<BJKlein> May 23 - Sonia Arrison - Free-market Policy
<BJKlein> Director of Technology Studies at the California-based Pacific Research Institute, Sonia Arrision joins ImmInst to discuss the importance of free-markets to a healthy economy and future.
<BJKlein>
http://www.imminst.o...=ST&f=63&t=3555<Randolfe> Sonia, are you a libertarian?
<BJKlein> Thanks for joining us, Sonia... are you outside on the wireless?
<Sonia> Yes
<Sonia> thanks for inviting me!
<Sonia> i'm inside now
<Sonia> was outside earlier
<Sonia> love wireless
<BJKlein> how did you come to your libertarian views?>
<FutureQ> BJ, sometimes, like above, the url you or others post is not clickable and other times is. How does one make it clickable?
<BJKlein> hmm.. FutureQ, it should work all times.. you may try to copy/paste
<Sonia> that's a good question -- I think it's because I spent part of my life in a small town and saw first hand how some humans like to oppress others
<BJKlein> interesting, in CA?
<MichaelA> Is advocacy of free markets a big indicator of libertarianism or somesuch..?
<Sonia> it's more obvious in a small town
<Sonia> yes -- free markets allow for greater choice and ultimately liberty
<Jonesey> what's a free market?
<Sonia> the ability to use your resources as you see fit (as long as it doesn't hurt others) is a big part of what it means to be free
<Sonia> a free market is one in which people get to make their own econ decisions
<Sonia> like what house to buy
<Sonia> what car to drive
<Sonia> where to shop
<BJKlein> is the libertarian party registered in all states now?
<Sonia> etc
*** Joins: John_Ventureville (~starman20@24-116-21-4.cpe.cableone.net)
<MichaelA> Are there ways in which our current market is not totally free or no?
<Sonia> i assume so, but I don't know
<Randolfe> I think the greatest step toward personal liberty is to be self-employed. I managed to do that in life but only 10% make it to self-employment.
<Sonia> New Hampshire is now a gathering place for a bunch of them
<Sonia> good point about the employment
<FutureQ> For immortalists, such as ourselves, it makes sese on one level to want the greatest amount of freedom. However, reality is that in the US we have a two party system and the Libertarians are not one 0f them. Is it then wise to be considered Libertarians, as a movement, when we need at least one of the current partties to be our friends?
<BJKlein> i remember they were pushing for registraion in Alabama a few years back.
<John_Ventureville> Randolfe, I totally agree. Being a "free man" while enslaved to the whims of one's boss is not a place to be.
<Jonesey> is an inefficient free market (monopoly, oligopoly and other imperfect markets) one where everyone actually gets to make their own decisions?
<Randolfe> The political analysts say that the great political divide today is between the libertarian and religious-right wings of the Republican Party.
<Jonesey> human nature is such that those with market power will inflict as much pain as profitable, game the market as best they can till the run out of prey...?
<Sonia> an inefficient free market? that's a complicated question...
<Sonia> most monopolies are government created
<FutureQ> Huh?
<Jonesey> hm? there were monopolies on the water hole long before there were gov'ts.
<Jonesey> and the happy hunting ground
<Sonia> and when there are naturally occurring ones, it's difficult to say that government intervention will be better
<Randolfe> Jonesey, free marketers don't "inflict pain" on purpose. They just seek to maximize profits.
<John_Ventureville> lol!
<Jonesey> true randolfe except where your profit is someone's loss, which is usually true.
<John_Ventureville> does it have to be a zero sum game?
<MichaelA> how does Pacific Research make money, out of curiosity
<Randolfe> Profit comes from producing a better product more effeciently. Everyone profits when that is done.
<FutureQ> No government needed to bust a monolpoy, just a mob of angry folks left out. But is that a wise way to self govern?
<Sonia> water? a monopoly on water? it's true that there are certain resources that are difficult to assign property rights to, and that creates probelms
<Jonesey> profit can come from producing an inferior product as well, e.g. microsoft, as long as there are enough barriers to entry to keep you afloat for a while
<Randolfe> We have that problem with the air we breathe and the airwaves broadcasters use.
