From extropians-request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Sat Jun 12 05:21:49 1993 Return-Path: Received: from usc.edu by chaph.usc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+ucs-3.0) id AA18278; Sat, 12 Jun 93 05:21:47 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: from wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu by usc.edu (4.1/SMI-3.0DEV3-USC+3.1) id AA09797; Sat, 12 Jun 93 05:21:44 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: by wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu (5.65/4.0) id ; Sat, 12 Jun 93 06:09:29 -0400 Message-Id: <9306121009.AA17725@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu> To: ExI-Daily@gnu.ai.mit.edu Date: Sat, 12 Jun 93 06:09:05 -0400 X-Original-Message-Id: <9306121009.AA17718@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu> X-Original-To: Extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu From: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Subject: Extropians Digest V93 #0320 X-Extropian-Date: Remailed on June 12, 373 P.N.O. [10:09:28 UTC] Reply-To: Extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Status: OR Extropians Digest Sat, 12 Jun 93 Volume 93 : Issue 0320 Today's Topics: Against Nanotech As A Public Good [1 msgs] DIET: Rational Choice [1 msgs] Diet: Natural Toxins & Evolution [1 msgs] ID: Alarming Development [1 msgs] LIFE-EX:Durk & Sandy Interviewed In Latest Laissez-Faire Catalog [1 msgs] NANO: what hope for normal robots? [2 msgs] NANOTECH: Bearding the Drexler in his Den [1 msgs] PLEDGE: Help me buy Extropy ad in WIRED [1 msgs] Review: The Aenead? [1 msgs] SOC: Birth Order and Extropians [1 msgs] SPACE/FREE: Governments in Space [7 msgs] Vegetarian/Cryonics menace... [1 msgs] diet [1 msgs] hair [1 msgs] jokes [1 msgs] unsubscribe me [3 msgs] Administrivia: This is the digested version of the Extropian mailing list. Please remember that this list is private; messages must not be forwarded without their author's permission. To send mail to the list/digest, address your posts to: extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu To send add/drop requests for this digest, address your post to: exi-daily-request@gnu.ai.mit.edu To make a formal complaint or an administrative request, address your posts to: extropians-request@gnu.ai.mit.edu If your mail reader is operating correctly, replies to this message will be automatically addressed to the entire list [extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu] - please avoid long quotes! The Extropian mailing list is brought to you by the Extropy Institute, through hardware, generously provided, by the Free Software Foundation - neither is responsible for its content. Forward, Onward, Outward - Harry Shapiro (habs) List Administrator. Approximate Size: 55739 bytes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 12 Jun 93 01:46 BST From: grlw1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Rich Walker) Subject: NANO: what hope for normal robots? (This rambles a bit. It has, however, got a point) I've been reading these nanotech threads, and it's starting to worry me. See, up until I started reading this list, my nanotech knowledge was the `bs in the pub' level, but now I find I've managed to get fairly clued up on it, without even pursuing references. And it's starting to worry me. Not, I hasten to add, for any un-EC reason like, fear of consequences (Why didn't Pandora get a Nobel Prize? She left the committee in the box...) but for a horribly personal one. See, I've spent the last four or five years working with a bunch of other guys on the general-purpose robot. I'll post a history/current status/next steps when I've had it vetted by the rest of them, but, for now, the basic theory is to produce a humanoid robot that's pretty good at most of the tasks people don't want to do. And we reckon it can be done, and it'll take us, we tend to say, 20-30 years of gentle puttering along at it to do it, or more if we get funding. Sorry, I meant _less_ if we get funding, I've been reading these anti-Gov't-scheme postings too much. Now, much of the AI that's going into it is, relatively speaking, very standard stuff: there are a few quirks of our own, and we'll probably put more in as we get more AI done. Main methods: 1. Find neater methods of doing x 2. If there already exist a,b, & c, synergise. I say that we're using `standard' AI, because when we saw Brooks' work on subsumption architecture and reactive planning stuff we looked at, and said, `oh yes, spinal cords, very handy, but our design model has them in already' (Our design model: Gray's Anatomy, ...) So, we found ourselves less likely to think in terms of `small simple machines are good', and considering them suddenly, without gradual mulling over time, has shocked me somewhat. Now, the nanotech guys (and Brooks' mob) talk a lot about nano-machines doing useful tasks, in an interesting way. Certainly, I can see that for a large number of e.g. domestic tasks, a specific nanomachine could do the task much more efficiently and less obtrusively. But you have to have the specific machine. Whereas the general-purpose robot can do any task you or I can describe to it, but not as efficiently as the nanomachine. And having been pondering the different approaches, nano and macro, I'm starting to have _doubts_, in a very serious fundamental manner. Indeed, I think I've hit my second crisis of direction. The problem is this: Would I be being more useful (in the strict Fuller manner) working on nanotech or in this conventional robotics? Indeed, is it _worth_ working in conventional robotics. It looks like the lead time in nanotech is big enough that, five years after we get useful robots out the door, the first useful nanomachines will turn up. But I've still got this problem: would it be better to work on the one, or the other? An even more stark viewpoint: is nanotech going to be more useful than robotics, whatever the visionaries say. I mean, `free' energy is all very well, but who's going to fill in the paperwork? Does anyone have any ideas or useful suggestions? (Sorry to lay such a heavy thing on you, but can you see a sensible response to this question turing up from anywhere else?) ^^^^^^ omigawd i can tell it's too late in the evening Rich! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1993 20:18:16 -0400 (EDT) From: esr@snark.thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) Subject: NANOTECH: Bearding the Drexler in his Den > Thats the same weekend as the Extropians gala, isn't it? Extropians gala? First I've heard of it! -- Eric S. Raymond ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 93 17:57:12 -0700 From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: SPACE/FREE: Governments in Space Something should be said this time around about the likelihood that space colonies will be *very controlled, very totalitarian*, at least for a long while. This is of course a debatable point, and a private space colony may well look like "corporatism," the kind of semi-totalitarianism most of us have worked under (you don't own your cubicle, you don't won the contents, you are told to follow the dress code, and so on....I'm not blasting corporate life, just noting that it's more communal and totalitarian, in a special kind of way, than most communist societies. That it's voluntary is an important saving grace.) In space, the logistic constraints, the psychological monitoring, etc., are likely to produce a very controlled atmosphere. Certainly more tightly controlled than, say, Antarctic bases. Perhaps more libertarian colonies may evolve, but not at first. In my opinion, of course. Robin Hanson writes: >Space may indeed be marginally a better place to found an anarchist >colony, but the margin may not be high, and not much due to a superior >defensibility of space colonies. > >The important thing is for a local majority to want to be an anarchy, >to be temporarily able to make the switch, and from then on to not be >seen as a threat by its neighbors, and strong enough to deter >aggression. The best defense is from trading partners and allies who >want you to stay around, and from a strong local economy. I suspect the pattern will be as seen in previous waves of emmigration: religious colonies (so favored by SF writers who populate L-5 colonies with religious schismatics) and business enterprises. The religious colonies will of course be autocratic in various ways, and the business colonies will likely resemble Aramco facilities in Saudi Arabia: self-contained communities in a hostile environment. But still not a freedom-loving anarchy in any sense I'd care to live in. Like I said, debatable. -Tim May -- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: by arrangement Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 93 17:57:06 -0700 From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: unsubscribe me Ray Cromwell writes: >Michael P. Hall writes: >> >> Could you please take me off the extropian newsgroup >> I am sick of getting all of these boring messages from egotistical >> know it alls who have as much wisdom as my cat > > It's amazing that some people simply can not unsubscribe a mailing >list/newsgroup (btw, this is a mailing list) without getting in >a snide remark as the last word. How true! I figure if I ever unsubscribed from this list, I'll at least have the decency to say nothing, to just not be here one day. (See, this'll keep folks guessing!) And I can't find any postings I archived for this mysterious Michael P. Hall, so perhaps it *was* his cat who subscribed. (My two cats are sitting here near me whenever I'm at my Mac, but they have too much sense to post!) -Tim, cattily ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 93 20:06:23 CST From: "" Subject: SOC: Birth Order and Extropians On Fri, 11 Jun 93 14:40:45 PDT, Robin Hanson wrote: >Before I tell you which children support vs. oppose new theories, I'd >like to survey extropians. So please email me responses to: > >What order child were you (1st, 2nd, etc.)? First, with a gap of 7 years before the next one. >How many children did your parents have? Two. >Do you think yourself more or less likely to support new theories, > right or wrong, than the average person? Not sure. > Dan Goodman dsg@staff.tc.umn.