 7.49% in 2007 & 2008, with a +0.61% overall trend 2000-2009). So much for the confident announcement that these huge statistics must be highly stable, making any psi (or other interfering) component blazingly obvious. So how is this degree of volatility possible, anyway? Degrees of despair and drunkenness might explain card games, but slot machines vary from 5.23% to 6.16% in eight years. If it just means they're crooked, and cook the books differently from year to year, that would invalidate any conclusions one might draw concerning supervenient effects. Damien Broderick From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 23:09:41 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 00:09:41 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Excellent article on adiabatic quantum computation Message-ID: http://dwave.wordpress.com/2010/06/29/how-do-you-measure-the-speed-of-an-adiabatic-quantum-computer/ Incredible how quickly D-wave are progressing. It's an unfortunate consequence of the complexity of the mathematics behind the technology, that it is not better covered by the MSM. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ross.evans11 at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 17:25:26 2010 From: ross.evans11 at gmail.com (Ross Evans) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:25:26 +0100 Subject: [ExI] never say never In-Reply-To: <4C2B7AAB.8020603@satx.rr.com> References: <4C26AB88.2000009@satx.rr.com> <4C26BED5.6070409@satx.rr.com> <4C28F4B0.2060208@satx.rr.com> <4C297175.4090308@satx.rr.com> <57519E9F-6A51-4319-9F1F-BE3D1C315DFE@bellsouth.net> <4C2984CF.6000905@satx.rr.com> <4C2997EF.3070206@satx.rr.com> <61D8320D-D73D-4BCF-B272-3E4266B27514@bellsouth.net> <4C2A22EE.8030601@satx.rr.com> <009A85B4-D0DF-4979-9371-E0B55472A79A@bellsouth.net> <4C2A37FB.9050300@satx.rr.com> <35F4B5D4-1A8B-4FE7-BA05-C1C48D29BCD2@bellsouth.net> <4C2AD77C.2090901@satx.rr.com> <4C2AFBC5.9050400@satx.rr.com> <26C8D291-8DAE-4945-B913-8A5E1977832A@bellsouth.net> <4C2B7AAB.8020603@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 6/30/2010 11:31 AM, John Clark wrote: > > With 730 drawings a year, each with a FAR larger sample size than any >> psi researcher could hope to see, and at least 25 years worth of data, I >> don't think it would be difficult at all to figure out how many winners >> you'd expect to see. >> > > Since you are so confident in your opinion, why don't you try that (or > locate a study by statisticians who have already done so) and let us know > how it works out. > > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > You are making the claim for psi phenomena, therefore the onus is on you to provide the relevant data. Ross -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From suburban.sam at gmail.com Wed Jun 30 21:03:10 2010 From: suburban.sam at gmail.com (Suburban Sam) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:03:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Spies among us In-Reply-To: References: <201006301950.o5UJoCj9005979@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: > From: David Lubkin > Date: Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 11:44 AM > Subject: [ExI] Spies among us > To: exI chat list > > > One of the alleged Russian spies, Anna Chapman, was just featured on > the news. The reporter mentioned that she is on LinkedIn and Facebook. > > Curious, I checked her LinkedIn profile. She's in a group for entrepreneurs > I'm in, and 14 of my friends know friends of hers. All but two are > long-time > extropians; the others are at financial firms. > > > -- David. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > Seems like a bit of a stretch to me. _______ http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/4684/stenoj.jpg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: