Re: Orangutan granted human rights
In Indonesia rapidly shrinking habitat might force the Orangutang into cultivated areas, where she would be killed as a crop raider. On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Jon Louis Mann net_democr...@yahoo.com wrote: Would this orangutan be better off released in the Indonesian rain forest? Jon Mann Very interesting, so the court decided that the non-human individuals have rights such as freedom of movement, and that the orangutan was unjustly imprisoned at a zoo (the story makes it clear that she didn't enjoy being there, and would probably not choose to remain). I wonder how much precedent this case will generate, and whether it will get applied to industrial animals as well? -- Matt A court in Argentina granted human rights to a captive Orangutan: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/21/us-argentina-orangutan-idUSKBN0JZ0Q620141221 http://www.buzzfeed.com/mbvd/orangutan-granted-basic-legal-rights-in-argentina#.fimQx6Xkb http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/landmark-ruling-orangutan-granted-basic-rights-argentina/ http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-30571577 (that's a great improvement from a country where, 40 years ago, humans didn't have human rights) Now, let's Uplift them!!! Alberto Monteiro ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Domain Hierarchy
I once read a quote that went something like, No action against climate change has ever been taken that resulted in material economic injury to those who took the action. This lead me to think that despite the knowledge about climate change at a physical level, humans make decisions based on the domains (not the sciences) of psychology, economics, and politics. Climate change then, is not a hard science problem, it is an economic and political problem. The solution can't be had through privation, no matter how much scientists say extreme conservation may be necessary, but has to involve a path through shared prosperity. The second thing it made me think is that while it cannot be said that one science is more important than another, the discursive domains indexed by sciences can be ranked as more or less foundational or derived, or more pejoratively as reductionist or ramified. Society Politics Economics Psychology Biology Chemistry Physics (Everything is, of course, mediated by psychology, but leaving that aside.) As you go down the scale knowledge becomes more precise and attainable, but relevance to daily experience lessens. As you go up the scale, the ramified complexity of the domain makes knowledge imprecise, but the lived relevance is high. This explains the frustration of natural scientists who find good science rendered irrelevant in the face of psychology,economics, politics, and society. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Domain Hierarchy
I have a degree in Mathematics. I consider it more of an art than a science. Math is a linguistic game that fortuitously has practical applications. On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 8:44 PM, David Hobby hob...@newpaltz.edu wrote: On 3/3/2014 10:37 PM, trent shipley wrote: ... The second thing it made me think is that while it cannot be said that one science is more important than another, the discursive domains indexed by sciences can be ranked as more or less foundational or derived, or more pejoratively as reductionist or ramified. Society Politics Economics Psychology Biology Chemistry Physics Trent-- You left out Mathematics? http://xkcd.com/435/ ---David ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: New Encyclopedia
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Keith Henson hkeithhen...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 12:00 PM, trent shipley trent.ship...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Keith Henson hkeithhen...@gmail.com wrote: Does Imaginaria stretch far enough to encompass Tom Clancy type novels? I haven't read any Tom Clancy so I don't have a bias to share on this point. I think some of his novels may be science fiction enough to qualify while others require suspension of disbelief but don't really have the rupture with mundane reality that imaginaria requires. Debt of Honor (1994) foretold 9/11. So as predictive SF it certainly made the cut. Any objection to using the space to actually write short stories or novels? ?I.e., put up stuff you are not trying to sell and have no intention of selling where people could edit the work. No fiction. The intellectual property lawyers hate fan fiction. Trivia good. Fiction bad. It's your wiki, you set the rules about what you want there. However, I don't see any reason for IP lawyers to get involved in (non derivative) fiction put up under a CC type license. Perhaps you could explain? Keith I want the wiki to be a place to document and critique imaginaria. Posting fiction removes the underlying theme of non-fiction writing about imaginaria. Including new fiction invites not just fictional narrative but world building. Including fiction creates the problem of proving the fiction is original. Perhaps most important including original fiction means that I have to spend even more time fighting fan fiction. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: New Encyclopedia
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Keith Henson hkeithhen...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm. I suppose I could put in a short bit about how The Clinic Seed came about. Another would be a long article about the influence of the early Extropian mailing list on such writers as Charles Stross. Does Imaginaria stretch far enough to encompass Tom Clancy type novels? I haven't read any Tom Clancy so I don't have a bias to share on this point. I think some of his novels may be science fiction enough to qualify while others require suspension of disbelief but don't really have the rupture with mundane reality that imaginaria requires. Any objection to using the space to actually write short stories or novels? I.e., put up stuff you are not trying to sell and have no intention of selling where people could edit the work. No fiction. The intellectual property lawyers hate fan fiction. Trivia good. Fiction bad. Keith ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: New Encyclopedia
Hi Jo Anne. You don't need to be an administrator to edit the wiki, you just need to click on the edit tab. If a link appears in red, then you can create the page for it by clicking on the link. You can create a new page by searching for the page title. If the title doesn't exist, then you can click on the bold red text to create the page. Most of the formating can be done from the icons at the top of the editor. Right now anyone can edit the wiki without logging in, but you may need to answer a simple math problem to finish. When you are ready you can sign up for a user name and password. When you log on to edit the wiki keeps track of what changes are yours. Practice at http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Sandbox See also in case you want to edit by hand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cheatsheet On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Jo Anne evens...@hevanet.com wrote: Uh, Trent? What do I use for an 'Admin address' and is the password the one for brinl? I tried my email and my brinl password, and I ***failed***. Please remember that just about everything I ever learnt about operating a computer, I learned on this list or from it's members Old and slow. Jo Anne evens...@hevanet.com Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 19:28:21 -0700 From: trent shipley trent.ship...@gmail.com To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: New Encyclopedia Message-ID: AANLkTikcn3pjcJFJP+k=gdnocb0w4gnprn+vr71la...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Some of you may recall that a few months ago there was a discussion about a David Brin trivia site. I have rented space on a server and Nick has helped with technical issues. You are welcome to work on a trivia project for David Brin's fiction at http://www.encyclopediaimaginaria.org. I hope to get a logo for the site in a few weeks. -- ___ Brin-l mailing list bri...@box535.bluehost.com http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com End of Brin-l Digest, Vol 26, Issue 1 * ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
New Encyclopedia
Some of you may recall that a few months ago there was a discussion about a David Brin trivia site. I have rented space on a server and Nick has helped with technical issues. You are welcome to work on a trivia project for David Brin's fiction at http://www.encyclopediaimaginaria.org. I hope to get a logo for the site in a few weeks. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: RE: Facebook is evil, why it must be eradicated [was: Wikileaks?]
A business decision that injures public health. On Dec 7, 2010 3:15 PM, Dan Minette danmine...@att.net wrote: Only a sociopath and pervert can think that breastfeeding is pornography. It's disrespectful to... Actually, it doesn't, Alberto. Facebook is free, last time I looked. I can choose to use it or not use it. If a network won't let me refer to physics, and takes all examples of QM off it, it's not criminalizing QM. Perhaps Facebook is making a business decision. Will disallowing pictures of breastfeeding on Facebook gain it more prudish members than allowing it would gain members interested in details of breastfeeding that can best be shown by pictures? Not allowing women to breastfeed in, say, Mall of the Americas is one thing. That severely curtails breastfeeding mom's ability to go there. But, there are other ways to communicate such info on the web, so not allowing someone to post it on one's Facebook account can be seen as a purely business decision. Dan M. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l... ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Wikileaks
The Manhattan Project was spied on by the Soviets. On Dec 1, 2010 4:18 AM, Alberto Monteiro albm...@centroin.com.br wrote: Doug Pensinger wrote: I'm generally for transparency and haven't heard of anything yet that ... I think the worst source of embarassment is the use by .govs of security-weak softwares and OSes. What if this happened 70 years ago and Manhattan Project was leaked to the nazis (or even the soviets)? Alberto Monteiro ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l... ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Wikileaks
How many secrets does Australia have that are worth leaking. Does a significant fraction of the World's population believe it is The Great Satan? On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Wayne Eddy darkenf...@gmail.com wrote: It is interesting to hear that there is overwhelming sentiment against Wikileaks in the US. From the comments I have read on newspaper articles about Wikileaks here in Australia, I would think a majority of people here (maybe about 75%) are supportive. Personally, I think there is good and bad in what Julian Assange and his team are doing, but that the good definitely outweighs the bad. Regards, Wayne Eddy. On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Doug Pensinger brig...@zo.com wrote: There seems to be overwhelming sentiment against Wikileaks' release of confidential documents and I was wondering how people here (some of whom may have read Brin's Transparent Society) felt about it. I'm generally for transparency and haven't heard of anything yet that is beyond mildly embarrassing to the U. S. government. I do think where the safety of our troops is concerned confidentially is important, but that government secrets should have a relatively short shelf life in all cases. Doug ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Down with the government
On 10/15/2010 05:15 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: At 03:23 PM Friday 10/15/2010, Dan Minette wrote: [snip] California has put itself in a box and I'd expect housing prices to drop another factor of ? before it can start to rebound. Now, there's a topic we can debate. :-) Dan M. Something missing here . . . . . . ronn! :) ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com The cost of living in California is still too high for it to compete with other livable areas. Therefore, no new business moves to California, especially the bay area. But if housing costs matched those in the Plains or Appalachia then it would be more attractive to open a business in California. After all, a low cost of living is why New England has weathered the Great Recession so well. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Unsolvable and beyond compromise.
http://alturl.com/s5id Republicans would have to be suicidal idiots to play ball with Obama and the Democrats on health care reform. They all involve increased interference by the Federal Government in the health care market, which is a cultural no-no in America. (Leaving people uninsured is also a no-no. Basically, health care reform runs afoul deeply held contradictory cultural values. It is not a problem for which there is a satisfactory political compromise.) ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Br?n on global warming
Wayne Eddy wrote: Found what I thought was a terrific paper on carbon sequestration. It suggests that it should be possible to use nanotechnology to convert atmospheric carbon dioxide into diamond bricks by the 2030's. http://www.imm.org/Reports/rep043.pdf ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com Why not convert it back to coal -- or wood -- so we can burn it again? Cleaner energy through reverse entropy and perpetual motion. (OK. I looked over the table of contents. There seems to be a solar input.) ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Br?n on global warming
Keith Henson wrote: If we don't solve the energy problem as many as 6 out of 7 people will *die* in famines and resource wars. Keith ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com Where will they live? (I am a member of a tribe. Global civilization can go stuff itself.) ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Br?n on global warming
Charlie Bell wrote: On 18/02/2010, at 11:29 AM, Keith Henson wrote: On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Charlie Bell char...@culturelist.org wrote: On 13/02/2010, at 7:05 AM, Keith Henson wrote: Examples such as water tanks, solar hot water, decent insulation are small steps that if taken by large numbers of people can massively lower the demand for energy. That's not as true as most people hope. All the saving you can make in a year are blown on one short aircraft trip. If you're talking per capita CO2 emissions, yes you're correct. If we're talking energy usage across a city (especially mainly suburban cities like in Australia), we're talking significant savings through these steps - they're the low-hanging fruit that it's crazy not to get on with. Tanks compared to desalination, for example, are so sensible and yet there's a push from politicians to huge wasteful desal. We've got our per capita mains consumption down to under 100l a day, and a few more changes to our home system will take us to using no more than 10l/pp/pd. This across a city the size of Melbourne can save at least 200gigalitres per annum, which would save building the 788GWh per annum desal plant planned for Melbourne is expected to use. Melbourne's power stations burn lignite... so you'll see the sorts of real consumption savings that can be achieved easily here with ease. There's no one-size-fits-all solution of course, but with some leadership we can save a lot of waste which is just as important as transitioning to new forms of energy production. For a little while longer I work for the local electric utility. We had a newsletter item that the Australian leadership had ruled out nuclear as an option and instead was making a bet on carbon sequestration from coal plants ... which will surely pan out eventually. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Br?n on global warming
Michael Harney wrote: Trent wrote: I believe that climate change is true, but that America's response must preserve the American way of life or to hell with the planet. You're kidding right? If we go down we're taking the world with us? A little Bond-villain-esqe don't you think? Can't compromises be reached? The majority of Americans are willing to give up a great portion of civil rights during times of war. We can't change our lifestyles just a little to preserve a more stable future? I'm half kidding, but I partly feel this way. More importantly, I think it reflects political reality. Polls are showing people are less concerned about global warming and more skeptical. It really comes home when you ask if you can raise electricity rates to prevent global warming. Polls come up with a resounding NO!. If you want to solve global warming it better not cost me my job, increase my electricity bill, make me pay more for transportation, sacrifice the quality or quantity of my transportation, or otherwise degrade my lifestyle. Also, it better not prevent increasing prosperity in less developed countries. Indeed, it better not reduce the rate at which prosperity increases. If you can do those things, then we can talk about fighting global warming. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Br?n on global warming
Michael Harney wrote: Trent wrote: Why not nuclear power? Less people have died in nuclear accidents than mining coal. Mining coal is more hazardous to your health than working in a modern nuclear power plant. It doesn't produce CO2. It doesn't produce environmental pollution other than the obvious radioactive waste that is slated to start being stored at Yucca Mountain starting in a few years, where it won't be a concern for tens of thousands of years. If the human contribution to global climate change is significant and is something that can significantly impact us within the next one or two centuries, then why not trade the more immediate global problem for one that is more localized and we will have a much longer time period to solve? The problem with nuclear power is that we can't get all the uranium we need from reliable countries. A lot of it comes from Russia, the Central Asian Republics, and less stable African states. The ex-Soviet sources are worse for the Europe and the U.S. than Saudi oil since those countries still treat the West as a strategic threat. Saudia Arabia treats America as a necessary evil and a protector, but not a threat. Uranium is a finite resource, and energy use always increases even with improved conservation. As time goes on, access to uranium may become an even bigger energy security problem for the West than it is now. So if your primary motivation is energy security (not climate change), nuclear power is only a marginal improvement over oil. For America, however, Coal is the ultimate in energy security. It's right here. We can even export the stuff and gain a strategic advantage over other countries by becoming part of their energy supply chain. Trent Shipley wrote: I believe that climate change is true, but that America's response must preserve the American way of life or to hell with the planet. So the solution has to be a magic technology fix. We cannot raise the cost of energy to solve climate change, especially not before the costs of climate change become apparent. Even then it may be more politically expedient to build levees than to increase the cost of energy. As for American energy security, that means coal, not uranium. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Br?n on global warming
As you said. http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/u/uranium-reserves.htm Uranium mining (reserves?) in tonnes Australia 725,000 t Brazil 157,400 t Canada 329,200 t * Kazakhstan 378,100 t South Africa 284,400 t Namibia 176,400 t * Niger 243,100 t * Russia 172,400 t Ukraine 135,000 t * Uzbekistan 72,400 t USA 339,000 t Richard Baker wrote: Trent said: The problem with nuclear power is that we can't get all the uranium we need from reliable countries. A lot of it comes from Russia, the Central Asian Republics, and less stable African states. Aren't the worlds most productive uranium mines in Canada and Australia? Those two countries combined account for almost half of the world's uranium output, Russia around 8%, other former Soviet states 22%, Africa about 15%. Rich ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Br?n on global warming
I believe that climate change is true, but that America's response must preserve the American way of life or to hell with the planet. So the solution has to be a magic technology fix. We cannot raise the cost of energy to solve climate change, especially not before the costs of climate change become apparent. Even then it may be more politically expedient to build levees than to increase the cost of energy. As for American energy security, that means coal, not uranium. Nick Arnett wrote: http://open.salon.com/blog/david_brin/2010/02/09/the_real_struggle_behind_climate_change_-_a_war_on_expertise ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
ping
Ping! ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Is this thing on?
No. Jeroen van Baardwijk wrote: taps on microphone Is this thing on? /tapping Is this silence (no messages for several days) caused by technical issues, or is Brin-L no longer the high-volume list is once was? Jeroen van Baardwijk -- Wonderful World of Brin-L Website: www.brin-l.com Alliance for Progress Encyclopedia: www.brin-l.com/a4p ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: The worst
Nick Arnett wrote: My friends I hate to write this. Been putting it off for a while. My younger sister, Lesley, the youngest of the four of us, mother of my five-year-old niece, Sarah, could not fight off the sepsis that attacked her body. Lesley died this morning. I have never hurt so much. Nick ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com That is really sad. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Foswiki content guidelines.
Alberto Monteiro wrote: David Brin asked: Let me know how I can help! You must tell us how far can we go - and how far we can't go :-) Here are the guidelines so far -- and they aren't consensus guidelines, they are still just guidelines Trent made up. You have to write from an external point of view. It's not fair writing from a point of view inside the author's universe, that is fan fiction. You have to write about fiction. You cannot write fiction. No fan fiction, fan world extending, original fiction, or original world building. The following are definitely in. Summaries. Plot Synopses. Original Reviews. Literary Criticism. And LOTS of trivia We will see how reviews and criticism work out on a wiki, I can see them being productive mostly of edit wars -- especially on Foswiki which doesn't seem to come with a comments page like MediaWiki does. Obviously, copy-and-pasting huge pieces of the books is totally out of line. Obviously, giving a small resume of the books is totally in line. Hell lies in the details: could we place resumes of the character's lifes? Could we place description of the places, ships, races, concepts, etc? See, for example, what motivated this thread: the pages in wikipedia that were marked for deletion by a wikipedia troll (or should I say a wikipedia Tandu?): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_Hph-wayuo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uplift_Universe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gubru http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glaver http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthclan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tymbrimi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jophur http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G'Kek http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaker_(David_Brin) (possibly other pages) Are these pages too much or too little? Alberto Monteiro All except Uplift Universe count as trivia. I'd port them straight over. I just looked at the Streaker article. It has an objection that its told from an insider's point of view, like an article for Trekkies by Trekkies. A decent trivia article might not stand on its own, but after following some links you should be able to get a feel for the trivia's role in the universe. It is also good to cite chapter and verse, documenting what books Streaker (for example) appears in and even what pages. This is particularly true for a race like the Tandu who, as I recall, made a cameo appearance in Startide Rising. After porting the endangered Wikipedia pages, I'd focus on articles for DB's books at the synopsis and summary level. Don't forget the bibliographic details. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Brin: UniversesImagined wiki
Dr Brin please see: http://nickarnett.net/foswiki/bin/view Hopefully you won't find anything more offensive than forcing writing about your work to share a site with fantasy and other forms of imaginaria. Other list members should note that the the site is open for business. New pages should be created under the web named Main. From David Brin we could use a short biography and a list of relevant works. David Brin wrote: Let me know how I can help! *From:* Richard Baker r...@theculture.org *To:* Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com *Sent:* Sun, January 3, 2010 2:35:44 PM *Subject:* Re: Brin: Re: is Brin-l active? Nick said: And we're cooking up a new project, a wiki for SF and fantasy, starting with a focus on a particular writer's works... Guess who. Benford? Bear? Baxter? Rich GCU I Give Up! ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: May not be around
Jim Sharkey wrote: Nick Arnett wrote: Yes, Im in Santa Clara... waiting to see if I should head to NC. Apparently the recovery from something like this is very long, so Im not rushing there unless the medical people say that its time for family to gather. They havent quite said that, but close. Let's hope you don't get that call, Nick. Jim Indeed. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Purpose of the Wiki
Wayne Eddy wrote: I'm interested to hear what everyone thinks the purpose of the SF Foswiki should be? Is it ... a) just a place to store SF related information not sufficiently important to be incorporated into WIkipedia. b) a place for things discussed on the Brin List to be documented in a systematic way, for the general interest of list members, and perhaps a focal point for discussions and intra-list socialisation. (I'd much rather read an article about space based solar power or market economics on a wiki, than in 3000 e-mails.) c) a genuine reference work that aspires to be the No.1 place on the internet, that people come to seek out information about Science Fiction. Personally, I think (b) makes most sense. Regards, Wayne Eddy ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com I think there is a place for b, but I am looking more at c (if you take a very expansive view of science fiction). I'd be interested to have Nick's input on the project's scope. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
The Taliban Fight Like Che.
http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/Death-Toll-Now-at-95-in-Pakistan-Volleyball-Bombing--80498082.html This is just dumb. If you want to win a war, intimidating the people whose support you need is pretty stupid. The West might not be able to win in Central Asia ... unless the Taliban keep helping us by alienating their own base. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
UniversesImagined Biz Org