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 93 17:56:56 -0700 From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: SPACE/FREE: Governments in Space Nick Szabo replies to my quibble about heat signatures: >It's probably easier to make other asteroids look warm. With >km^2 size mirrors solar energy is practically free, so we can heat >thousands of km^2 of surface: large thin-film balloons, asteroid surfaces, >tank farms, industrial sites, habitats, etc. Using a pattern-generating >paint gun we can create quite sophisticated IR patterns >that make thousands of km^2 of surface area IR-indistiguishable in >terms of habitat vs. industrial vs. dead. Crypto-surface science. Ah, clever! But the profiles might still look slightly different, given the heating profiles from surface heating vs. heating from within...the cooldown profiles should provide clues as to which is which. And sensors can watch to see which asteroids have been "painted" by the heating beams and take this into account. The problem is that the attackers have *months* or even *years* (before the war begins, or as it is building up) to map out which asteroids are inhabited or contain factories.... "Counter-asteroid warfare" will be a new field of study. >For extra stealth, just keep moving the various pieces around; >by the time the probe data is beamed back to supercomputers and >analyzed it will be out of date. Except it'll take on the order of *hours* or *days* to move pieces around, but only fractions of that to analyze trajectories, even changing ones, on the computers of tomorrow (or perhaps even of a few years from now). The statistic is that there are 10x as many rocks for each 10x decrease in size. The number of human-habitable rocks will be large, but not nearly as large as tracking all the little rocks will be. The habitable rocks will likely be > 100 m in size (anything less is too small, is not enough shielding space, is too fragile for mining, etc.--just my guesses), and may be as large as > 300 m or even larger. These should all be trivially locatable and trackable, and will not be able to be moved or hidden with any ease. Again, the attackers have months or years to do "targeting" and will be ready to go when the balloon goes up (or wherever it goes in space). >This reminds me of one of the Fermi-paradox theories, that ET >civilizations are out there but hiding on purpose, perhaps from >marauding VNMs that home on signs of "intelligence". (And are >coming our way even as I type! :-) I am sure they are already here. And they will act when they find signs of intelligence. So far, they haven't acted. -Tim May -- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: by arrangement Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 93 21:46:24 WET DST From: rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray) Subject: SPACE/FREE: Governments in Space How about dropping a few asteroids into near sun orbits? Locate your colony there, forget about IR signatures when you've got a corona in the background. -- Ray Cromwell | Engineering is the implementation of science; -- -- EE/Math Student | politics is the implementation of faith. -- -- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu | - Zetetic Commentaries -- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1993 19:15:54 -0800 (PDT) From: phoenix@ugcs.caltech.edu (Phoenix) Subject: SPACE/FREE: Governments in Space It would take more time and energy to construct, but what about (as someone else sort of suggested) colonies inside asteroids? It would also limit the number of available ones somewhat, but still...find a kilometer diameter asteroid and hollow out the inner region, leaving a 100 meter thick shell. Of course more powerful explosives (bigger nukes, a few ounces of antimatter) could break through that, but still... with bigger ones it might work. Obnoxious logistically, but also obnoxious to attack. Which raises an important resource allocation question: Who gets Ceres? (Or the ultimate solar-orbit asteroid...Mercury. Not that stealth is a question there but there's lots of free energy around) -- ->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>{Phoenix<>Damien R. Sullivan<> X-) Kiljoy}<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<- || 6x9=42 | AIXELSYD | 1374245896=4 | Libertarian Dictatorship! || || Honk if you're American and have heard of Steeleye Span... || -==========================================================================- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1993 21:02:37 -0500 From: "Phil G. Fraering" Subject: Vegetarian/Cryonics menace... Much has been written on this list about the alleged health benefits of going to a vegetarian diet or some fascimille thereof. Some have even talked about the need to purge all animal products from their diet, or anything that might possibly increace lifespan. People who object are labelled as having "deathoid prejudice" and not worthy of attention. Well, I'd like to fight back, with the facts about this "vegetarianism" "movement." It isn't a movement; it's a meme, formulated to elicit favorable behavior from humans. Who would do such a thing? Well, basically the Grey Aliens. Why? Their masters, the Reptoids, who will be arriving Real Soon Now (maybe a couple of centuries) are a degenerate race; their preferred sustenance is always sentient beings. Not all Reptoids are purely utilitarian (although the utilitarians are so only with respect to their own species) in their desire to partake of human flesh. Some are gourmands. When the first captured humans were brought to Zeta Reticuli, it was found that the flesh of the ones that had been avoiding meat had the best taste and texture. They were consumed so fast, there wasn't time to extablish a breeding population. This would happen to any more brought back on the saucers (which have a limited hauling capacity). So a plan has been formed: while the Reptoid StarGate Wormhole is moved into Solar space, advance agents will spawn memes on Earth to better prepare the kine for their ultimate fate. Spurious scientific studies are generated, "showing" that vegetarianism extends lifespan... Immortality is in some circles pushed as being a positive thing instead of a negative thing (as if those pitiful humans wouldn't spend eternity pining for their lost high school sweethearts!). Special submemes are generated, so that kine will be available for the Vegan market (the reptoids on Vega are finicky and _don't_ like any meat that was fed with anything other than vegetables and grain. Milk and fish are out.)