From extropians-request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Mon Jul 5 20:03:11 1993 Return-Path: Received: from usc.edu by chaph.usc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+ucs-3.0) id AA01894; Mon, 5 Jul 93 20:03:09 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 AA17335; Mon, 5 Jul 93 20:03:06 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: by wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu (5.65/4.0) id ; Mon, 5 Jul 93 22:49:13 -0400 Message-Id: <9307060249.AA27225@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu> To: ExI-Daily@gnu.ai.mit.edu Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 22:48:52 -0400 X-Original-Message-Id: <9307060248.AA27211@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu> X-Original-To: Extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu From: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Subject: Extropians Digest V93 #0376 X-Extropian-Date: Remailed on July 6, 373 P.N.O. [02:49:12 UTC] Reply-To: Extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Status: OR Extropians Digest Tue, 6 Jul 93 Volume 93 : Issue 0376 Today's Topics: [1 msgs] AIT VirtSem: Bennett on "Logical Depth" [1 msgs] AIT VirtSem: Does a String Have an Intrinsic AIT Value? [1 msgs] Immortalism & evolution [1 msgs] Immortality, and "Kids these days..." [3 msgs] META:anonymity and list rules [1 msgs] NEWS/CHAT Financial Times going extropian? [1 msgs] New Ways directory [1 msgs] Replies to GA/Immortality question [1 msgs] give me immortality, or give me death [1 msgs] line). [1 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: 51467 bytes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 12:51:09 CST From: "" Subject: New Ways directory New Ways. An in-process directory of Internet/Bitnet discussion lists which may be useful for people interested in new ways of thinking, living, etc. Dan Goodman, PO Box 580009, MPLS MN 55458. Internet: dsg@staff.tc.umn.edu. Further distribution is permitted and encouraged. I'd appreciate suggested additions. Also, if your judgement of a list mentioned here differs from mine; or if you spot an inaccuracy; let me know. (All such messages will be considered okay to publish, unless the sender plainly says otherwise.) Alternative Institutions RECOMMENDED Contact: AltInst-request@cs.cmu.edu (Robin Hanson) "AltInst is solely for proposing and critiquing alternative institutions for various walks of life. Alternative ways to run conversations, countries, households, markets, offices, romances, schools, etc. are all fair game. "AltInst is open to folks from any political persuasion, but general political flaming/discussion is forbidden. Skip the theory and just tell us your vision of how something could be different, and how that would work. Many of us are truly excited to hear about creative well-considered suggestions, no matter what the source, but quickly bored by both ideological is-too-is-not flaming, and partisan rah-rahs for anything 'politically correct' in some camp." BELIEF-L Personal Ideologies Discussion List "This list is designed to be a forum where personal ideologies can be discussed, examined, and analyzed. Topics for the list can range from 'what is good' to 'what happens after death' to 'is there a god'. "This list is designed to be open to members of ALL religious and political faiths or non-faiths; we do not discriminate based on religion, race, gender, sexual preference, handicap, et cetera. "To subscribe to this list, send the command: SUBSCRIBE BELIEF-L your_name to LISTSERV@BROWNVM. Internet subscribers should go DIRECTLY to LISTSERV@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU. "Coordinator: 'David B. O'Donnell' " The following is based on the list as it was a few months ago. Plus: BELIEF-L is certainly diverse. It includes Fundamentalist Protestants, gay activists, Neo-Pagans, atheists, nihilists,.... Minus: Many contributors seem ignorant of their own beliefs. Christians who don't know that there's more than one translation of the Bible into English; Neo-Pagans who accept as validly researched rituals from the work of fantasy writers notorious for not caring about accuracy. Not yet checked out -- not necessarily still alive. CLTHOPT on LISTSERV@ETSUADMN.BITNET or LISTSERV@ETSUADMN.ETSU.EDU "CLTHOPT is an online discussion list for clothing optional living. This is open to discussing skinny-dipping, visiting nude beaches, or resorts, and topfree issues for women. This is not a sexual discussion list. If anything, we hope to dispell the myth that nudity is always equated with sex. Subscriptions to this list are open to all. "To subscribe, send the following command to LISTSERV@ETSUADMN via mail or interactive message: SUB CLTHOPT your full name "Owner: John Hendry " Not yet checked out. COHOUSING-L on listserv@uci.com "This is a list for discussion of Cohousing, the name of a type of collaborative housing that has been developed primarily in Denmark since 1972 where it is known as bofoellesskaber (English approximation). "Cohousing is housing designed to foster community and cooperation while preserving independence. Private residences are clustered near shared facilities. The members design and manage all aspects of their community. "Automated subscription: Send email message to listserv@uci.com with the following command in the message body (no subject): SUBSCRIBE COHOUSING-L (In response an informative introduction will be sent) "Email to fholson@uci.com for more information" Conlang: Constructed Languages. This includes Esperanto and its rivals (many more than you might think); languages invented by Tolkien and other writers; and languages made up for the fun of it. More relevant to present purposes -- Some of these languages are intended to promote clearer thinking. Listserv@odin.diku.dk Not yet checked out. COUNCIL on LISTSERV@SJSUVM1.BITNET or LISTSERV@SJSUVM1.SJSU.EDU "Global Council Forum -- Moving Beyond the Nation-State "COUNCIL has been created to provide an international computer forum for the discussion of the creation of a global council. Its premise is that the world reality has moved beyond the nation-state, yet the world order still relies on this fragmentary concept and structure. The proposal is for the creation of a small, non-power-holding, non-bureaucratic council in East Africa, the birthplace of humanity, in the foreseeable future. Seeking voices from outside North America for discussion. To spur exploration of this issue, the list owner will post a short essay at least once a week, by 0900 GMT Wednesdays. "To subscribe to this list, send the following note to LISTSERV@SJSUVM1 on BITNET or LISTSERV@SJSUVM1.SJSU.EDU : SUBSCRIBE COUNCIL yourfirstname yourlastname "List owner: Martin LeFevre lefevre@sjsuvm1.bitnet" Not yet checked out. cryonics "Purpose: Cryonic suspension is an experimental procedure whereby patients who can no longer be kept alive with today's medical abilities are preserved at low temperatures for treatment in the future. This list is a forum for topics related to cryonics, which include biochemistry of memory, low temperature biology, legal status of cryonics and cryonically suspended people, nanotechnology and cell repair machines, philosophy of identity, mass media coverage of cryonics, new research and publications, conferences, and local cryonics group meetings. "Contact: ...att!whscad1!kqb -or- kqb@whscad1.att.com (Kevin Q. Brown)" Extropians If you're interested in personal freedom, life extension, spaceflight, mind expansion, and related topics, this may be for you. Contributors tend to be wordy; most seem to be libertarians. extropians-request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Not yet checked out. May not belong here. FUTUREC FUTUREC@UAFSYSB Future Culture Not yet checked out. May not belong here. HOLISTIC HOLISTIC@SIUCVMB Holistic Discussion Group Not yet checked out. home-ed@think.com "Purpose: This mailing list is for the discussion of all aspects and methods of home education. These include the "unschooling" approach, curricula-based home-schooling, and others. The list is currently unmoderated and welcomes everyone interested in educating their children at home, whatever the reasons. "Contact: home-ed-request@think.com (David Mankins)" "Coordinator: David Mankins (dm@think.com.)" Not yet checked out. Leri-L@pyramid.com "Or, Commodore Leri's Metaprogramming Mail Service. Discussions range widely over such topics as metaprogramming a la Wilson/Leary/Lilly, the nature of consciousness and how the brain works, the possibility of an Attractor/ Singularity a la Terence McKenna, quantum theory, the psychedelic experience, mystical experiences/alingual phenomena (ie the tremendum), Internet theory, memetics, art, poetry, science fiction, music, and occasionally politics. This is an extremely high volume list, guaranteed to crash lesser mailers. Available in realtime or Daily Compilation format. "Contact: leri-request@pyramid.com "Leri-FAQ available via anonymous ftp at penguin.gatech.edu, /pub/leri, along with various articles, essays, and short stories pertaining to Leri-L. "Owner: Scotto j_culshaw@acc.haverford.edu" Not yet checked out. LIBERNET@DARTMOUTH.EDU "An electronic mailing list/discussion group/magazine for libertarians, classical liberals, objectivists, and anybody else interested in a free market/social tolerance approach to political issues." "All requests to be added to or deleted from this list should be sent to LIBERNET-REQUEST@DARTMOUTH.EDU. "Coordinators: Barry Fagin June Genis (BitNet)" Judgement call. Neo-Paganism goes back to the late 19th Century, and has some continuity with older traditions. Some Neo-Pagans trace their religion back to Neanderthal times, which makes them profoundly reactionary. PJML on LISTSERV@UTXVM.BITNET or LISTSERV@UTXVM.CC.UTEXAS.EDU "PJML is an educational forum -- a place for sharing information on a variety of Jewish concerns -- aimed at inspiring us to move forward and build a better world. PJML connects activist Jews and our allies across the globe. We come from many traditions but identify ourselves as 'progressive'; if we have differences, let us discuss them openly and respectfully. Let us continue in the tradition of _tikkun olam_, the just repair of the world. "PJML is unmoderated, and subscribers are asked to use their best judgment when submitting items that deal with especially emotional issues, such as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The list owners reserve the right to take appropriate steps in keeping these discussions constructive and focused. "To subscribe to PJML, send the following message to either LISTSERV@UTXVM.CC.UTEXAS.EDU (Internet) or LISTSERV@UTXVM (Bitnet): SUB PJML List Owners: Steve Carr Seth Grimes Internet: Steven.Carr@UTXVM.CC.UTEXAS.EDU JCIPP@MCIMAIL.COM Bitnet: RTFC507@UTXVM" While I was on this list, a Serbian nationalist established where the boundaries of discussion were by going beyond them. He got booted off the list for calling someone a Fascist. Not yet checked out. PROG-PUBS@fuggles.acc.virginia.edu [Last Updated 28-January-1992] Contact: PROG-PUBS-request@fuggles.acc.virginia.edu "PROG-PUBS is a mailing list for people interested in progressive and/or alternative publications and other media. "PROG-PUBS was originally created to facilitate and encourage communication among people interested in and active with the 'alternative student press' movement. However, the list's scope is now broader than this; we welcome and encourage participation from people involved in all kinds of small-scale, independent, progressive and/or alternative media, including newspapers, newsletters, and radio and video shows, whether campus-based or not." Transformation Stories List [Warning -- bibliography, not discussion list] Bibliography of fiction whose theme is transformation. This can include lycanthropy, robots becoming gods, humans becoming universes, gender change, etc. Additions eagerly sought. Two ways to get it. 1) Anonymous FTP to halcyon.com; directory /local. 