<Jonesey> in the long run you do have to produce a superior product but you can have a lot of fun for a long time with an inferior product.
<John_Ventureville> *the Peter Prescription*
<John_Ventureville> lol
<Randolfe> But Linux is the coming program. Chine adopted it.
<Sonia> well, we could talk all day about MS -- should we try to get back to larger issues of immortality?
<FutureQ> Yeah, Randolfe, Clear Channel has been alowwed a monopoly ans o all we get is right wing wacko speak.
<Jonesey> MS is immortal, sonia
<Sonia> heh
<Sonia> it would like to be
<Sonia> as would i
<John_Ventureville> Sonia, are you an immortalist/transhumanist?
<MichaelA> Yeah, I was going to ask if you talk with people at your work about your crazy transhumanist ideas
<BJKlein> excellent.. so you wish to live forever.. and why?
<Sonia> yes -- i am very pro-life
<John_Ventureville> wow
<Sonia> life is simply better than death
* BJKlein claps
<John_Ventureville> as far as we know!
<John_Ventureville> lol
<BJKlein> death = oblivion
<Jonesey> you slay me, John_Ventureville
<Randolfe> You can't compare life and death. Death is the absence of life.
<Sonia> unless you believe that there is a real heaven, but even so, it doesn't sound that challenging
<Jonesey> wups
<FutureQ> go with what you know Jonh, the experiment has no reset button.
<Sonia> well, death is the alternative to life
<BJKlein> how did you come to this conclusion?
<FutureQ> Heaven can wait
<Sonia> i also think that the immortality issue has become more important b/c of the war on terror
<BJKlein> agree.. religion is a killer
<FutureQ> how so?
<BJKlein> religious ideas in the head of people.. athiest are safer
<Sonia> the terrorists don't mind dying
<Sonia> osama has said that his troops embrace death as we embrace life
<Sonia> if we want to beat them, we need to embrace life MORE
<Sonia> that's where immortality comes in
<Randolfe> BJ, Stalin and Mao were atheists.
<Sonia> it's patriotic, you see
<BJKlein> if they were real atheist, they'd be frozen in cryonics
<Sonia> yes, the athiests are greater enemies to immortality than are religious people
<Sonia> especially leftist athiests
<MichaelA> Sonia, when do you think 1% or more of the American population will embrace 120-yr-plus lifespans?
<Sonia> i'll tell you why
<MichaelA> I would say; "only when the technology is right there and already being demonstrated"
<BJKlein> i refer to atheism by the most strictest definition.. not with any politics
<Sonia> to answer michael's question: when it becomes possible
<BJKlein> no god = oblivion
<MichaelA> Right
<FutureQ> I'm a leftist-ish atheist and I;m way immortalist
<Sonia> no god and anti-immortality is the strongest pro-death camp
* kevin sneaks in.. and hangs in the back..
<Jonesey> Sonia, it looks to be possible now pretty definitely through diet, but for most westerners that means cutting calories and very few go for it.
<Sonia> right -- it's the long-run short-run trade off
* MichaelA waves to Kev
<Randolfe> I'm going for it. With 1500 calories a day, I've been losing a pound a week for 13 weeks now.
<BJKlein> do you embrace transhumanism, Sonia?
<Jonesey> I'm a leftist agnostic and also very immortalist
<Sonia> and perhaps it's rational if you think you might be in a car accident etc
<BJKlein> i sould assume you're interested in cryonics?
<Sonia> yes, i fully support the idea of becoming better humans
<Jonesey> randolfe:careful there, don't lose all your weight!
<Sonia> cryonics is very interesting to me
<Sonia> i don't think i want my head lopped off
<BJKlein> you may enjoy seeing
http://www.imminst.org/facing_cryonics when you have time
<Jonesey> think you'll care after death?
<Sonia> but whole-body freezing is acceptable
<BJKlein> heh
<Randolfe> Neither do I. I want my head to stay attached. I'll settle for simple cloning.
<FutureQ> then don't go with a neuro have your whole body done
<Sonia> i would care if i could come back to life
<Jonesey> i'm signed up for whole body, but my teenage son chose head only if he dies young while his organs are attractive for donation
<Sonia> hmm
<MichaelA> Head seems way cheaper
<Jonesey> it's not that much cheaper I don't think
<MichaelA> I thought it was less than half
<BJKlein> Head is more effective in saving brain information
<MichaelA> Anyway, Sonia; nano, bio
<Sonia> i suppose that if we can bring people back to life, maybe we can re-create bodies too. But then the question is: are we still ourselves?
<Randolfe> Jonesey, how fabulous. I was going to raise the question on cryonet as to whether cryonics was "selfish" in view of organs needed.
<MichaelA> Which will be more important
<MichaelA> Depends on how much me-ness you assign your body
<BJKlein> Sonia, it's all in your head.
<MichaelA> Heh
<Jonesey> Sonia:You've grown a lot from age 0, are you still yourself?
<FutureQ> Jonesy, that's not necessarilly a good idea for your son. It's a good way to get his braingood and warm with ischenic damage while they ahrvest him.
<Sonia> perhaps. and what about cloning? what do people think of that?
<Randolfe> Sonia, you are saying exactly the things I say. Our bodies are part and parcel of whom we are.
<Jonesey> futureq yep we've had that debate, he's stubborn. No idea where he got that from.
<BJKlein> cloning is just like a twin
<MichaelA> Cloning will be eclipsed rapidly by superior technologies
<BJKlein> different person all-to-gether
<MichaelA> Cloning organs, though?
<Sonia> really? what other tech>?
<MichaelA> Nanomedicine for one
<FutureQ> nano
<Sonia> ah
<BJKlein> but theraputic cloning is to be useful to life extension
<Randolfe> Cloning is an identical twin, the genotype that is you lives on. That, we know, is possible.
<kevin> our bodies are *part* or who we are.. if you lose an arm or a leg however.. it isn't nearly as deleterious to your identity as losing your brain...
<MichaelA> Robert Freitas's work you may have seen around
<Sonia> losing an arm would change who I am a bit though..
<Sonia> i would have to do things differently
<Sonia> people would see me differently
<Randolfe> Kevin, you can lose "your memories" from being hit in the head, or having Alzheimer's and still have your brain.
<MichaelA> Well, not if it were replaced with an equivalent, though
<BJKlein> I'll give you three more arms, Sonia.
<FutureQ> only until you had it regrown or replaced with bionics
<Sonia> yes -- true
<Jonesey> yep sonia you'd be saying "talk to the stump" for instance
<Sonia> hahaha
<kevin> certainly.. but after regrowing one.. you would likely become very similar to your preloss persona.. that is unlikely if you lose a prefrontal cortex and then regnerate it
<MichaelA> So, do you have all the usual transhumanist ambitions of space travel, independent flight, x-ray vision, and so on? )
<MichaelA>
<Sonia> of course
<Sonia> space travel would be very cool
<BJKlein> hmm.. let's get into smarter-than-human muhaha
<Randolfe> Kevin, if you don't think we can regrow a prefrontal coretex, how are we going to grow and entire new body?
<Jonesey> Sonia I"m perplext at the lack of market investment in immortality, the funds required are so tiny compared to what's out there in markets in general.
<MichaelA> Yeah, what do you think of the idea of smarter-than-human intelligence, recursively self-improving intelligence, the Singularity, and so on?
<Sonia> there's market investment in the baby steps
<Sonia> like nano and bio
<Jonesey> aubrey de grey estimates only around 50 mil to multiply mouse lifespan , the methusalah mouse proj
<FutureQ> I'm curious about yur acedemic peers Sonia, how do they fit in to your/our transhuman aspirations? Anyone likewise as interested, curious?
