From extropians-request@extropy.org Sat Dec 25 22:27:40 1993 Return-Path: Received: from usc.edu by chaph.usc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+ucs-3.0) id AA27790; Sat, 25 Dec 93 22:27:31 PST Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: from news.panix.com by usc.edu (4.1/SMI-3.0DEV3-USC+3.1) id AA18883; Sat, 25 Dec 93 22:27:25 PST Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: by news.panix.com id AA12479 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for more@usc.edu); Sun, 26 Dec 1993 01:18:45 -0500 Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 01:18:45 -0500 Message-Id: <199312260618.AA12479@news.panix.com> To: Extropians@extropy.org From: Extropians@extropy.org Subject: Extropians Digest X-Extropian-Date: December 26, 373 P.N.O. [06:18:04 UTC] Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Status: RO Extropians Digest Sun, 26 Dec 93 Volume 93 : Issue 359 Today's Topics: Now the Hendersons have the bomb [1 msgs] Extropianly correct welfare programs [1 msgs] Hello (Goodbye) [1 msgs] Kennita's Emotional Breakdown [2 msgs] Meta: Let's Cool Off (was: Kennita's Emotional Breakdown) [1 msgs] Nightly Market Report [2 msgs] Prometheans & the Rapture of Politics [3 msgs] SOC, META: Kennita's Emotional Breakdwn [1 msgs] Tim May`s Social Darwinism [1 msgs] Why Have Children [3 msgs] Administrivia: No admin msg. Approximate Size: 58942 bytes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1993 23:09:43 -0500 (EST) From: Harry Shapiro Subject: Meta: Let's Cool Off (was: Kennita's Emotional Breakdown) a conscious being, Timothy C. May wrote: > It saddens me that the List is degenerating to this level. Me too. I would like to suggest that we cool off by tabling this discussion until 1994. /hawk ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1993 23:31:09 -0500 (EST) From: schirado@lab.cc.wmich.edu (Schirado) Subject: SOC, META: Kennita's Emotional Breakdwn Tim May writes: >Dave Krieger and Nick Szabo will most likely be too polite to verify >the facts I described above, but they can, if pressed. I would hope that they would be more polite than you're showing yourself to be. I know you're not here to schmooze, brown-nose and suck up, but there still is (and ought to be) such a thing as common courtesy. This little anecdote of yours, charming though it may be, is, IMO, wholly inappropriate in the semi-public atmosphere of the list. >It saddens me that the List is degenerating to this level. It saddens me that you find yourself unable to be rational, and must resort to this sort of thing. I never asked for any explanation; I merely assumed it wasn't my business. Kennita: If you can get over fear, you will soon find humor. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 00:00:02 +0500 From: The Hawthorne Exchange Subject: Nightly Market Report The Hawthorne Exchange - HEx Nightly Market Report For more information on HEx, send email to HEx@sea.east.sun.com with the Subject info. News Summary as of: Sat Dec 25 00:00:01 EST 1993 Newly Registered Reputations: (None) New Share Issues: (None) Share Splits: (None) Market Summary as of: Fri Dec 24 23:58:01 EST 1993 Reputations of members of the Extropians mailing list: [ Note: Contact hex-request to have a reputation placed on this list. ] Total Shares Symbol Bid Ask Last Issued Outstanding Traded AMARA .10 .50 .50 10000 2000 0 ANTON .61 .65 1.22 10000 2186 243 ARKU .18 .31 .30 10000 5301 0 BLAIR .01 1.20 .01 10000 26 0 BROOX .01 .10 .01 10000 1 0 DEREK .15 .19 .19 100000 18930 0 DROSE - .15 .10 10000 3000 0 DRS - .15 .15 10000 2600 0 DVDT .75 1.75 1.70 10000 10000 0 E .80 1.00 .90 10000 8011 0 ESR - - - - - 0 FCP .06 1.30 1.50 80000 15345 0 GHG .02 .30 .20 10000 8180 0 GODII .01 1.00 - 10000 - 0 GOEBEL .20 .25 .25 10000 767 0 H .53 .76 .76 30000 10290 0 HAM .60 .90 .90 20000 15918 0 HANNO .15 .24 - 10000 500 0 HFINN 1.50 6.00 .01 10000 1005 0 IMMFR .30 .70 .80 10000 1838 0 JFREE .02 1.25 .99 10000 3200 0 JOHN .30 .40 .35 10000 600 0 JPP .26 .29 .26 10000 3500 0 KARL 1.00 - 1.50 10000 1100 0 KLAUS .01 .45 .45 100000 37104 0 KNNTA .12 .24 .26 100000 13100 0 LEFTY .31 .42 .40 10000 4751 0 MARCR - - - - - 0 MEEKS - - - - - 0 MLINK - .01 .01 1000000 112602 0 MWM - 1.50 .01 10000 1260 0 N 1.50 9.00 5.00 10000 4749 0 P 22.50 24.00 24.00 1000000 94 0 PETER - .01 .01 10000000 601 0 PRICE - .01 .01 10000000 1410 0 R .40 .80 .70 10000 6100 0 RJC .65 999.00 2.00 10000 7100 0 ROMA - - - - - 0 RWHIT - - - - - 0 SAMEER .30 .75 .61 10000 9810 0 SHAWN .55 .55 .55 10000 2025 0 SWANK - 1.00 - 10000 - 0 TIM .60 .75 .60 10000 2104 0 WILKEN 1.00 10.00 1.00 10000 102 0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 243 Other reputations: Total Shares Symbol Bid Ask Last Issued Outstanding Traded 1000 .05 .40 .20 10000 5000 0 110 .02 .10 .10 10000 1750 0 150 .01 .10 .10 10000 1750 0 1E6 .20 - .20 10000 8825 0 1E9 .01 .09 .20 10000 7000 0 200 .02 .20 .10 10000 5075 0 80 .01 - - 10000 - 0 90 .01 - .10 10000 2000 0 ACS .10 .15 .12 10000 3223 0 AI .01 .09 .10 10000 2400 0 ALCOR .25 .85 .60 10000 3675.00 0 ALTINST - .25 .05 10000 4000 0 ANARCHY .20 .90 1.00 10000 1100 0 BETSY .01 - - 10000 - 0 BIOPR .01 .09 .05 10000 3000 0 BITD .01 1.00 - 10000 - 0 BLACK - .10 .12 100000 7000 0 CHUCK - - - - - 0 CORWIN - - - - - 0 CYPHP .32 .40 .30 10000 10000 0 D&M - - - 10000 - 0 DC1000 - .10 - 10000 - 0 DC200 - .15 .10 10000 1500 0 DC7000 - .10 - 10000 - 0 DCFLOP .15 - .15 10000 6000 0 DRXLR .75 .90 .80 10000 4545 0 EXI .10 .55 .25 10000 3025 0 FAB - - - - - 0 FROG - .05 - 10000 - 0 GOD - .10 .10 10000 3000 0 GUNS - .90 1.00 10000 3900 0 HART - 1.99 2.00 10000 9000 0 HEINLN .28 .30 .30 10000 6600 0 HEX 100.00 101.00 100.00 10000 4548 20 JBM - - - - - 0 KPJ - - - - - 0 LEARY .01 .50 .20 10000 1000 0 LEF .10 .35 .10 10000 5214 0 LIST .40 10.00 10.00 10000 5010 0 LP .25 .30 .50 10000 5625 0 LSOFT .50 1.00 .50 10000 9550 0 LURKR - .01 - 100000 - 0 MED21 .01 .30 .30 10000 5399 0 MMORE - 1.25 .10 10000 3000 0 MNSKY - .40 - 10000 - 0 MORE .38 1.25 .75 10000 2660 0 MRLOT - - - - - 0 NEWTON - .50 .20 10000 1000 0 NLAW - .50 - 10000 - 0 NNLAW - .50 - 10000 - 0 NSS .02 .03 .01 10000 25 0 OCEAN .15 .18 .20 10000 6600 0 OOMPH - 15.53 22.00 20000 - 0 PENNY - .08 1.50 10000 2500 0 PGP - 1.00 1.00 100000 2100 0 PLANET .01 .02 .02 10000 4000 0 PPL .15 .40 .30 10000 4900 0 RAND .18 .20 .20 10000 3900 0 RAW - .05 - 10000 - 0 RCLARK - .09 - 10000 - 0 SHECKY - - - - - 0 SQRL - 1.00 - 10000 - 0 SSI .15 .20 .20 10000 5200 0 TCMAY .38 1.00 .38 10000 4900 0 TRANS .01 .90 .60 10000 3211 0 VINGE .01 1.00 .75 10000 3449 0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 20 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1993 22:53:59 -0800 (PST) From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: Prometheans & the Rapture of Politics Nick Szabo seems to be highly critical of the areas of political debate and crypto anarchy I have been closely associated with. However, I'll address his points in order: > All of these goals are very long-term visions, but only cryonics > and uploading have major contemporary implications for us as > individuals or a small group of similarly-thinking people. How I give uploading essentially no chance of working for at least a century, and probably not for much longer. (We've debated the difficult issues many times, so I won't now. But this explains one reason I place little emphasis on working towards uploading.) Cryonics is marginally more reasonable to work on, and getting into suspension in the best way, technologically and financially, is certainly a win, as then the "sleep time" works in one's favor. However, an essential aspect of this, for me, is ensuring persistent economic and memetic institutions that can safeguard my deanimated body. For me, this means financial "shell games" that move money around in packets that are persistent, untraceable, etc. It also means enabling the "bootleg medical research" and liquid markets in medical information that such things as BlackNet have only been glimmers of. (I say this by way of disagreeing with Nick that my priorities are as backward as he claims, below, that they are.) > much other such practicum. It also implies that quarreling with > each other about changing the entire world to be run by our own very > unpopular political ideals is not only a waste of time, it is > damaging to our prospects for long life: it is deathist. Those First, I have to assume this is directed at those of us who have recently been writing about politics here, judging by the timing of this and previous messages Nick has written urging us not to debate politics and fall into the Rapture of Politics. Well, the time spent on this is topic is not "time-fungible," that is, I can't take the "saved" time and devote it to, say, reanimation research or hastening the onset of the Singularity. Some people watch movies or go skiing, I write these mini-essays. I encourage Nick to just ignore them if he thinks my time on them is taking away from more pressing concerns. Second, I will stack my work on crypto policy (who do you think called attention to key escrow a full five months before Clipper?), in crypto anarchy, in co-founding the Cypherpunks group, and in writing essays of some importance here against nearly anyone I can imagine. I am not being a braggart, I hope, just rejecting the innuendo that I am spinning my wheels while more important projects need to be worked on. > who waste their days in the Rapture of Politics, bitching at each other > about libertarianism instead of figuring out how to carve out our > own little niches of control in today's non-libertarian world, will > be tommorrow "Preterites", left in the dustbin of today's trivial > history by the Prometheans who have learned how to win in the world > as it is, rather than in the world as it should be, or the world > as it might be some day. If Nick is directing this remark even _partly_ at me, he is very misguided. I set out to become a millionaire by the age of 40, by working my butt off and by investing as much as I could in promising investments. As it was, I beat my own schedule and retired at the age of 34, nearly 8 years ago. So, I have "carved out my little niche of control," effectively immunizing myself from the legal predations of the State (illegal predations remain a worry). > Furthermore, we're in a better position to implement the first leg of > cryonics than to attempt any of the other partial advances needed to work Well, I think cryonics is a much tougher problem than Nick does. Sure, the freezing part will get better and better. But it's the next part, reanimation, that remains a cipher. For those interested and talented in crybiology, perhaps a noble thing to work on. For me, of little interest. Until the results happen, of course. > towards these goals. Anarchy does not come close the importance and > practical repercussions of immortality, nor is it as practical a goal > to work on today, outside the narrow niche of crypto-anarchy. (Which, Nick and I have radically different beliefs in this regard. I'm more interested in, and have more hopes for tangible results in the next decade or two for, a sharp increase in the number of degrees of freedom in our political and social world. This will mean new kinds of financial institutions, new models for medical and other research, and the growth of personal fortunes that can, excitingly, fund the long-term research we likely need. > Now it may be that the _business_ side of crypto-anarchy will have important > near-term implications for making a practical living in the near-world > future, but this involves boring subjects like EDI, networking protcols, > banking, marketing, and and the like much more than it does assasination > markets, killing off the stooges in the Federal Witness program, etc. > (are these really libertarian goals?). Business engages in practical Here Nick has launched a direct frontal assault on some of the admittedly offbeat aspects of crypto anarchy I sometimes talk about. By taking things out of context from the last Cypherpunks meeting (the Witness Protection Program points, for example) and perhaps from other discussions we have had, and then using them to argue that those interested in these things are not working on the _important_ issue, Nick is showing very poor judgment indeed. I repeat that many of the ideas people are now talking about, here, on Cypherpunks, in the pages of "Wired," and elsewhere are partly my doing. Does anybody deny this? > world change, not in the obsolete male instinct to "change the world" > when the world is not a controllable little tribe any more. Crypto-business > success also involves forming coordinated, mutually loyal metanational > business teams, as opposed to the Randian hyper-individualist model where > selfish people delite in stabbing each other in the back, and then wonder > why their world keeps getting more screwed up despite their ideals. > It is no coincidence that mafias, today's practical implementation > of the idealistic notion of PPL, stress duty, loyalty, honor, teamwork, > organization, strong ethnic bonds of trust: anti-entropic, anti-Randian > notions. I think this is a serious distortion of Rand. Howard Roard was a profoundly loyal, honorable, etc. character, as were the main characters of "Atlas Shrugged." I saw no evidence, for example, that Francisco D'Anconia stabbed Ragnar D. in the back, or that Dagny Taggard cheated any of her customers. Just some examples. Many of us have critques of Rand and her novels, especially now that we're older than when they first hit us so hard (most of us, at least), but can anyone find evidence in her novels of these selfish people who delight in stabbing others in the back? (Perhaps Nick has not read "Atlas" carefully and mistakes Wesley Mouch and Floyd Ferris for the heroes...they indeed relished back-stabbing, but few would call them exemplars of Rand's philosophy!) > Jamie loves Paul Saffo's phrase, "never mistake a clear view for > a short distance", and with good reason. It is far more important > to focus on gaining control over our lives in the world as we find > it today, rather than engaging in futile idealist battles to magically > transform the world into radically different states we dream it might > be. Many of us have thousands of years in which to make a true difference > in the world instead of tilting at windmills. True Prometheans let lesser > entities engage in this petty political bickering. Thanks for the lecture, Nick. Meanwhile, I've made my fortune and don't intend to piss it away on ideological tilting at windmills, such as pumping money into nanotech studies or cryobiology research. Every penny I have would vanish, with little to show for it. I want investments and projects that return at least a dollar in benefit _for me_ for every dollar I invest, not pie in the sky for the good of society. Granted, these debates here will do little to change the world. But their cost is also proportionately low. I have seen Nick change his main interest from space colonization to things like crypto, Internet commerce, EDI, and the like, and I applaud him for switching to a more promising area. We'll see what progress he makes. I hope he makes some breakthroughs, or at least that he makes his fortune. But his new interest in such things is no cause for him to "diss" the interest of others in political discussion. --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: PGP and MailSafe available. Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1993 23:21:30 -0800 (PST) From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: Prometheans & the Rapture of Politics Just a spelling correction on my last note: Howard Roark and Dagny Taggart are the correct spellings. --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: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 00:57:40 -0800 (PST) From: Oliver Seiler Subject: Why Have Children On 24 Dec 1993, Reilly Jones wrote: > Oliver Seiler writes: should be a blind process...> > > I think the unpredictable will become more and more important as people live > longer and longer. Determinism is horribly boring and uncreative. Random mixes > of genes are much more interesting than designer children, especially between > two intimates who plan on raising the child while exploring their unknown > combinatorials more fully and delightfully. Well, unpredictability and reducing the risk of genetically inherited incidences of cancer and such can go hand in hand. What I am saying is that people have a lot of choice in this sort of thing, and for those people interested in improving the gene pool in way's that they see fit, there is very little effort going on. For instance, do sperm banks keep track of the their client's (as in the client's they get sperm from) for such things as cancer, life span, medical records, etc. Do they examine family tree's for genetically inherited traits which may be desirable or undesirable. Even if they do, are these records available? (In my opinion they should be available for those who want them to be - no names released, just pertinent information that people are interested in).... I agree that with racial mixing (coming from lot's of immigration) the gene pool will generally become more diverse and stronger, and we can expect many similar effects. I think this can only go so far though, since there is no directed effort to improve the gene pool, except for those traits which people will generally find immediately attractive, such as intelligence (not a bad thing), personality (hard to say how much is genetic), and looks. Little attention is paid to family history of diseases, cancer, long life, etc. How a 'designer' kid would be different to raise from a 'normal' kid is not an issue. Deciding to improve that child's chances for high intelligence, long life, low risk of disease, etc. seems like a more noble thing... -Oliver | Oliver Seiler + Erisian Development Group + Amiga Developer + | oseiler@unixg.ubc.ca +-------------Reality by the Slice--------------+ | oseiler@nyx.cs.du.edu | Phone: (604) 683-5364 Fax: (604) 683-6142 | | ollie@BIX.com | POB 3547, MPO, Vancouver, BC, CANADA V6B 3Y6 | ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 02:06:36 -0800 From: freeman@maspar.com (Jay R. Freeman) Subject: Extropianly correct welfare programs The First Extropian Squirrel believes recent debaters on social Darwinism, the poor, and related topics, have overlooked a possibility for Extropianly correct welfare programs. The Squirrel infers from Extropian economic principles, the premise that economics is a positive-sum game. He thereby concludes that the more players, and the more productive each player is, the higher the total payoff. It follows that without regard to charitable or moral impulse, any proposed "welfare" program can be viewed as an economic transaction, in which a certain cost -- the distribution of goods, services, or whatever -- creates goods, services or some other economically tangible quantity at a later time. (The Squirrel means neither to praise or condemn charitable actions, nor to speak for or against any specific morality. He is ducking those issues because they aren't relevant to his point.) Thus Extropians might reasonably ask whether any of the assistances normally provided as "welfare" do indeed produce subsequent value for persons beyond the recipients. The Squirrel submits that some do; for example: (1) Immunization against diseases. This is the closest to a simple, numerically-supportable example that the Squirrel can think of offhand, for it is easy to show that in the case of epidemic disease not spreading too rapidly, widespread immunization confers benefits (reduced probability of catching the disease) not only on those immunized but also on those who are not. Some other public-health programs might be similar. (2) Diverse kinds of education. The Squirrel makes no comment on perceived inadequacies of various kinds of public education; however, he submits that it is possible to provide education which is cost-effective in the sense discussed. He suspects that among the most valuable kinds is basic literacy, for the parable "teach a man to fish and he can eat for the rest of his life" surely has a parallel, "teach a man to read and he can learn for the rest of his life". Thinking on experiences with early education recently reported here, the Squirrel also suspects that efforts directed at the very young, in the manner preached (but not necessarily practiced) in "Head Start" programs, might also be cost-effective. If any such "welfare" activities indeed subsequently create economic goods, then the Squirrel submits that it is Extropianly correct to determine how to undertake those activities and profit thereby, within a society of the form preferred by Extropians. The Squirrel perceives that the Extropianly correct way to finance activities is to charge for them. However, the key to his argument is, that the prospect of widespread payoff should in principle make it a defensible economic choice to sell such programs to persons who have no prospect of paying the entire cost, conceivably even to the point of complete subsidy. To convert principle to practice requires some means for those who provide the subsidy to reap some of the consequent payoff for themselves. This is perhaps a difficult task for many programs of conventional welfare, but the Squirrel suggests that it might be more optimistic and thought-provoking to view it as a challenge: If economic benefits do accrue to education, public health and other such programs, how would entrepreneurs in a stateless, free-market society arrange to profit thereby? -- Jay Freeman, First Extropian Squirrel (buy SQRL on HEx) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 7:16:03 WET From: rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray) Subject: Tim May`s Social Darwinism Geoff Dale writes: > I'm beggining to see that a two-tiered approach might be useful. It reminds > me of the Sufic teachings I once studied. (People not interested in hearing > perfectly good ideas extracted from religious context may hit the d key > now. Really, Ray, go ahead. I won't be offended.) I don't think I've ever voiced the opinion that religion has no useful ideas or that religion is useless. On the contrary, I think it exists because it fills an evoluntionary niche that Extropianism can potentially fill. That still doesn't mean it's not based on bunk. -- Ray Cromwell | Engineering is the implementation of science; -- -- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu | politics is the implementation of faith. -- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 09:25:08 -0500 From: ddf2@postoffice.mail.cornell.edu (David Friedman) Subject: Why Have Children >Well, unpredictability and reducing the risk of genetically inherited >incidences of cancer and such can go hand in hand. What I am saying is that >people have a lot of choice in this sort of thing, and for those people >interested in improving the gene pool in way's that they see fit, there is >very little effort going on. For instance, do sperm banks keep track of the >their client's (as in the client's they get sperm from) for such things as >cancer, life span, medical records, etc. Do they examine family tree's for >genetically inherited traits which may be desirable or undesirable. Even >if they do, are these records available? (In my opinion they should be >available for those who want them to be - no names released, just >pertinent information that people are interested in).... (Oliver Seiler) On a related issue, one of the potential advantages of legalizing the adoption market is that it would make it practical to produce high quality babies for profit. An openly for-profit adoption agency would presumably charge--and pay--more for high quality infants, with quality defined by whatever variables matter to the adoptive parents. That creates a niche for women who are good at producing babies to get inseminated by very high quality fathers--sperm being essentially a free good--in order to produce children for adoption. This is more profitable for women who themselves have desirable characteristics. It works even better if it becomes practical for a woman to bear a child from another woman's egg--which I think is currently being done for other large mammals. After all, it is really the womb space, not the egg, that is the scarce reproductive resource. As I remember, estimates for the percentage of infertile couples run as high as ten percent, although I presume the number is falling as medical technology improves. Suppose half of them opt for adopting grade A infants. You then have five percent of the children being the children of (say) the top tenth of a percent of parents. If, as I suspect, parental desires include things like intelligence, the long term results could be interesting. >How a 'designer' kid would be different to raise from a 'normal' kid is >not an issue. Deciding to improve that child's chances for high >intelligence, long life, low risk of disease, etc. seems like a more >noble thing... (Oliver Seiler) Under current law and technology, the main way people do this is by the choice of their spouse. I will refrain from telling you all about the high intelligence, superhuman charm, et. al. of my offspring, for fear of provoking other parents on the list to reciprocate. On a more radical note, Heinlein, in _Beyond This Horizon_, has a very neat idea for libertarian eugenics along the line of designer kids. Or has this already been mentioned earlier in the thread? David Friedman Cornell Law School DDF2@Cornell.Edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 10:34:07 EST From: cards@top.cis.syr.edu Subject: Hello (Goodbye) Not all of our minds are so closed as all that. I believe that many of your fellow lurkers (including myself) participate minimally rather than fully, partly for the reasons you list. I am here for the wheat, not the chaff. There is a lot of threshing to do, but I think it is worth it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stuart W. Card, Consultant, Card & Associates -- Research & Development Box 153 RR 1 Newport Rd Utica NY 13502 315-735-1717 / FAX -8469 swc@uc1.ucsu.edu or cards@top.cis.syr.edu "Who is John Galt?" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 10:43:15 EST From: cards@top.cis.syr.edu Subject: Now the Hendersons have the bomb Jamie quotes Gary Larson in a recent post. Within 10 years at the outside, I predict that any reasonably wealthy and intelligent individual will be able to build/buy small (physically, not necessarily in terms of yield) thermonuclear weapons. Anyone care to speculate on the implications of this? I know, "An armed society is a polite society" and all that (I even believe it); but maybe some more creative discussions of the dynamics? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stuart W. Card, Consultant, Card & Associates -- Research & Development Box 153 RR 1 Newport Rd Utica NY 13502 315-735-1717 / FAX -8469 swc@uc1.ucsu.edu or cards@top.cis.syr.edu "Who is John Galt?" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 12:48:02 -0800 (PST) From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo) Subject: Prometheans & the Rapture of Politics Tim May makes both good and arguable points, but we've reached a state where it's more important to cool down the flame war than to explore these issues for the moment. So I'll just comment on this one aspect: > I set out to become a millionaire by the age of 40, by > working my butt off and by investing as much as I could in promising > investments. I think many of us admire you for this; I know I do. This practical money making is almost the polar opposite of the idealistic political activism I was criticizing. Nick Szabo szabo@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 12:56:20 -0800 (PST) From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo) Subject: Kennita's Emotional Breakdown > Dave and Nick: please send -- to the list, or to me personally if you > are "too polite" to go over them in public -- your impressions of my > behavior on the evening in question, This sort of thing need not be commented on publicly; to do so is to exercise poor judgement indeed, IMHO. Ditto for "lizard eyes", although in another context that would have been more funny than hurtful. There are more than enough Detweilers in the world who really hate us; why when we get away from his kind here do we have to start hating each other? Individualism in action? So much for a "safe haven". :-( Nick Szabo szabo@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 19:29:11 -0500 From: Alexander Chislenko Subject: Why Have Children Reilly Jones <70544.1227@compuserve.com> writes: >>Oliver Seiler writes: >should be a blind process...> >I think the unpredictable will become more and more important as people live >longer and longer.Determinism is horribly boring and uncreative. Random mixes >of genes are much more interesting than designer children, especially between >two intimates who plan on raising the child while exploring their unknown >combinatorials more fully and delightfully. We can also extend the adventurous combinatorial practice of trial-and-error to other areas. I would cautiously suggest starting with things that, unlike having children (especially in the world of unlimited life-spans), don't bring long-term consequences; many of them you can start doing right now - consider, for example: - eating random things of random nature; - buying random things from random stores; - having sex with random partners/objects; - reading random stuff, like alt.misc.misc, contents of your local landfill or output of a random number generator (*not* extropian list!) When you get the taste of these random experiments, you may start producing random children (with random mutations, too?), paying attention to your chances to live forever with an immortal crippled debil or - much more likely - a mediocre person whose interests have nothing to do with yours. ------- More seriosly: >... Determinism is horribly boring and uncreative... - I can see *nothing* *less* creative than accepting random things - here you don't *do* anything at all. Creativity is in the intelligent choice of *actions*. While appreciating the wide variety of possible genetic combinations, I would use it to *choose* from. Actually, I don't see much sense in sticking to genotypes and biological recreation - except ancient animal instincts. Do you really treasure all your and your lover's genes that much - including the recessive ones that may have never manifested themselves in anybody you ever new; are you so proud of these 'ballast' (and possibly defective) genes carrying features you don't have that you allow them to substitute *any* of your real genes? If you are more interested in proliferating your genes than in what your children are going to be and what relationships you may have - why don't you just try to sell your great genes on the market? -- Sasha ------------------------------ I argue with ideas, not people ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 18:30:15 -0800 From: kwatson@netcom.com (Kennita Watson) Subject: Kennita's Emotional Breakdown Nick writes: Ditto for "lizard eyes", although in another context that would have been more funny than hurtful. Just to clarify: I used the term "lizard gaze" or "lizard look" because that is what Tim (May) referred to it as. I don't think his _eyes_ look like lizards' at all (I actually think he's quite a handsome fellow), and probably wouldn't have thought to refer to his expression using that term if it weren't his. Apologies for any confusion. There are more than enough Detweilers in the world who really hate us; why when we get away from his kind here do we have to start hating each other? Another clarification: I don't hate Tim (though he may hate me by now) -- I had hoped my follow-up to my post stating that I was afraid of him had made that clear. I respect and admire his intelligence, his accomplishments, and his abilities. My fear of him is visceral (first-circuit, for you RAW fans). If anybody really wants elaboration, write me privately and I'll see what I can do. Repeat: I bear Tim May no ill will; I wish him success in all his endeavors. That doesn't change my feeling of dread that he could and would squash me like a bug if I got in his way. I might feel the same way about a tidal wave, but there don't seem to be any in the immediate vicinity. I may discuss designer emotions at some future date when I'm not so bound up in feeling helpless to access them. Individualism in action? So much for a "safe haven". :-( Apologies to Nick and to any others who have found my emotional honesty disturbing. Good Things to everybody!, Kennita ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 00:00:02 +0500 From: The Hawthorne Exchange Subject: Nightly Market Report The Hawthorne Exchange - HEx Nightly Market Report For more information on HEx, send email to HEx@sea.east.sun.com with the Subject info. News Summary as of: Sun Dec 26 00:00:02 EST 1993 Newly Registered Reputations: (None) New Share Issues: (None) Share Splits: (None) Market Summary as of: Sat Dec 25 23:58:01 EST 1993 Reputations of members of the Extropians mailing list: [ Note: Contact hex-request to have a reputation placed on this list. ] Total Shares Symbol Bid Ask Last Issued Outstanding Traded AMARA .10 .50 .50 10000 2000 0 ANTON .61 .65 1.22 10000 2186 0 ARKU .18 .31 .30 10000 5301 0 BLAIR .01 1.20 .01 10000 26 0 BROOX .01 .10 .01 10000 1 0 DEREK .15 .19 .19 100000 18930 0 DROSE - .15 .10 10000 3000 0 DRS - .15 .15 10000 2600 0 DVDT .75 1.75 1.70 10000 10000 0 E .80 1.00 .90 10000 8011 0 ESR - - - - - 0 FCP .06 1.30 1.50 80000 15345 0 GHG .02 .30 .20 10000 8180 0 GODII .01 1.00 - 10000 - 0 GOEBEL .20 .25 .25 10000 767 0 H .53 .76 .76 30000 10290 0 HAM .60 .90 .90 20000 15918 0 HANNO .15 .24 - 10000 500 0 HFINN 1.50 6.00 .01 10000 1005 0 IMMFR .30 .70 .80 10000 1838 0 JFREE .02 1.25 .99 10000 3200 0 JOHN .30 .40 .35 10000 600 0 JPP .26 .29 .26 10000 3500 0 KARL 1.00 - 1.50 10000 1100 0 KLAUS .01 .45 .45 100000 37104 0 KNNTA .12 .24 .26 100000 13100 0 LEFTY .31 .42 .40 10000 4751 0 MARCR - - - - - 0 MEEKS - - - - - 0 MLINK - .01 .01 1000000 112602 0 MWM - 1.50 .01 10000 1260 0 N 1.50 9.00 5.00 10000 4749 0 P 22.50 24.00 24.00 1000000 94 0 PETER - .01 .01 10000000 601 0 PRICE - .01 .01 10000000 1410 0 R .40 .80 .70 10000 6100 0 RJC .65 999.00 2.00 10000 7100 0 ROMA - - - - - 0 RWHIT - - - - - 0 SAMEER .30 .75 .61 10000 9810 0 SHAWN .55 .55 .55 10000 2025 0 SWANK - 1.00 - 10000 - 0 TIM .60 .75 .60 10000 2104 0 WILKEN 1.00 10.00 1.00 10000 102 0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 0 Other reputations: Total Shares Symbol Bid Ask Last Issued Outstanding Traded 1000 .05 .40 .20 10000 5000 0 110 .02 .10 .10 10000 1750 0 150 .01 .10 .10 10000 1750 0 1E6 .20 - .20 10000 8825 0 1E9 .01 .09 .20 10000 7000 0 200 .02 .20 .10 10000 5075 0 80 .01 - - 10000 - 0 90 .01 - .10 10000 2000 0 ACS .10 .15 .12 10000 3223 0 AI .01 .09 .10 10000 2400 0 ALCOR .25 .85 .60 10000 3675.00 0 ALTINST - .25 .05 10000 4000 0 ANARCHY .20 .90 1.00 10000 1100 0 BETSY .01 - - 10000 - 0 BIOPR .01 .09 .05 10000 3000 0 BITD .01 1.00 - 10000 - 0 BLACK - .10 .12 100000 7000 0 CHUCK - - - - - 0 CORWIN - - - - - 0 CYPHP .32 .40 .30 10000 10000 0 D&M - - - 10000 - 0 DC1000 - .10 - 10000 - 0 DC200 - .15 .10 10000 1500 0 DC7000 - .10 - 10000 - 0 DCFLOP .15 - .15 10000 6000 0 DRXLR .75 .90 .80 10000 4545 0 EXI .10 .55 .25 10000 3025 0 FAB - - - - - 0 FROG - .05 - 10000 - 0 GOD - .10 .10 10000 3000 0 GUNS - .90 1.00 10000 3900 0 HART - 1.99 2.00 10000 9000 0 HEINLN .28 .30 .30 10000 6600 0 HEX 100.00 101.00 100.00 10000 4548 0 JBM - - - - - 0 KPJ - - - - - 0 LEARY .01 .50 .20 10000 1000 0 LEF .10 .35 .10 10000 5214 0 LIST .40 10.00 10.00 10000 5010 0 LP .25 .30 .50 10000 5625 0 LSOFT .50 1.00 .50 10000 9550 0 LURKR - .01 - 100000 - 0 MED21 .01 .30 .30 10000 5399 0 MMORE - 1.25 .10 10000 3000 0 MNSKY - .40 - 10000 - 0 MORE .38 1.25 .75 10000 2660 0 MRLOT - - - - - 0 NEWTON - .50 .20 10000 1000 0 NLAW - .50 - 10000 - 0 NNLAW - .50 - 10000 - 0 NSS .02 .03 .01 10000 25 0 OCEAN .15 .18 .20 10000 6600 0 OOMPH - 15.53 22.00 20000 - 0 PENNY - .08 1.50 10000 2500 0 PGP - 1.00 1.00 100000 2100 0 PLANET .01 .02 .02 10000 4000 0 PPL .15 .40 .30 10000 4900 0 RAND .18 .20 .20 10000 3900 0 RAW - .05 - 10000 - 0 RCLARK - .09 - 10000 - 0 SHECKY - - - - - 0 SQRL - 1.00 - 10000 - 0 SSI .15 .20 .20 10000 5200 0 TCMAY .38 1.00 .38 10000 4900 0 TRANS .01 .90 .60 10000 3211 0 VINGE .01 1.00 .75 10000 3449 0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 0 ------------------------------ End of Extropians Digest V93 #359 *********************************