... Finally: it will take a couple centuries to tie in Earth to the major "railheads" and slaughterhouses of the other star systems. Billions of kine will die in this time period, and the meat will be buried in the ground to rot. This must be combatted. Therefore a new meme will be introduced, to keep the humans from destroying all that valuable food: the idea that by freezing their dead in liquid nitrogen, they may someday be revived. While this may be physically true, the plain fact of the matter is that noone is going to develop this technique for humans beyond the anti-freezerburn stage. (In order to keep them from developing the technique on their own, the Greys are manipulating some humans to start a government project to "develop" the technology. It worked for arresting the development of spaceflight...) I think I'll let you absorb this shocking news (although in retrospect it seems shocking that noone on Earth besides me has realized the danger) for a while before I educate you about more of this fiendish conspiracy. Klaus! von Future Tertius ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 93 20:34:10 PDT From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: SPACE/FREE: Governments in Space Ray Cromwell writes" > How about dropping a few asteroids into near sun orbits? Locate your > colony there, forget about IR signatures when you've got a corona in the > background. 1. The equilibrium temperature is high (how high depends on how close). A mirrored surface changes this only slightly, unless orientation is arranged very carefully. The expense of this should make this prohibitive on non-colonies, i.e., decoys. And so the habitats are indentifiable. 2. The attackers, no matter where the habitats are located, still have lots of time to analyze traffic, supply flow, etc., so as to identify the inhabited asteroids. 3. By the way, the solar system by then (2100?) will be completely observable, with arrays of telescopes, sensors, small probes (which can drift into enemy space, map colonies, then leave...all while being much harder to detect than the inhabited colonies are), etc. It will be hard to hide. (One scheme I thought of while considering Nick's notion of moving around the rocks in a kind of shell game, was a kind of "chaotic remailer," analogous to the Cypherpunks remailers, wherein some number of rocks would approach and go into a tight orbit. The scattering matrix could perhaps be manipulated at the point of closest approach with small nudges and rocket burns so as to "randomize" the exit trajectories. Perhaps this could even be done in the shadow of larger rocks, or even in the shadow of large artificial thin-film shields. But if such large optical shields can be built, this may be enough to hide the rocks from inner system observation.) -Tim P.S. Maybe we're all laying the groundwork for an SF novel about warfare in the asteroids. -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1993 22:27:53 -0500 From: extr@jido.b30.ingr.com (Craig Presson) Subject: unsubscribe me In <9306112130.AA10770@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu>, Michael P. Hall writes: |> Could you please take me off the extropian newsgroup |> I am sick of getting all of these boring messages from egotistical |> know it alls who have as much wisdom as my cat I wondered what they did at the National Institutes of Mental Health. Ironic, ain't it? ^ / ------/---- extropy@jido.b30.ingr.com (Freeman Craig Presson) /AS 5/20/373 P.N.O. /ExI 4/373 P.N.O. ** E' and E-choice spoken here ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1993 21:46:25 -0600 (MDT) From: Stanton McCandlish Subject: LIFE-EX:Durk & Sandy Interviewed In Latest Laissez-Faire Catalog > > The reason I mention this is that there is a picture of the two of them, > > and Durk looks _appalling_. He appears to have been embalmed. Badly. > > > > Not at all a good advertisement for their product... > > They operate on the "eat garbage, don't exercise, and just take loads > of supplements and smart drugs" principle. This should be a lesson to > others who believe in the same path. (Not to say that supplements > aren't good, but they are only half the battle.) Well, Sandy is unattractive, and Durk is downright ugly, but they are both quite older than they look in most pictures. Still not a good ad, I agree. Neither of them are. Both of them, in their books anyway, recommend a healthy diet, so I dunno where the "eat garbage" charge comes from... -- When marriage is outlawed only outlaws will be inlaws! Stanton McCandlish, SysOp: Noise in the Void DataCenter Library BBS Internet anton@hydra.unm.edu IndraNet: 369:1/1 FidoNet: 1:301/2 Snail: 1811-B Coal Pl. SE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87108 USA Data phone: +1-505-246-8515 (24hr, 1200-14400 v32bis, N-8-1) Vox phone: +1-505-247-3402 (bps rate varies, depends on if you woke me up...:) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1993 23:57:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Carol Moore Subject: unsubscribe me > In <9306112130.AA10770@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu>, Michael P. Hall writes: > |> Could you please take me off the extropian newsgroup > |> I am sick of getting all of these boring messages from egotistical > |> know it alls who have as much wisdom as my cat > Actually, Mr. Hall has a point here. For even the wisest of humans may not be as wise as a cat--within the cats limited potential for wisdom. Given humans huge potential for wisdom--and the little wisdom that most of us possess-- my quess is a higher percentage of cats fulfill their wisdom potential than do humans. But then maybe that's why humans evolved--because of some inner drive to explore greater areas of wisdom than that possessed by less evolved (though infinitely more graceful and loveable) cats... Signed: Carol the occassionally wise... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1993 22:58:31 -0500 From: extr@jido.b30.ingr.com (Craig Presson) Subject: Review: The Aenead? In <9306112322.AA13435@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu>, "Phil G. Fraering" writes: |> |> >Coming next: REVIEW: _The Aenead_, 2400 years on the best-seller list. |> |> You're not going to review it for another 350 years? That sounds about right (written in about 1649 B.N.O.). Meantime, I do recommend Fitzgerald's translation of the Aeneid for the Latin-impaired. A few years ago, I worked my way through some of the "classics" on a one-book-a-night-at-bedtime basis (e.g., the Iliad in 24 nights, etc.) I started with the Argosy, then Iliad, Odyssey, Aeneid, and a selection of Aeschylus and Sophocles. This was much more enlightening than having to scramble through them for a class. ^ / ------/---- extropy@jido.b30.ingr.com (Freeman Craig Presson) /AS 5/20/373 P.N.O. /ExI 4/373 P.N.O. ** E' and E-choice spoken here ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 93 21:16:12 PDT From: more@chaph.usc.edu (Max More) Subject: PLEDGE: Help me buy Extropy ad in WIRED Re: Pledges to buy ad in WIRED for Extropy From: Max More, President, Extropy Institute Fellow Extropians, Many wonderful things are happening for Extropy and Extropy Institute. EXTROPY #11 should be the best-produced issue yet, thanks the (expected) layout help of a professional. We've been spreading the word (actually many words :) ) in the media: The British GQ article (about as favorable as you could expect) led to a BBC TV spot for ExI director Russell Whitaker, and (last night) a Los Angeles area chat show appearance by me (KMET, Electric Cafe, to be aired in about a month around midnight). I'm also conducting our largest informational/ promotional mailing yet, to members of an Objectivist organization, to some of the Bionomics Institute subscribers, to the Venturists (immortalists of our kind), as well as to many expired subscribers. A further spurt in ExI's growth should result from my speaking at next week's "New Edge" conference in Amsterdam (no I'm not blowing ExI funds, the host is covering all expenses). It occurred to me that we should follow up on the largely favorable review in WIRED #2 -- a publication read by people many of whom are likely to be good prospects for Extropy Institute. The ad rates are frightening for a still-tiny organization like ExI, yet should be well worthwhile. If we placed an ad by the early July deadline for #4, it would appear not too long after the review, triggering the memory of the second issue coverage. The ad would reach 180,000 people. It would cost (assuming black & white) $1,750. Given that we are currently spending money due to the recent change of location, and more on the promotional mailings, and soon a big chunk on EXTROPY #11 (distributors have not yet paid for the large-circulation #9), we cannot afford to spend this kind of money on an ad. I hate to pass up this opportunity, so I'm personally willing to donate at least $200 out of my meager earnings (currently around $12,000/year) towards it. ExI may be able to put in a small fraction. If you want to see Extropy and ExI survive and thrive, and agree that an ad in WIRED would be an effective marketing idea, I urge you to pledge whatever that prospect is worth to you. Only if we reach the goal will ExI call in the pledges and place the ad. We don't have much time -- the money would have to be raised within about 2 weeks (I can start working on the ad in the meantime). Since I'll be away June 15-22, pledge drive reports wil be made by ExI director Ralph Whelan. He'll be logging on through my account (more@usc.edu). For those who have no interest in helping out, and are annoyed by plede drives, my apologies. Just skip the messages when you see the prefix. The drive will not last long, and it's the first one we've done this year, so I trust it's not too bothersome. To reduce the list traffic, please send all pledge messages directly to me, and I (or Ralph) will make reports periodically to the list. Upward and Outward! Max More more@usc.edu President Extropy Institute (ExI) Editor EXTROPY: The Journal of Transhumanist Thought ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1993 23:01:59 -0600 (MDT) From: Stanton McCandlish Subject: DIET: Rational Choice Quoth Garrett Goebel, verily I saith unto thee: > > Mark W. McFadden wrote: > } >Hear me now and believe me later.The only healthy diet for humans is what > } >our species was raised on: roots, berries, grubs, body lice and carrion. > } > > Not to mention that the average life span in primitive societies which > eat roots, berries, grubs, body lice, and carrion... was around 27 (The > number comes from a rather old referrence to the life spans of isolated > societies in New Guinea (needless to say, quite old). Perhaps someone > else can