<kevin> randolfe.. what I meant was in regrowing losing part of your brain will change your personality a lot more than losing a limb.. our identity is largely housed in our gray matter.
* BJKlein is very impressed with Sonia's ideas
<Sonia> most people think the transhumanist group is pretty fringe
<Randolfe> The great Bush disaster is that they are not funding basic science. But Libertarians don't believe in governmental funding.
<kevin> randole.. subtract *regrowing*.
<Sonia> i think they are short sighted
<BJKlein> you mean the people who attack transhumanism?
<MichaelA> Scientifically literate people are best to communicate the ideas to, I think
<Randolfe> Kevin, are you sure our identity isn't located between our legs?
<Sonia> libertarians would rather see more money in your pocket so you can decide where to donate your money -- like to transhumanist research
<Sonia> bruce -- right
<kevin> LOL..
quite sure.. for myself anyways.
<FutureQ> Mine is Rany!! hehe
<Randolfe> I haven't seen any uptick in funding coming from people weho got big tax cuts from Bush.
<BJKlein> as MA was saying, do you have thoughs or fears that we humans will create something smarter than we are sometime soon?
<Jonesey> i've got the laker/timberwolves game on in the background, shaq, kobe, garnett etc all have contracts more than 50 mil. surely someone out there values immortality more than watching those guys. maybe if richard mellon scaife has relaxed from bankrolling whitewater/paula jones suit etc he could put some cash here.
<Sonia> transhumanism is today like travelling to the moon was to my father's generation
<FutureQ> Of course not Randolfe they're all in the get it and hoard it till I die camp.
<BJKlein> imagine an entity that is 100 to 1000 times smarter than any human mind
<Sonia> i believe that can happen
<Sonia> i think we will integrate with machines
<BJKlein> are we screwed?
<Sonia> no -- we will be them
<BJKlein> cool
<Sonia> it will not be an us vs them
<kevin> Sonia.. do you think that individuals will have to accept more responsibility in the future because of the ease of participation in decision making afforded by the internet?
<Randolfe> FutureQ, worse than that, they get a gas guzzler for every member of the family.
<MichaelA> I would hesitate to estimate the probability that human-computer interfacing will come before autonomous AI as very very high
<Sonia> yes, with greater freedom comes greater responsibility, but it's possible that new technologies will also hinder freedom
<Sonia> michael -- that's interesting why?
<Randolfe> Sonia, I believe in the free market and am a conservative libertarian. However, this job outsourcing has me really worried.,
<FutureQ> I hope to hell it is higher Michael
<BJKlein> MichaelA, i fear you're right.. AI Indepent.. may come before Brain-Computer interface
<MichaelA> Is it harder to build a 747, or reinvent the bird?
<MichaelA> AI can be more streamlined than the complex circuitry required to interface with human neurons
<Sonia> outsourcing will help everyone in the long run. again , it's long run vs short run thinking
<Jonesey> I'm getting pessimistic sitting here.
<MichaelA> The bottleneck here is the innate complexity of the human brain
<FutureQ> mm, building an AI could e constreud as reinventing
<Jonesey> People are equating superstition(god) with the drive for progress, when in fact it has been an incredible brake on science.
<Randolfe> My basic argument with libertarians is that they "carry a good idea" too far.
<MichaelA> Not reinventing the whole Homo sapiens brain, but only what is absolutely required for intelligence
<BJKlein> Jonesey ?
<Jonesey> Galileo, Copernicus, darwin, mendel
<BJKlein> who's talking god?
<Jonesey> and currently people who are working on stem cells etc
<kevin> Michael.. the brain is the ultimate adaptable tool.. I think it may have a few surprises in the interface arena that we haven't thought of.
<Sonia> I am somewhat optimistic as AI has been stalled for years and we are making great progress in the bio-sciences
<Sonia> I can't equate AI with a 747
<FutureQ> I think Jonesy mena the eschatological camp that sees progress as foretold in the end times.