2) Email from Mark Phaedrus (phaedrus@halcyon.halcyon.com.) No response last time I checked -- quite likely dead. URBANITES@PSYCHE.MIT.EDU "The purpose of this mailing list is to discuss and promote self- sufficiency in everyday life in many forms. This includes but is not limited to basic needs such as food, shelter, health, and safety. A unique aspect of this list, however, unlike many others, is that we will concentrate on the city and urban/semi-urbs applications of traditional self-sufficiency technology. Thus, discussions on raising fish in a small backyard pool or in a large aquarium instead of in cage-culture rafts on a farm pond; raising veggies and some small-tree fruits in containers on the patio or under grow-lights at work (a ready source of fluorescent fixtures for most of us!) instead of in a 20 x 40 garden plot 'out back'. "Send requests to be added directly to urbanites-request@psyche.mit.edu and include 'urbanites-request' in your subject line. "Coordinator: sgw@silver.lcs.mit.edu (stephen g. wadlow)" Not yet checked out. WORLD-L on LISTSERV@UBVM or LISTSERV@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU "The WORLD-L is a forum for the discussion of the teaching, methodology, and theory of a scientific and non-Eurocentric world history. It aims to hold regular electronic conferences related to the purpose of the list. "To subscribe to WORLD-L, send the command SUB WORLD-L yourfirstname yourlastname to LISTSERV@UBVM or LISTSERV@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU via a mail message (again, as the first line in the body of the mail, not the Subject: line). "Owner: Haines Brown BROWNH@CTSTATEU.BITNET" Not yet checked out. Y-RIGHTS@SJUVM.BITNET "As the title suggests, this list is on the discussion of the rights of kids and teenagers (called Y-Rights for 'Youth Rights', or 'Youngster's Rights' or 'Why Rights?' -- whichever strikes your fancy). It's a very open list, and everyone is welcome to participate on it, whether you are a teacher, a professional, a student, or a kid or teenager yourself. "What do I mean when I say 'Children's Rights'? Well, I don't necessarily mean the rights for adults to 'protect' children, because that 'right' seems to be misused and misguided to ends that are, oftentimes, tragic, even with the 'best' intentions. That, of course, is open for discussion on this list, and I'm certain that it will come up at some point. "To add yourself to the list, send an Interactive Message (BITNET) or a Mail message (any system) to LISTSERV@SJUVM with a single line: SUB Y- RIGHTS Firstname Lastname "This particular LISTSERV takes a minimum of two names, but it can take three, four or more (for example, 'J. P. Zelder Hoghorn III' is acceptable. 'John' will not work). "Owner: Kenneth Udut kudut@hamp.hampshire.edu kudut@hampvms.bitnet" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 10:10:50 PDT From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: AIT VirtSem: Does a String Have an Intrinsic AIT Value? Here's a brief reply to one of Hal Finney's points. His longer postings on logical depth need more effort. (And I can't even _think_ about tackling Nick Szabo's "Ten Unsolved Problems," or whatever he called his David Hilber-like list of questions!) > One area that AIT does not speak clearly about is "slightly compressible" > strings. In at least some computers C, the coding to specify some actual .... > This isn't that surprising; Chaitin's information measures all have an O(1) > fudge factor. He tends to think in terms of strings with grossly different > information contents, in effect admitting that fine differences aren't > captured well by this model. This gets to one of the points raised several days ago, by Robin Hanson, I believe. Nearly all of these models have these "O(1) fudge factors" to convert one Turing Machine to any other (any TM can emulate any other TM, within an O(1) factor), to convert one compression system to another, and so on. In particular, the "overhead" of any particular compression scheme is not all that critical, and is negligible when compare to either very long strings or lots of stings. > If such C existed, they would be good candidates as canonical computers for > measuring AIT complexity. It might be easier to prove assertions about AIT I doubt this. A C program will have a different effect on "C-compressible" code (whatever that may be) and another effect altogether on, say, biological organisms. Factors of a few (that is, the O(1) argument) just don't matter. -Tim -- .......................................................................... 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: Mon, 05 Jul 93 18:07:08 GMT From: price@price.demon.co.uk (Michael Clive Price) Subject: NEWS/CHAT Financial Times going extropian? The right memes seem to be spreading (albeit with some dilution). Make sure you check out the last paragraph. Reprinted from the Financial Times, London, 5th July 1993 ************************************************************** DREAMING OF A PERFECT SUMMIT by Michael Prowse on America "Daddy, why are the world's leaders going to Prague for an economic summit?" "It's a tradition - an excuse for a pleasant vacation. The leaders converge on one of the richest capitals and talk about anything under the sun. Usually they go to Asia but Prague is now as chic as Bejing." "But why is it called an economic summit? Politicians don't have anything to do with economics - do they?" "Of course they don't. But these summits began in the late 1970s - that would be well over a half a century ago - governments intervened in nearly all aspects of economic life. They also quarrelled a lot about economic issues. The summits were meant to reduce friction and enhance "global co- operation"." "What did they quarrel about most?" "Trade. I know this sounds crazy but in those days every country used to impose tariffs (that is, taxes) on imports from trading partners. These were often very high. They also imposed quotas - a specific limit on the volume of goods or share of a market that a competitor could have." "You mean we would have had to pay extra for our Chinese hover car?" "Exactly. These restrictions were illogical. Nobody would have dreamed of imposing them on trade between regions of their own country. In their hearts the politicians knew they made everybody poorer but, selfishly, they still put the short-run interests of their own countries first. They were worried that rising imports would create unemployment." "What is that? I know some people get their incomes topped up out of taxes but unemployment is a contradiction in terms - wages would always fall to whatever level is needed to employ everybody." "They didn't then because people would not accept that the value of different jobs is always varying. Wages were not allowed to fall because people thought the world 'owed them' a certain standard of living. "What else was discussed at these summits?" "Fiscal policy was always a contentious issue. By the 1980s economists were agreed that policy lags and the unpredictability of business cycles meant it was useless to fine-tune economies by deliberately running budget deficits or surpluses. But politicians (especially Americans) still used to demand that other countries provide a stimulus by loosening fiscal policy. And most countries routinely spent more than they raised in taxes, thus shifting financial burdens onto future generations who didn't have a vote." "You're joking. That would be unethical. You mean there wasn't a balanced budget law?" "Your economic history is lousy. You should know that didn't happen until the early years of this century. Monetary policy was also a chronic source of friction. At the summits, politicians were always complaining of that somebody else's interest rates were too high or too low." "Now you're really pulling my leg. Government don't control interest rates. The creation of money, and the management of its purchasing power, is a private-sector function." "What a parade of ignorance. In the 20th century national institutions called central banks enjoyed monopoly rights to print money. A few were nominally independent but most had to obey the politicians who invariably wanted more rather than less of it. That's why there was so much inflation in those years - for your information inflation means a steady rise in the overall level of prices." "What a strange idea. You mean your income would have to rise every year just to keep pace with prices? But since even in those days most countries had faith in markets, why on earth did they think private agencies were incapable of managing money creation? Why did they think people would be more responsible of they wore public- sector hats?" "It's a long story. One worry was that, if a private bank was allowed to produce its own money, it would overdo it and produce terrible inflation. That was a stupid argument, of course, because nobody would want to hold money that loses value. As we have discovered in the past few decades of "free banking", the market monitors the purchasing power of different private monies closely. As soon as one shows any signs of losing its value, it is threatened with bankruptcy." "You mean like Greenback Inc that had to be taken over by that Korean company?" "Yes. But compared with the instability of the 20th century we've had only minor hiccoughs with competing private monies. The price levels has barely moved in 30 years. That's hardly surprising; the scientific challenge of stabilising the purchasing power of money is not really so great. The tough problem was persuading governments to surrender a power they relished." "Wow, those 20th century characters were dumb." "They were, but then they never really grasped the character of the market system. We see it as a spontaneous self-ordering mechanism and let it do virtually everything for us. But they saw it more like a bit of defective physical machinery with levers that had to be pulled and pushed. Ironically, the ex-communists provided the impetus for reform. With the enthusiasm of the religious convert they pushed for a truly unhampered market system. Once we got over the shock, we never looked back." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 11:54:12 -0700 From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: AIT VirtSem: Bennett on "Logical Depth" Here's a recent Charles Bennett paper on logical depth, a subject closed related to algorithmic information theory (even identical with, as it is not just Chaitin's work per se that makes up AIT any more than only Shannon's work constituted information theory). This is more recent that his paper in the Herken book (which is cited at the end), albeit it is much more concise. This is from the "PhysComp" ("Workshop on Physics and Computation") conference held October 2-4, 1992 in Dallas, Texas. The IEEE published the Proceedings as IEEE Computer Society Press Order Number 3420--02, LOC Number 92-74438, ISBN 0-8186-3420-0. As usual, watch for errors that escaped my proofing. OCR is far from perfect, and small errors can creep in, especially in equations. Also, I could not included the full-page figure/diagram Bennett refers to, for obvious reasons. Interested readers are encouraged to get this book (along with Chaitin's books, Herken, Zurek, Leff, and the various other books I've mentioned several times before). Enjoy it. Logical Depth and Other Algorithmically Defined Properties of Finite Objects C.H. Bennett IBM Research Division T.J. Watson Research Center Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 Abstract The input/output relation of a universal computer, which by Church's thesis provides a microcosm of all deductive logic and all physical processes that might be described by such logic, can be used to define intrinsic properties of digitally represented physical objects. An object's intrinsic information content or arbitrariness may identified with its algorithmic entropy, the negative logarithm of the object's probability of being produced as the output of a computation with random input. An object's intrinsic causal nontriviality or logical depth may be identified with number of steps in a typical one of the computation paths leading to the object. Although not effectively computable or efficiently approximable in practice, these properties are asymptotically roughly machine independent (and thus intrinsic), owing to the ability of any two efficiently universal computers to simulate one another at the cost of an additive increase in program size and a polynomial expansion of execution time. Because of the ability of universal computers to simulate one another and compute any computable function, the input/output relation of a standard universal computer can be regarded as a microcosm of all of deductive logic, as well as all physical processes describable by such logic. As suggested in the figure, the input/output relation of a universal computer can be viewed as a random computation, in which the proverbial monkey, instead of randomly striking the keys of a typewriter in hopes of producing meaningful literature, randomly strikes the keys of the computer in hopes of causing it to do a meaningful computation. Experience suggests that under these circumstances the computer is most likely to embark on a trivial, quickly-terminating computation, perhaps issuing an error message, or else on a trivial nonterminating one, in which the computer loops endlessly and ignores all further input. However, every meaningful computation also has some chance of accidentally being programmed by the monkey and performed by the computer, e.g. computing the digits of pi, the infrared spectrum of toluene, or determining which side, if any, has a winning strategy in chess. A computer U is universal if for any other computer V, there is some sequence of initial monkey bits that will cause U to simulate V on subsequent input. In other words, the computation tree of U contains an internal node, (marked "simulate V" in the figure), the subtree below which is isomorphic to the entire computation tree of V. If U is efficiently universal, as many simple Turing machines are, then this isomorphism in node structure will extend, within a polynomial, to the times of computation. Therefore, the probability that the monkey will perform a given computation on the U machine is at least a constant fraction of its probability of doing so on the V machine, and the time required to do so on the U machine is at most polynomially greater than the time required to perform the computation on the V machine. It is perhaps worth noting that because U can simulate any computer it can also simulate itself. Therefore the computation tree of U will be self-similar, containing infinitely many subtrees isomorphic to the entire tree. The approximately invariant structure of the universal computation tree can be used to define correspondingly robust properties of finite objects such as long binary strings x, and by extension, of physical objects such as genomes that can be conveniently represented by such strings. These properties are approximately invariant with respect to changing from one universal machine to another, or applying computationally trivial mappings to the strings themselves (i.e. concisely programmable 1:1 mappings that are fast to compute and have fast inverses). The simplest algorithmically defined string property [4][2][3] is the output probability of x, termed the universal semimeasure, a-priori probability, or aIgorithmic probability of x. It is machine-independent up to a multiplicative constant, and its base two logarithm, the algorithmic entropy H(x), is equal within an additive constant to the size of the smallest monkey-program to compute x. Algorithmic entropy corresponds intuitively to a string's absolute information content or arbitrariness [4] [2], and an "algorithmically random" string may be defined as one of near maximal algorithmic entropy. Such strings are also termed "algorithmically incompressible", since they lack any algorithmic description significantly more concise than the string itself. Another property, logical depth[l], measures the typical duration of computations leading to x. Typical duration cannot be taken simply to mean expected duration, since that is infinite for any x, but must be defined more carefully. Various slightly different definitions are possible[l]; one is to say that a string x is d-deep at confidence level 2 ^(-k) if computations running in time < t contribute a less than a fraction 2 ^ (-k) of the algorithmic probability of x. This formalizes the notion that it is more implausible for x to have arisen by a computation of fewer than t steps than for a tossed coin to yield k consecutive heads. A deep string thus contains internal evidence that a large amount of mathematical work was probably done to create it. If the string represents a physical object, and if one believes that physical processes in general can be efficiently simulated by digital computers, then this implies that the physical object also probably had a nontrivial causal history. Frequently one wishes to consider how much additional information, or how much additional computational work, must be supplied to compute an object X/ if another object x is already present. These notions can be formalized as relative algorithmic entropy of y given x --the negative logarithm of the probability that a monkey will program U to transform x, supplied as an auxiliary input to the computer, into y-and relative depth--the time required for a significant fraction of these computations to finish. Other properties referring to time of computation, but distinct from logical depth, may be defined in terms of the relation of a string x to the universal computation tree. Treating o as an input rather than an output, x might be called "ambitious" if it acts as a program for a long computation without giving evidence that the computation need actually to have been performed to generate x. Ambition is not a very robust property, since small changes in a program can greatly alter its run time. Another property distinct from depth is "crypticity" [1], the time required to infer a plausible origin for a thing given a knowledge of the thing itself. Formally, an object x can be called cryptic if every incompressible program for computing x is deep relative to x. Cryptograms are typically cryptic, at least in the common circumstance that they contain sufficient information to infer a unique plausible plaintext, while making it computationally infeasible to do so. Cryptic objects need not be deep, however, since good cryptograms need not take a long time to generate, only to analyze. Neither need deep objects be cryptic All these properties are so closely connected with the halting problem as to be uncomputable in principle and not efficiently approximable in practice. Their main usefulness is therefore in proving theorems concerning circumstances under which objects having the properties will and will not be generated by computational or dynamical processes. References [1] C.H. Bennett, "Logical Depth and Physical Complexity" in The Universal Turing Machine--a Half Century Survey, Rolf Herken, ed., Oxford University Press, 227-257, (1988). [2] G. Chaitin, "A Theory of Program Size Formally Identical to Information Theory", J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 22, 329-340 (1975). [3] L. Levin, "Randomness Conservation Inequalities; Information and Independence in Mathematical Theories," Inform. and Control 61, 15-37 (1984). [4] A.K. Zvonkin and L.A. Levin, "The Complexity of Finite Objects and the Development of the Concepts of Information and Randomness by Means of the Theory of Algorithms", Russ. Math. Surv. 256 83-124 (1970). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 20:15 GMT From: Aidan Willis <0005570913@mcimail.com> Subject: Subject: Replies to GA/Immortality question I apologize for putting all my replies in one msg, but it's very clumsy to communicate via MCI, and I am billed per message. As I can't use mail reader software, quoted statements are my hand-keyed distillations. Stanton McCandlish asks me to define effectiveness. I was referring to the effectiveness of the genetic algorithm, not that of the organism (I think I should have used a clearer word than "its" effectiveness). The effectiveness of GA is I think well known; the effectiveness of an organism is indeed a slippery quantity to define. What we can say, from simulations, is that of the strategies examined the GA produces "superior" (by whatever criterion has been assigned) organisms faster than other algorithms do: especially letting all the organisms survive at every generation. Ray Cromwell makes a couple of points I would like to respond to. One is that genetic evolution is no longer significant for humans, since they are about to have the option of moving to new hardware, etc. This may well be the case, but is somewhat irrelevant to my point. One could see humans as being an Alife organism with a bundle of bits describing its physical form, among the rest of the bits; if some of the organisms acquire the ability to change that form and pass on that capacity to their offspring, that is still a form of evolution. Ray's second point is that my argument was a "nonimmortalist preconception". Gosh, I am all in favor of immortality, at least my own: I just wanted to present an argument against it in the hopes that it had already been discussed and definitively disproved in this forum. (Seemed a better bet than 'Dear Abby', even if she does believe in eternal life.) Anton Sherwood also makes two good points. "We can improve ourselves directly, not wait for genes" -- this is similar to Ray's first point. Because humans have so little firmware, this has been true since the Cro-Magnons: almost all present human capabilities, relative to their genetic cousins, are due to *cultural* evolution. Indeed, one can almost dismiss humans as the hardware used by cultures to evolve on. As I get older I am beginning to feel that I am losing the