Nick Arnett wrote: On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Trent Shipley tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com wrote: The host or its agents cannot serve on any board of directors since that would be a conflict of interest. Eh? Interlocking boards of directors with conflicts of interest are the American Way! Seriously, though, I'd need some clarification. I have and I do serve on boards, but I don't think they create any conflict of interest. I am presently on the board of Lutheran Social Services, one of the largest social services non-profits around. There's no conflict there, I'm quite sure. Conflicts of interest need to be disclosed for the sake of transparency, of course. What kind of boards did you have in mind? Nick ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com Well, I see the UniversesImagined.org trademarks and content being under the custodianship of the UniversesImagined Foundation (UIF). The UIF is a non-profit 501.c3 with membership qualifications to be determined ... probably membership is free and consists of a paper document with a signature saying I want to be a member. The board would consist of two contributors, two academics, two creative producers (for example David Brin), and two business producers (DB's publisher or Paramount). Board members would have to be real people. There would be an executive committee of the usual president, vice-president, treasurer, and secretary. There would be at least two officers. An Editor-in-Chief and a Chief Information Officer (the CIO manages the relationship with the host). To insure editorial independence, I suggest that the UIF not put advertising on the website. Unfortunately that makes supporting the site problematic. To provide money for hosting the site I suggest the UIF outsource hosting and have an arms-length relationship with hosting. Thus, the host can make whatever it wants with noninvasive/non-intrusive advertising in return for hosting the wiki. I propose that no agent of the host serve on the UIF board because the host's agent would have to work in the interest of the host, breaking editorial independence. Indeed, I suggest no money pass from the host to the UIF. The UIF might consider alienation of profits when considering bids to an RFP for a host, but these should go to selected causes like literacy, science education, endowed literature chairs in imaginaria, English lit scholarships, film school scholarships, or support for topical Ph.D. research, and so on. Do we want to have a UIF-host type of organization? When do we have to formalize that relationship? As the zeroth host, Nick is taking on an entrepreneurial risk under a UIF-host organization. The UIF as virtual representative of a future UniversesImagined community really can't give him the right to host in perpetuity, but Nick deserves consideration for being the entrepreneurial host. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Foswiki up and running
And... a blast from the past, pasted below. I'll let whoever emerge as the folks who lead the wiki project decide how to respond. As usual, I'm inclined to let the community choose and will only intervene directly as a last resort. Nick It's been a sufficiently long banishment. Although, if we should have occasion to discuss Israel, Palestinians, Jews, or Jewishness, I doubt his opinions have changed and I doubt he will refrain from expressing them. The watchamacallit wiki is a new project and we can hardly keep him out there for behavior here. If we keep conversation about that here for a while we almost have to let Jeroen into Brin-L at this stage. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: SciFi and Fantasy(?) Wiki
If we are to grow we need an organizational plan for growth. We need a growth oriented revenue plan. ** This can wait awhile. ** Nonprofit?? underwriting or no underwriting? ** For profit? (I would be reluctant to contribute for free.) If it grows, I mostly care about it paying expenses, so if I'm hosting and whatever goes along with that (I have been paid to write for a living, too), I'd expect to be able to add non-intrusive advertising. As to what would happen to anything left over after hosting expenses, I'd be inclined to invite the users and managers vote on a charity related to the subject. We could also explore asking publishers to sponsor, but that's a long way off. And it is, of course, advertising. I've had some ideas about social media and book marketing kicking around for a while... but I'll leave that for later. For now, it's just going to be my problem to deal with the finances. I say problem because I'm sure cash flow will be negative for a while, of course. But it is appropriate to resolve those things early on if there's chance it will actually throw off cash. If not, shouting and tears inevitably follow. Nick I've thought about this quite a bit today. The community (as represented by a non-profit corporation when sufficiently mature) is responsible for the content of the wiki, marketing the site, and finding a host. Basically the community with virtual representation in the corporation is custodian of the site and its contents. The community, to avoid a conflict of interest, does not solicit advertising. They outsource technical management of the site to a donor host. The responsibilities of the host are detailed in a service level agreement and other contracts. The donor host is free to sell as much non-invasive advertising as they want on pretty much any topic. This may offset the cost of hosting the site. If the host makes a monster great profit donating hosting services, that is fine. The host must agree to public release of their gross revenues from hosting the site. That way when the host position comes up for periodic bid, RFP respondents can put together intelligent proposals. The host or its agents cannot serve on any board of directors since that would be a conflict of interest. Nick is the current host. He is also the de facto project leader. We should split up roles now so that Nick is lead host, technician, and evangelist and someone else is content leader and independent editor-in-chief. I'd like the role. Alberto would be good at it, though he doesn't have Nick or my grand vision for the project. If we have the mixed luck to grow at warp speed, we go to Google and *beg* them to buy out Nick as host. Otherwise, Nick shouldn't loose too much and could do OK. So for now, Nick hosts the site and can cover his expenses with non-invasive ads. The community doesn't advertise, but it is custodian of the wiki's contents. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Foswiki up and running