<MichaelA> There may be surprises, but they have to be sufficient to boost human intelligence substantially, and I'm not sure that's too easy within the current biological framework
<Randolfe> With enhancements, the human brain can outcompete AI
<outlawpoet> Sonia, what do you mean by stalled, precisely?
<MichaelA> It's not a matter of competition
<Sonia> i agree with randolfe
<BJKlein> It may be that Independent AI will go first.. and then look back to help us slower meat brain humans
<MichaelA> Part of the problem with interface research is that it's hard to get FDA clearance for experiments
<MichaelA> Meaning the research pool is small
<Sonia> stalled as in it was in the 1970s that eveyone thought we'd see huge advancements in this area, but it hasn't moved much since then
<Jonesey> bjk Sonia said above that atheist(and I assume agnostics like me also) leftists are the biggest opponents of immortalism
<BJKlein> ak.. ok
<FutureQ> Thatwill chgange as more of my ilk get implants fr disabilities.
<Jonesey> in fact the biggest and most implacable opponent of sicence is superstition, aka religion.
<Jonesey> hands down.
<Sonia> yes, the FDA is a huge impairment
<MichaelA> AI was overhyped by desperate enthusiasts
<Randolfe> I think transhumanist talk about "meat brains" and "bio-body-bags" hurts our ideas being accepted.
<outlawpoet> Sonia, that's largely a question of metrics.
<Jonesey> conservative points of view that are threatened by advancing knowledge that breaks doctrine.
<kevin> Heh.. once the experiments on robotic control come through with the flying colors they will.. (I'm hoping.. ) there will be little to stop almost any application and brain scanning tech will become top priority
<Sonia> let me track back to my athiest comment
<outlawpoet> in term of actual progress, we're in a very different place than we were at that point.
<Jonesey> It's tough when you make a claim of eternal truth, e.g. "god"
<BJKlein> well, Jonesey, the politics are certianly complicated
<Jonesey> you're then stuck defending it against every new set of facts that come in
<outlawpoet> adaptive control systems are nearly mainstream, that used to be "AI research".
<Jonesey> as opposed to science which shifts its theories rather than crushing the discoverers of annoying facts
<Randolfe> Not if you have the Jewish sense of asking questions.
<kevin> Sonia can you revisit your athiest comment for me.. ?
<Jonesey> of course if you have "jewish sense", look at zionists today who never question why it is that they are acting like milosevic and ethnically cleansing left and right cos "god gave them the land" or whatever.
<Sonia> this is what I had in mind: athiest supporters of immortality are great -- they have a clear vision of what they want. Religious types are not as anti-immortality as we might think. Most religions have as their goal eternal life -- so they are with us on the outcome, just simply how we get there. It's the athiests who oppose immortality who are the worst opponents in my view as they are truely pro-death.
<Randolfe> I mean the Talmud approach that is less doctrainaire.
<Jonesey> I don't know any atheists who oppose immortality, but yes I guess you could be right if such people exist
<Sonia> they exist
<Jonesey> by far and away, religious folks react most strongly against it in my experience. but then I know so many more religious people than agnostics or atheists.
<BJKlein> Sonia, do you have any specific names in mind you'd feel comfortable sharing?
<MichaelA> If atheists wanted immortality, then they'd be here in this chatroom with us
<Sonia> they are the ones who argue that life would be meaningless without death
<Randolfe> Sonia, if you read the stats on membership here, there are no traditional religionists.
<Sonia> and then they want to use the government to tell you what the meaning of life is
<kevin> I've been thinking the same thing Sonia.. it's the hopeless who are the most vehement about maintenance of the status quo and who do not have a larger vision to hold them from using tactics that those who believe in immortality do.
<Jonesey> Interesting sonia, have never heard of or met anyone who said that.
<Jonesey> Lots of religious people who feel trying to achieve physical immortality="playing god"
<Jonesey> lots and lots
<Randolfe> Leon Kass, a poriest without a collar, is the big proponenet that death gives meaning to life, not any atheists I know of.