capacity to adapt to cultural or other changes. A human infant might be transported to Imperial Rome, Poland in the 15th century, or Bayswater in 1920, and adapt as well as any other infant. We can reasonably assume that infants will adapt to the 24th century as well, but if we survive that long will we be happy with the society? I think that immortals, or even very long-lived people, will become set in their ways within fifty or a hundred years, and largely withdraw from society. Worse, they might act as a brake on cultural (and other) evolution: look at the effects of the AARP on differential taxation, for example. "We can escape the solar system so no competition for resources": I certainly hope that humans develop that capability sooner rather than later. However this does not address my point about improvements in humans. If the competition for resources declines it will allow even the dweebs, and their outdated cultures/value systems, to multiply, and take up resources which humans will need to defend themselves with against the vicious S'Grungi when they encounter them. Danny Willis 557-0913@MCIMail.com I believe in life before death. ### ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 16:10:30 CST From: "" Subject: give me immortality, or give me death On Mon, 5 Jul 93 20:15 GMT, Aidan Willis wrote: >As I get older I am beginning to feel that I am losing the >capacity to adapt to cultural or other changes. A human infant >might be transported to Imperial Rome, Poland in the 15th century, >or Bayswater in 1920, and adapt as well as any other infant. We >can reasonably assume that infants will adapt to the 24th century >as well, but if we survive that long will we be happy with the >society? I think that immortals, or even very long-lived people, >will become set in their ways within fifty or a hundred years, and >largely withdraw from society. Worse, they might act as a brake >on cultural (and other) evolution: look at the effects of the AARP >on differential taxation, for example. In some ways, very longlived people might find it easier to adapt. They'll have gotten used to continuing change. One of my amusements is reading the laments of people younger than me about The Younger Generation. Those kids aren't listening to good rock music; they're listening to horrible noises. They're wearing unesthetic clothing. They don't listen to their elders! If I were to be still alive a century from now, I'd be hearing the same stuff from the grandchildren of those Young Barbarians. If there are any immortals around right now, they're probably too cautious to point out that the more things change, etc.... Saying "This, too, shall pass -- so what?" about empires, for example, would be likely to annoy both imperial bureaucrats and rebels; even a true immortal would probably prefer not to keep reassembling his body after it had been torn apart or subjected to explosives. In other ways -- an immortal born in the Thirteenth Century would probably be continually horrified at present-day inflation. (English farthings now so worthless that no one bothers to coin them? What can the world be coming to!) Dan Goodman dsg@staff.tc.umn.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 17:24:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Edward J OConnell Subject: Immortality, and "Kids these days..." In "the man who folded himself" David Gerrold has a character that has a time travel device; but he finds that he cannot go very far into the future because people are...different. This charcter keeps reliving certain decades, the 50s, over and over again... One of the best time travel stories ever written, sightly disturbing in its vision of the future as a place that we can never truly enter and be a part of... Then again, there's always the Amish. I've also imagined that historical recreations could become very popular--the popularity of role playing games, SCA; software adventures, etc, would seem to indicate that many people would really like to pretend to live in another time...(without the intestinal parasites and goiters, of course. The SCA and Wild West recreate romanticisied pasts that never were, largely, but again, they entertain...) Varly in his 8 worlds has various 'Disneys', domed habitats that recreate various eras... Various funamentalist movements try to plunge us back into the past every few years or so; in some countries, (Iran) they gain power, and it gets ugly... In a truly varied future, cultures that span dozens of centuries could all coexist. Immortals could pick their era. The way Heinleins immortals deal with inflation is to just think of newer money as a different currency; the 1980 dollar is not the 1990 dollar. Think of one as a 'quatlo' and do a conversion. Tough to do, but I've already started thinking this way, and I'm only 30! Jay ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 17:15:25 CST From: "" Subject: Immortality, and "Kids these days..." On Mon, 5 Jul 1993 17:24:40 -0400 (EDT, Edward J OConnell wrote: >Then again, there's always the Amish. The Amish _have_ changed. An immortal Amishman would find himself surrounded by newfangled technology -- within the Amish community. The Amish are selective about adopting new technology; but they do adopt a fair amount of it. >The way Heinleins immortals deal with inflation is to just think of newer >money as a different currency; the 1980 dollar is not the 1990 dollar. >Think of one as a 'quatlo' and do a conversion. Tough to do, but I've >already started thinking this way, and I'm only 30! > Take someone born in a time when the smallest available coin would buy a good warhorse. He might be continually wincing at the sight of people dropping pennies and not bothering to pick them up. Dan Goodman dsg@staff.tc.umn.