[ExI] Social computability

Rafal Smigrodzki rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com
Thu Mar 3 02:00:40 UTC 2011

Richard, I won't try to address all the emotionally charged questions
you posed but instead I can only invite you to try to dispassionately
analyze the problem of efficiency - What arrangements are in general
more likely to work in terms of achieving whatever goals are set for a
complex system, i.e. a network? What network topology is more robust -
one that contains redundancy or one that doesn't? Which networks
compute better - ones with or ones without feedback links?

I understand you are a student of artificial intelligence - try to
apply your knowledge of efficient network computation to conceptualize
the society as a network that calculates the methods of achieving
goals inscribed in the structure of the network's nodes.

I am sure you will be able to achieve a deeper understanding of social
reality and, more importantly, the vistas for future social
development, once you rise above emotions, especially empathy, and


On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com> wrote:
> spike wrote:
>>> ... On Behalf Of Richard Loosemore
>>> ... people coming together and realizing that it is in everyone's best
>> interest if the community is forced to pool their resources to pay for
>> things like roads and theaters and bridges and schools and police
>> forces...
>> Indeed?  The critical difference in my thinking and yours is found in this
>> one sentence.  People coming together for roads, bridges, schools and
>> police, yes.  Theatres?  No.  That is exclusively the domain of private
>> industry, and the root of the tension between libertarian and statist.  It
>> is not in everyone's best interest to pool resources to build theatres.
> The inclusion of "theaters" was strictly optional:  not essential to my
> argument.  A throwaway.
> So let me see if I understand:  you are saying that without the word
> "theater" in my description, what I said bore no resemblance to the
> philosophy of libertarianism?
> Would it be more accurate, then, to say that Libertarianism is about
> SUPPORTING the  government funding of:
>   Roads,
>   Bridges,
>   Police,
>   Firefighters,
>   Prisons,
>   Schools,
>   Public transport in places where universal use of cars would
>      bring cities to a standstill, or where poor people would
>      otherwise be unable to escape from ghettos,
>   The armed forces,
>   Universities, and publicly funded scholarships for poor students,
>   National research laboratories like the Centers
>      for Disease Control and Prevention,
>   Snow plows,
>   Public libraries,
>   Emergency and disaster assistance,
>   Legal protection for those too poor to fight against the
>      exploitative power of corporations,
>   Government agencies to scrutinize corrupt practices by
>      corporations and wealthy individuals,
>   Basic healthcare for old people who worked all their lives
>      for corporations who paid them so little in salary that
>      they could not save for retirement without starving to
>      death before they reached retirement,
>   And sundry other programs that keep the very poor just above
>      the subsistence level, so we do not have to step over their
>      dead bodies on the street all the time, and so they do not
>      wander around in feral packs, looking for middle-class people
>      that they can kill and eat...
> .... but it is about NOT supporting the government funding of theaters?
> In that case I misunderstood, and all western democracies are more or less
> libertarian already, give or take the 0.0001 percent of their funding that
> goes toward things like theaters and opera houses.
> Richard Loosemore
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD
Chief Clinical Officer,
Gencia Corporation
706 B Forest St.

Charlottesville, VA 22903

tel: (434) 295-4800

fax: (434) 295-4951

This electronic message transmission contains information from the
biotechnology firm of Gencia Corporation which may be confidential or
privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended
recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use
of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have
received this electronic transmission in error, please notify us by
telephone (434-295-4800) or by electronic mail
(fportell at genciabiotech.com) immediately.

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list