<kevin> A lot of 'religious' people don't give a damn for the religion.. only the power that it affords in 'this' life.
<Jonesey> yep kevin, that's always been true
<FutureQ> Sonia, ll the athiest opponsnetsneed is a tipping piint to one, show them it is possible, and two that it won't setroy the environment. However, the religionists feel that only god can give immortality and they fear the loss of revenue when the churches empty because the real reason people go to church is fear of death, no fear death no more church, no more payt for prests and bishops etc.
<kevin> Leon Kass is an anomaly..
<BJKlein> what's one or two things that would change minds toward more pro-immortality thinking?
<Jonesey> BJK:A sense of feasibilty
<Sonia> oh sure, that argument can come from the religious side too. All I am pointing out is that the immortality folks and the religious folks all support immortality -- just in different forms
<BJKlein> agree
<Jonesey> Most people are very surprised when I say for example that we have an excellent idea how to dramatically extend lifespan just by diet.
<Sonia> and once society loses it's myths, there will be more support for immortality
<kevin> spiritual vs. physical
<Randolfe> The first real transhumanist activist I've encountered is an ex Jehovah Witness. That religion preaches eternal life here on Earth.
<Jonesey> such that most people could reliably aim right now for a 120 yr liefspan.
<Jonesey> let alone all the other great stuff being worked on.
<John_Ventureville> FuturQ, I think people attend church for many more reasons than just a fear of death....
<Jonesey> Sonia here's an interesting one for you, how do you market something that won't pay off till your'e very old or dead, life extension?
<BJKlein> pretty fast chat tonight..
<Sonia> yes
<Sonia> so many qusetions -- i feel like we could have been here for hours
<kevin> I personally don't feel that the actual meat of most religions preclude the search for physical immortality.. and actually may be referring to it rather than a spiritual one.
<Jonesey> Maybe that's why the market is struggling with life extension techniques available now such as diet
<John_Ventureville> getting a sense of community and shared values almost eclipses the fear of death point
<FutureQ> It gets them in the door first John.
<Sonia> kevin -- if we become immortal, doesn't that mean god is dead?
*** Joins: Rotaerk (~Rotaerk@0-2pool159-236.nas6.augusta2.ga.us.da.qwest.net)
<Sonia> or maybe we become god's sibling...
<Sonia>
<Jonesey> Sonia:Yes, but who cares. God sounds kind of mean from what I've read
<BJKlein> Sonia, you're handling this very well... you're quite brilliant
<John_Ventureville> so I see organized religion and Christianity going strong even in a society of immortals
<kevin> not at all.. it means our current idea of god is lacking.. and it will evolve as it has over the millenia and will continue to do so..
<Sonia> God dose seem mean -- i agree
<John_Ventureville> religion will just continue to morph, as it has done for centuries
<Jonesey> kevin:Yes true
<Jonesey> religion has been amazingly resilient
<Sonia> that's an interesting concept
<Sonia> how would religion change?
<John_Ventureville> Sonia, that's a Physical Immortality article idea
<John_Ventureville>
<Jonesey> maybe types of "religion" that are more introspective might get stronger, like meditative inner oriented buddhism
<Sonia> there could still be an idea of an omni-present being
<BJKlein> religion is a sticky meme because it serves an important purpose to aswage the fear of oblivion after death...
<Randolfe> I think we forget that "immunity from accidental death" is virtually impossible. So, even with greatly expanded lifetime, we will still have basic questions.
<Sonia> religion is also supposed to keep people in line
<kevin> god would become less 'human'.. greek mythology humanize their gods.. and we tend to measure 'god' in a similar way.. it is impossible for us to fathom what god is.. we are too limited..
<Jonesey> is that an important purpuse, or a terrible dilution of the drive to scientifically understand and conquer aging?
<Jonesey> is religion actually the opium of the masses, as far as solving death is concerned?