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 16:44:42 -0700 (PDT) From: szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) Subject: Immortalism & evolution Humans aren't restricted to blind search. With foresight, we can anticipate some future trends in evolution, including breakthroughs into new, lucrative search spaces. (As a side note, such foresight doesn't work very well until we understand the blind search process first, since greedy search is often superior to naive long-range planning). Immortalism is a new strategy in civilization's vast "memetic algorithm". Those who "catch the meme" in its proper form -- presumably following scientifically demonstrated life extension regimens, signing up for cryonics, avoiding high-risk behaviors, etc., but there may be better forms we haven't found yet -- may vastly outlive those who don't (by trillions to one, including a quality-of-life measure, cf. my earlier post on how P(Uploading)*L(Uploaded) dominates the factors for Lifespan and Post-Reanimation). Most humans won't make it past the normal lifespan, either because they lack the resources or lack the proper knowledge of immortalism or the motivation to act on it. In trillions of human-lifetimes, the possibilities of further evolution (via running GP on one's own mind, having children, etc.) are vast. If that's not variation and differential selection, I don't know what is. By same token, the more traditional form of genetic and memetic "immortality" via children still has some advantages. And the two may be synergistic. In cryonics it helps quite a bit to have relatives at your side & on your side when you deanimate. What better way to get such allies than to make 'em yourself. Children also hedge your bets -- you may not make it to uploading, but some of your semi-copies almost surely will. A child born today and taught to follow life-extension techniques from an early age probably has a life expectency well beyond 2100, and can make it to uploading even if cryonics and nanotech don't start working well until the end of the next century. Even getting to immortalism requires a large amount of mental evolution. It requires sufficient resources for cryonics and longevity, and commitment of those resources. It means throwing off much of the near-term, pessimistic dogma that dominates our culture's dialogue and figuring out what the possibilities are for 100 or more years from now, in order to make informed choices about life extension and cryonics. The process of reanimation will require wrenching self-transformation, and uploading will require self-transformation of a degree few can comprehend (or care to) -- cf. Hans Moravec's article "Pigs in Cyberspace" in Extropy #10, and my own essay "Uploading and Sexual Engineering" posted to exi-essay a few months ago. Nick Szabo szabo@techbook.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 19:05:32 -0700 From: hfinney@shell.portal.com Subject: Immortality, and "Kids these days..." Jay OConnell, , wrote: > In "the man who folded himself" David Gerrold has a character that has a > time travel device; but he finds that he cannot go very far into the > future because people are...different. This charcter keeps reliving > certain decades, the 50s, over and over again... One of the best time > travel stories ever written, sightly disturbing in its vision of the > future as a place that we can never truly enter and be a part of... This reminds me of an article I read about cryonics in the December 9, 1990 issue of West magazine, which I believe is a Sunday magazine from a Bay area newspaper. The author is interviewing Art Quaife, president of the cryonics organization Trans Time. "I'm no Pollyanna. I don't expect a perfect world," Quaife says. "Yet the presumption is that the quality of life will continue to get better and better, and I'll be there for it. A lot of people do spend time on planning what they'll do in the future. Me? I'm a child of the '50s and I'm waiting for the '50s to come around again. I'm more interested in going back, I guess, than going into the future." He stops, shrugs and smiles, aware of my surprise. "The '50s, I was a teen-ager. It was a good time for me. I'd like to get it back again." I thought this made Quaife sound kind of pathetic, actually, although I suppose it was good that he was being honest. It makes cryonics sound like a retreat rather than an advance, though. Hal Finney hfinney@shell.portal.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 21:01:07 -0500 From: nobody@rosebud.ee.uh.edu Subject: META:anonymity and list rules -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- If an open-minded, forward looking list like Extropians shuts out anonymity, does it have much of a future? If a violation of list rules was perpetrated by an anonymous poster, would complaining to the administrator of the remailer do any good? Could they trace it to the true name of the poster? If they could, would they? Back on the original question of anonymous subscription, what if the list admin knew the identity of the subscriber, but kept no record of it other than an encrypted forwarding address? When anonymity is outlawed, Eternal Optimist key registered -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.2 iQCVAgUBLDiZ+YjvfLxJbYYtAQEgtgP9HhMiBz5XfIN7w7Veme5WpvWu1kcNSbcj nPbj/+hIUDiiI9pSCBHfbw9F5h7QkxTdlULCYiikRAKyFVvZcJf7Asiu8G1QkvC4 ddtWbu2anfBYSEKMJBn+PkapnlYx7SWfuud2DrPqtzkuwvwSvPgmvYttfeIOQYq2 f25+Jl9hg1U= =gtN4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------ End of Extropians Digest V93 Issue #0376 ****************************************