find better citings on life spans of primitive societies? > > Garrett Oh come now, you KNOW much of that has to do with disease, etc., not diet. Of course knocking the carrion out of the diet would knock a lot of nasty things out also. But simply changing diet isn't going to fix all the things that kill people at 27. -- When marriage is outlawed only outlaws will be inlaws! Stanton McCandlish, SysOp: Noise in the Void DataCenter Library BBS Internet anton@hydra.unm.edu IndraNet: 369:1/1 FidoNet: 1:301/2 Snail: 1811-B Coal Pl. SE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87108 USA Data phone: +1-505-246-8515 (24hr, 1200-14400 v32bis, N-8-1) Vox phone: +1-505-247-3402 (bps rate varies, depends on if you woke me up...:) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1993 01:09:03 -0400 (EDT) From: esr@snark.thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) Subject: NANO: what hope for normal robots? > Would I be being more useful (in the strict Fuller manner) working on nanotech > or in this conventional robotics? My opinion? Keep track of nanotech, but stick with what you do well. The *scale* and *physical implementation* of nanobots will be different from macrobots, but many of the optimal-control problems with smart nanobots are going to be similar to what you're learning how to do now. I don't think macrobots will be a dead end --- and even if they are, your practical experience with macrobots could make all the difference between ungrounded theorizing and a practical nanorobot project. -- Eric S. Raymond ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1993 02:59:41 -0400 (EDT) From: RYAN Alan Porter Subject: ID: Alarming Development I was in my vet's office today after having my rabbit castrated and found an alarming article. It was concerning a fairly new invention that our local vets are almost all endorsing, it is a small device, about the size of a grain of rice, apparantly, which is implanted under the skin of your pet with a needle for $30 in a five minute operation. The device contains some kind of microelectronics which allow it to be read by a scanner. Each one has a unique serial number. The scanner pictured looked a lot like a barcode scanner, apparantly it doesn't have to be very close and it is very reliable and easy to scan an animal and tell whether or not they have been implanted. The implant itself is passive, so there are no batteries to wear out, and it is reportedly indestructible. It was referred to as an AVID, or American Veterinery Identification Device. There is now a national database known as PetTrack, or a company by that name, or something, that part wasn't very clear...which keeps track of all of the implanted animals. There has been some problem in the past with settling on a standard numbering method and such, and there are apparantly four different kinds of scanners on the market, so the technology is quite new and unstandardized. Reason for concern: This look suspiciously like a test campaign to create a large, centralized database for keeping track of people with a method that can be verified instantly and automatically. What is to stop the feds from discovering this and using it to track convicts? Once they have society convinced of the benefits of tracking convicts, what is to stop them from using it to track everyone? I have alarming visions of a world where you are implanted at birth with your social security number or whatever, and then tracked every time you get on a plane, cross a state border, go to a public restroom... Hell, what's to stop satellites from keeping track of every single citizen at every single instant, no matter where on the planet they may wander? Am I being paranoid for being concerned at this possible new tool for invading privacy? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jun 93 00:29:34 -0700 From: dasher@netcom.com (D. Anton Sherwood) Subject: diet Christopher Weeks: > I'm not real big on biology, but couldn't we replace our whole system > with something that allows us to just plug into a power source? . . . What work of fiction mentioned racing dogs with no guts? ~ ~ ~ Mention of the "recent" mutation that allows me to drink milk reminds me of another one. I heard once that some humans see green as a primary (I do), and some don't (or have been taught to say it's blue+yellow). Any comment? :r .signature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jun 93 00:25:11 -0700 From: dasher@netcom.com (D. Anton Sherwood) Subject: jokes Robin says of conventional QM: > This is similar to the way Minsky speculates that jokes are all about what > things we shouldn't think about - we laugh and suddenly don't feel like > pursuing that line of thought. Both of these are functional adaptations, > in usual practice. "To poke fun at philosophy is to be a philosopher." --Blaise Pascal "A serious and good philosophical work could be written that would consist entirely of jokes." --Ludwig Wittgenstein "I laugh, therefore I am." -- title of book by John Allen Paulos I got through two-thirds of this book before getting bogged down in a bit where I need to pay attention. (It's waiting for a day when I'm feeling clear- headed and caught up on my mail and wouldn't rather be doing something else...) I haven't learned much from Paulos, but I am now curious to read his mathematical theory of humor. *\\* Anton ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jun 93 00:26:08 -0700 From: dasher@netcom.com (D. Anton Sherwood) Subject: hair >Join me in the revolution! The