<John_Ventureville> religion might change in terms of less stress on the "thou shalt not's" and more stress on God's unconditional love and the sense of community that engenders
<MichaelA> It is already changing in that direction
<Sonia> yes -- i tend to think john is right if religion survives
<Sonia> this is an interesting theoretical
<MichaelA> Presbytarianism would be one example
<kevin> I think moving in the direction of something more akin to Buddhism and Universality is where we will see most religions head..
<kevin> reading the subtexts of Xtianity as well as other mainstream religions reveals that they are not that far off of that path either.
<FutureQ> Once we all have greater intelligence and total recll of all of human works we'll, one, realize the Christ myth was faked, and two, all accept evolution hands down. How can there be room for religion in the light of absolute reason?>
<Sonia> right -- there's still the notion of fate
<John_Ventureville> and in a society of immortals death would still come (though rarely) and so when it did people would in some ways feel it even more! And religion could be doubly comforting for them (in whatever changed form they observed it).
<Jonesey> if everyone were really convinced 1) that aging is solvable and 2) religion is BS, I would think there would be a much greater focus of resources on solving aging and death.
<MichaelA> FutureQ: absolutely not, religion has a limited lifespan
<MichaelA> FutureQ: as in, there can be no room
<Sonia> right -- but humans are not always reasonable
<MichaelA> Jonesey: right, but it's not worth obsessing over the second one too much because we can do so little
<kevin> There will always be room for Myth.. no matter how advanced we become..we will never be all knowing.. I'm thinking we're just one small Russian doll inside innumerable other shells..
<MichaelA> The first message is our primary task
<Jonesey> MichaelA:Hm I don't know, there have been other ubiquitous memes like slavery that have receded to a dramatic extent, though not completely disappeared yet.
<Sonia> there are many unthinking people in society -- perhaps that's the greatest argument for why religion will continue even when we can be immortal.
<John_Ventureville> to say "religion is BS" shows just how ignorant a person is of the role of religion within the context of human society and the human condition
<MichaelA> I think there is a difference between lack of mysticism and all-knowing-ness
<FutureQ> That';s my point exactly MichaelA, there is no room fr it when one accepts total reason and logic and truth.
<Jonesey> but yes the first one is a LOT easier to disseminate without inviting a hailstorm of hostility
<Jonesey> the best way to do it though is something like the methuselah mouse project
<MichaelA> All of human history rests of the foundation of our species-unique brain structure, and once we start modifying that, all bets are off
<MichaelA> Or at least, a great many of them
<Sonia> michael -- that's a good point. There is a bit of that that concerns me.
<BJKlein> we're nearing the end of our wonderful official chat with Sonia Arrison.. but all are free to stay longer
<John_Ventureville> Dr. Michael Perry is currently writing a book on the subject of creating a rational religion
<MichaelA> Yeah, it concerns me because it could quickly lead to extinction if handled unproperly
<Sonia> what if we modify our brains and it results in something where none of us care about anyone else anymore?
<Sonia> could be a big problem
<MichaelA> Well, that would suck, we would need to try to avoid that on the self-revision trajectory
<MichaelA> Just like we need to avoid overpopulation on the life extension trajectory
<kevin> Michael.. as long as there is a need to explain the unexplainable.. someone or something somewhere will attempt to fill it with faith in the abscence of facts..
<MichaelA> There are always benefits and risks
<Sonia> that's why i think baby step are the proper way to go about enhancement
*** Joins: Kid-A (~Dave@217.137.106.49)
<Jonesey> I get lots of email on enhancement sonia, and they're not promsing baby steps
<Sonia> and, practically speaking, i also think scientific progress wil be a series of smaller steps
<MichaelA> Kevin: it's actually possible to use a formal system that doesn't fill in unexplainables with faith
<BJKlein> Sonia, it seems things are happening much faster (Kurzweil)
<Randolfe> Sonia, the more conservative way would be to avoid germline engineering.
<Sonia> i know -- i'm in the minority on that here probably
<John_Ventureville> every time I hear the phrase "baby-steps" I think of the Bill Murray movie What about Bob?"
