From: Lyle Burkhead (lybrhed@earthlink.net)
Date: Sun Apr 18 1999 - 01:37:09 MDT
Michael Lorrey wrote,
> a person on the bleeding edge will be far more likely to consider
> primitive humans to be included in their perception of 'humanity'
> than a primitive human is to consider the transhuman being
> to be 'human', simply because the individual primitive's
> slope of perception is much less steep than that of a transhuman.
You may be right. If so, it would be prudent not to call yourself a
"transhuman." That's just asking for trouble. I don't want to be part of
God's Chosen Transhumanity, or the Transhuman Master Race (which are two
sides of the same coin), I just want to be a ridiculously healthy
bodybuilder. I don't think primitive humans will have a problem with that.
> If the future is to be a land of plenty, then there is
> no reason to use force to make sure everyone gets
> what somebody considers to be everyone's 'fair' share.
No reason... well, maybe there is no reason. The world is already a land
of plenty for those who choose to make use of opportunities. Some people
make other choices, and some people always will. Why is force being used
in Yugoslavia, Palestine, Kashmir, Tibet, and South Africa? Why do narks
use force against people who smoke pot? There are many "reasons" for using
force, and in the future force will still be used for the same "reasons."
As I browse through the list archives, I find that some people want to be
Powers, and wipe out everybody else; and others say "If YOU get anywhere
close to being a Power, I'll nuke your lab!" There may be an element of
teenage silliness in this, but grownups play these games too, with real
nukes.
I don't want to be a Power, but the situation leaves me no choice. In the
coming decades I intend to build an elaborate bodyguard around myself, to
protect myself from violence of all kinds. The external immune system is
just as important as the internal immune system.
Going back a couple of weeks, I wrote,
> This kind of thinking weakens you. This is not the way to see reality
> clearly. On a battlefield, in business, or anywhere, the one who sees
> clearly wins. Our way of thinking (“calibration”) is exemplified by the
> geniebusters site. It strengthens us. It does lead to clear perceptions.
to which Lee Daniel Crocker replied
> I can think of a much better measure of clear-headed thinking: poker.
> In war, technology and physical skills have a big impact,
> and the game is very negative-sum. Business is so positive-sum
> that even those with fuzzy minds can make money.
> Poker, on the other hand, is a pure zero-sum contest of minds
> rationally evaluating the exact odds of possible outcomes, the gain and
loss
> of each, investing ("raise") and liquidating ("fold") as appropriate,
> winner take all. In many years of experience -- including 6 months
> as a pro -- I can confidently state that all misconceptions,
superstitions,
> and emotional attachments are quickly punished by the clear-headed.
My experience of poker is much more limited, but it tends to confirm your
experience. However, poker is basically a waste of time. It doesn't lead
anywhere, and you can't make real money (hundreds of millions of dollars)
playing poker. Poker tests your perception of your immediate surroundings,
but the real challenge is to decide which game to play. That's the real
test of your perception of reality.
In war, technology and physical skills do have a big impact, and they
depend on planning. You have to foresee years or decades in advance that
you need technology and physical skills, and get ready for the moment when
those things are needed. The technology that you bring to the battlefield
reflects your perception of reality. In business, you have to decide years
or decades in advance which business to go into, and how to prepare for it,
and then implement your plan. It may be true that even those with fuzzy
minds can make money, but it is also true that a lot of people lose money.
Extropy.com, for example, is in debt. There is no money to be made in
propagating memes. That's the wrong business to go into.
We are entering the age of memetic competition. What kind of meme can
create a phenotype around itself that has the strength to survive and
become immortal? An ism? A corporation? or some new kind of meme?
Lyle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:33 MST