short hairs will take back the list >from you hippies! I watched "North by Northwest" last night and was glad that I have a simple disguise at hand. Not that I'm ever likely to be inconspicuous, but going skinhead would at least make me *differently* conspicuous. ;) And while I'm catching up on my ex-reading here -- KILL! KILL! KILL! KILL! KILL! KILL! KILL! KILL! KILL! KILL! KILL! KILL! KILL! Whew. Shouldn't read rants while watching "Enter the Dragon". Anyway, I am pleased (and a bit surprised) that Tim implies he has evidence to confirm my prejudice about the Human Genome Project -- when it was still a proposal, I was saying, why bother? it'll get done anyway. -- the jolly fat bearded Arctic-American ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jun 93 07:47:29 GMT From: price@price.demon.co.uk (Michael Clive Price) Subject: SPACE/FREE: Governments in Space Colonies in space (the solar system) have two advantages, in the Final War with Earth: - there are lots of them, but only one Earth - Earth lies at the bottom of gravity well, they at the top When Earth-gov' becomes too troublesome a number of the colonies band together and divert an 'Earth grazer' in Earth's general direction. Perhaps plant some antimissile defences on the asteroid, just in case Earth tries to defend itself instead of organising the biggest evacuation in history. Perhaps Earth will destroy a few colonies in bitter vindictiveness, but the Colonies are Many, Earth is One. Couple of months later evolution on Earth is knocked back to the slimemold level. End of problem. Earth 0, Colonies 1. Game Over. Goodnight Vienna! Mike Price price@price.demon.co.uk AS member (21/3/93) PS the asteroid is cold, so perhaps Earth wouldn't detect it until the last moment. Just spreading the rumour (The Comet is Coming) might destabilise Earth government. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1993 01:21:40 -0800 (PDT) From: phoenix@ugcs.caltech.edu (Phoenix) Subject: SPACE/FREE: Governments in Space > Colonies in space (the solar system) have two advantages, in the Final > War with Earth: > > - there are lots of them, but only one Earth > - Earth lies at the bottom of gravity well, they at the top Plus: being dependent on an open ecosystem is double-edged. If Earth hits a colony, it's gone, whereas the converse is not automatically true. On the other hand, Earth does have to hit the colony, whose eco-system is sealed. Not like sending a supply ship to Earth which happens to contain lots of plutonium dust.... Of course there is the moral question of whether libertarians can use weapons of mass destruction in good conscience. (How to kill planets is a fairly frequent topic of conversation in my circle.) -- ->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>{Phoenix<>Damien R. Sullivan<> X-) Kiljoy}<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<- || 6x9=42 | AIXELSYD | 1374245896=4 | Libertarian Dictatorship! || || Honk if you're American and have heard of Steeleye Span... || -==========================================================================- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jun 93 9:39:49 GMT From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu Subject: Against Nanotech As A Public Good The most disturbing thing that comes to my mind when Drexler argues for coercive support of nanotech as a public good is: how much? This assumes the correctness of the public goods argument, which I reject, but it's instructive nonetheless. Take Drexler's claim that we lose 25 million dollars per day without nanotech per day at its face value. That's 9 trillion, 125 million dollars lost per year. Last I heard, the GDP of the USA was about 6 trillion. So, how much support should nanotech R&D get? On the public goods argument, it would seem that it should get the ENTIRE GDP, plus another 3 trillion or so! So, in addition to consuming all GDP, we'd have to consume capital, too, which would reduce GNP growth... Where does it end? Of course, there's another problem with this: what if Drexler doesn't deliver? What then? What about those people who had their assets taken to support his failure? By rights, he'd owe them what was taken from them. This suggests a voluntary means of financing Drexler: he should offer a money-back guarantee him. Would he accept such a deal? Because of these problems with arguing for nanotech support as a public good, even accepting the public goods justification for coercion, I highly suspect that the true motive for a Nanotech Initiative isn't rational, but merely the desire for nice big budgets to play with. My suggestion for those members of the Foresight Institute who are opposed to coercion to write letters to Foresight and Drexler indicating that you will boycott if any further efforts are made to get coercive support for nanotech by the Institute. Furthermore, I suggest that you contact all the members as well, and organize a group of members who are like-minded enough to agree to join you. Make it clear that if coercive support is to be obtained for nanotech, that it'd better be enough to compensate for the loss of your support, then maximize that amount. Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! Assistant Editor: Freedom Network News, the newsletter of ISIL, The International Society for Individual Liberty, 1800 Market St., San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 864-0952; FAX: (415) 864-7506; 71034.2711@compuserve.com Think Universally, Act Selfishly - starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jun 93 03:16:15 -0700 From: mcpherso@lumina.ucsd.edu (John McPherson) Subject: Diet: Natural Toxins & Evolution Apparently the June issue of Reader's Digest has an article entitled: "Foods That Help You Live Longer" by Lowell Ponte (the San Diego Libertarian talk-show host*). He just spent an hour on his show giving a recap of the article, much of which apparently deals with natural toxins as well as pro-longevity foods. His research seems to rely heavily on that of Dr. Bruce Ames of UC Berkeley Disclaimer: I'm not a bio-chemist so I won't even try to spell most of the chemical names mentioned on the show. I probably even missed some syllables. If you want the info, I recommend you read the article. His major point is that plants, being stationary life-forms, have evolved natural toxins and "pesticides" to discourage critters from eating them. In fact in many cases, he claims, natural toxins are present in quantities 1000-10,000 times that of human-made pesticides! He gave a whole of list of foods containing such toxins, and I'm sure I didn't get them all (it was too long!). To be "fair", most of these foods contain beneficial compounds and nutrients ... Lowell was just trying to make the point that "good" foods are often not _all_ good, and several "bad" foods not _all_ bad. Here are some examples: Alfalfa sprouts contain "Kay-nuh-bay-nine" which can cause "Lupus" in humans. Basil (an ingredient of pesto) contains a poison affecting bugs and humans. Carrots, Celery, Parsley and Parsnips contain "sore-uh-leens" which apparently cause a person's eyes and skin to become even more prone to solar-radiation damage than usual. Coffee and other plants contain caffeine which apparently acts as a natural insecticide in all plants known to contain it. Comfrey contains "pie-roll-uh-zoid" alkaloids. Corn and Wheat contain "aflotoxin". Potatoes, Celery, Tea Leaves and Barbequed Meat contain an alkaloid toxin which he called something like "ben-zo-uh-pie-reen" which is carcinogenic. He mentioned that 6 average size potatoes contain enough toxin to be detrimental. (Barbequed Meat also contains several "aromatic hydrocarbons".) Licorice contains an "intoxicant" (?) which causes hypertension. Mushrooms contain hydrazines. Pepper (Black) contains "pip-er-een", a poison. Tomato Puree contains Methyl "Gly-ox-ul". Here are some other foods he listed but didn't mention the toxin names: Bananas, Fennel, Figs, Honeydew Melon, Horseradish, Lettuce, Mustard, Nutmeg, Peaches, Pineapple, Radishes, Raspberries, Sassafras, Strawberries, Tarragon (eg, in Tarragon Vinegar). Here are some foods he mentioned which contain both beneficial and detrimental compounds: Cruciferous vegetables (Brocolli, Brussel's Sprouts, Cabbage, Kale) contain both, but on balance they are better for you than not. Cinnamon in doses of less than 1 teaspoon per day can increase by 400% the ability of cells to effectively regulate blood-sugar levels, but doses around 4 teaspoons per day are toxic. Citrus fruits apparently have a toxin in the oils of the rind (critter repellent), but the inner fruit is good for you. Thus, grapefruit and orange juices prepared by juicing the whole fruit (rind and all) will contain the toxin. Meat can often contain excess fat which contains "Kree-at-uh-neen", but much of this fat can be drained off by microwaving it first (as a previous poster mentioned). Further, meat contains a very good compound called "conjugated linoleic acid" (which is also contained in "Cheese Whiz"). Nuts (a handful 5 times per week) contain Magnesium, some "good" oils and a beneficial "tension factor". (I wasn't paying attention here ...) but they also contain "aflotoxin". Here are some foods that he mentioned only the good things about: Garlic and Yellow Onions. Wine contains "res-pear-uh-trol" and "sair-si-treen" (an anti-cancer agent also found in Garlic). (I _know_ I got these two compounds wrong.) Green Tea contains an anti-oxidant. Soy Beans contain "gel-as-teen", an anti-cancer agent. Cold water Fish (eg, Salmon, Mackerel, and Herring) contain "Omega 3" oils. He gave an interesting example of co-evolution (which he may have picked up from the "Co-Evolution Quarterly"): Apple trees "need" animals to eat the fruit to help spread its seeds, otherwise the young apple trees will compete with the "mother" to the detriment of both. Thus apples are sweet, appealing and nutritious, so we will be enticed into "participating". On the other hand, eating the seeds is not a Good Thing for the Apple species, thus they have evolved to contain a natural form of cyanide. Lowell said that a handful of apple seeds contain enough of the poison to kill an adult human. (Coming soon: "FDA/DEA Requires License to Buy Crates of Apples" ;-) Lastly, he mentioned that some traditional Mediterranean dishes (eg, Italian) were found to be among the healthiest in the world (even when considering Chinese Cuisine), and that Olive Oil is better for you than Butter, which is better for you than Margarine. [* Unfortunately Lowell is being replaced for the next 5-6 weeks by some sports program ... heh, "priorities"] /UCSD/SIO/CalSpace/John_Mcpherson (mcpherso@lumina.ucsd.edu) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "Things are only impossible until they're not." Captain Jean-Luc Picard ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Just say NO to Clinton's telephone wiretap-chip proposal! ------------------------------ End of Extropians Digest V93 Issue #0320 ****************************************