<kevin> heh.. our unique brain structure is still based on the same physical principles that any other structure will be based.. and likely subject to similar 'anomalies'..
<John_Ventureville> *sorry*
<MichaelA> What "anomalies" are inherent in physical structure?
*** Joins: Nanogirl (~Nanogirl@c-24-18-55-195.client.comcast.net)
<MichaelA> It's not about germline engineering as much as completely reshaping your brain with medical nanotech
<BJKlein> welcome Gina Miller (nanogirl)
<Sonia> what are the big things that are likely to happen? I asked this question at the recent Foresight event and *no one* had an answer.
<Nanogirl> Hi Bj and everyone...
<MichaelA> Hey Gina, saw you at Foresight but didn't get a chance to introduce myself
<FutureQ> Noooo. Randy we don't want to avoid germline engineering!!
<Nanogirl> Hello Michael, nice to meet you
<kevin> Michael.. random motion in quantum mechanics creating unpredictable variations which lead to paths of evolution which one may not have thought of
<Randolfe> I agree. Just seeing where Sonia stood on that.
<Sonia> too bad we don't have avatars
<John_Ventureville> howdy, Gina!
<BJKlein> ya, i envy the Forseight gathers
<Nanogirl> Hi John
<Nanogirl> why don't you go BJ?
<Randolfe> Nanogirl and I were the only two people at an Extropian Summit event. Small world.
<FutureQ> Hi, Gina!
<BJKlein> dont fly
<MichaelA> Kevin: a small amount of low-level static could easily be irrelevant in the bigger picture of evolutionary development, ref John Smart
<Nanogirl> I see.
<John_Ventureville> I was at the Extropian summit
<Nanogirl> I wasn't?
<kevin> Michael.. *could*..
<BJKlein> Randolfe, Extropian Summit physical event or online event?
<Sonia> jonesey: what are the promising big steps in AI etc?
<Nanogirl> aw,...that might be it
<Randolfe> Online event. Poorly attended.
<Nanogirl> Okay, yes, now I remember.....
<John_Ventureville> *only at times*
<BJKlein> ah.. you mean online chat event for the summit
<MichaelA> Saying "could" doesn't give us full license to postulate that major evolutionary directions were taken as a result of quantum static
<Nanogirl> I was starting to think someone was stealing my identity for a minute..........: )
* BJKlein Official Chat Ends
<MichaelA> The design pressure of selection and differential reproduction vastly overwhelms any quantum noise effects
<FutureQ> that was a shame too. I donated but couldn't find the time to attend.
<BJKlein> not yet Nanogirl
<John_Ventureville> the chats were great
<Nanogirl> good thing
<MichaelA> thanks for joining us, Sonia
<John_Ventureville> it's not that often that you get people like Max More or Greg Burch in a chatroom
<FutureQ> hope they happen again
<kevin> Yes certainly.. thanks Sonia!
<Nanogirl> i have been dealing with some bad news lately...
<Randolfe> Nanogirl, would you feel you lost you identity if someone cloned you?
<John_Ventureville> Sonia, it's been a good chat
<Sonia> I need to run to write an article, but if anyone wants to contact me, my email address is: sonia.arrison@gmail.com
<Jonesey> thanx sonia
<Sonia> yes --this was fun -- thanks for inviting me!
<Jonesey> great fun
<Nanogirl> no, I wouldn't Randolfe, there are already clones, twins, and they have seperate identities
<Nanogirl> if someone cloned me w/o my knowledge, I might have some concerns...........
<BJKlein> really heady chat tonight... it's great to make your virtual acquaintance, Sonia
<Jonesey> memory is a huge part of identity, tha'ts why you feel like you're the same person as the 10 yr old "you"
<BJKlein> take care!
<John_Ventureville> *invite this gal to the first Immortality Institute conference*
<Sonia> great to virtually meet u 2, bruce
<Sonia> ciao
<John_Ventureville> bye
<Randolfe> Goodbye