Nick Arnett wrote: Got Foswiki installed here: http://nickarnett.net/sfwiki Hi Nick, check out: http://n2.nabble.com/Foswiki-f2555947.html It's the archive for Foswiki discuss after March 2009. I have a thread near the top. The gist is that if we are lucky we could run into a problem scaling out. As A.C. said there are webs and subwebs, as near as I can tell these correspond to directories. The performance of a web/directory degrades noticeably by about 10 entries by which time searches take 5-10 seconds each. Furthermore, these companies wind up having to use Google search engines on their sites. This limit is an area that is attracting a lot of effort however. One way around this limit is to have subwebs. This gives your wiki a hierarchical structure. So for an encyclopedia you would perhaps have mutually exclusive horror and superhero webs. Now do we put Buffy the Vampire Slayer entries in horror or superhero? For an encyclopedia type site, hierarchy is Bad. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
UniversesImagined webs
I can think of at least two webs that we will need. Most important we will want the main web with all the writing about imaginaria. Then we will need the meta-content where we have policies, discussions about the site, basically information about the site, so a MetaUniversesImagined web. And as near as I can tell the admin needs to create webs. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Another Conserpadia accidental joke: Fidel Castro is dead
Sorry. I must read more carefully. I missed the retired, presumed dead part. tship...@deru.com wrote: No, this one may be right. Fidel got too sick to rule and was followed by his brother Raul(?). Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel -Original Message- From: Alberto Monteiro albm...@centroin.com.br Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:41:18 To: Killer Bs \(David Brin et al\) Discussionbrin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: Another Conserpadia accidental joke: Fidel Castro is dead http://www.conservapedia.com/Fidel_Castro Fidel Castro (born August 13, 1926, presumably died by 2009) was the brutal communist dictator of Cuba from 1959 to 2008, (...) I don't think the list admins realize that Conservapedia editors are adding up minor vandalisms to make it a parody of Uncyclopedia. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Shopping for a wiki
Andrew Crystall wrote: On 29 Dec 2009 at 22:22, Trent Shipley wrote: See above answers. There's an effective page limit per-web (20,000), but you are not limited in the number of webs and users you can create. The biggest? Probably Google or Nokia's installs. (Foswiki is the direct successor of Twiki, having taken along basically all the core devs except two) AndrewC ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com What is a web in this context. It sounds like there is an effective limit of 20,000 pages per named wiki instance (a web), but that the Foswiki engine can support multiple wikis. Now we will be extremely lucky to get 20,000 pages, but if we get 20,000 pages we will get way more than 20,000 pages. The customers will want to see a unified image of the site. What happens if we get 60,000 pages? ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: The wikipedia trolls may win again (III) :-/
Alberto Monteiro wrote: David Hobby wrote: So the user is Abductive, and he seems to spend a lot of time proposing articles for deletion. It's probably an attack account: a sock puppet of a known user, created to give anonimity to a coward behavior (if it used the _real_ account, we might retaliate by proposing for deletion _its_ articles!). In the Portuguese wikipedia those trolls are severely repressed; one editor who abused sock-puppeteering was banned until after 2012-12-21. If we want the articles to stay up on Wikipedia, the best defense is references to them in books not written by David Brin. Does anybody know any? Probably some science fiction magazines have material about Brin's characters, races, etc. Also, there's GURPS Uplift, who is _not_ by Him. (and I still think Category should not be in the magma table!!!) Alberto Monteiro ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com All of which does not change the fact that Abductive is correct. The articles previously mentioned in this family of threads simply do not meet en-Wikipedia's notablity guidelines. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28books%29 gives: *This page in a nutshell:* A book is generally notable if it verifiably http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:V meets through reliable sources http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources, *one* or more of the following criteria: 1. The book has been the subject^[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28books%29#cite_note-subject-0 of multiple, non-trivial^[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28books%29#cite_note-nontrivial-1 published works whose sources are independent of the book itself,^[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28books%29#cite_note-independent-2 with at least some of these works serving a general audience. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries and reviews. Some of these works should contain sufficient critical commentary to allow the article to grow past a simple plot summary http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PLOT. * The immediately preceding criterion excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.^[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28books%29#cite_note-selfpromotion-3 2. The book has won a major literary award http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Literary_awards. 3. The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a notable motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement. 4. The book is the subject of instruction at multiple grade schools, high schools, universities /or/ post-graduate programs in any particular country.^[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28books%29#cite_note-textbooks-4 5. The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable.^[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28books%29#cite_note-study-5 And Derivative articles Shortcut http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Shortcut: WP:BKD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BKD It is a general consensus on Wikipedia that articles should not be split and split again into ever more minutiae of detail treatment, with each split normally lowering the level of notability. What this means is that while a book may be notable, it is not normally advisable to have a separate article on a character or thing from the book, and it is often the case that despite the book being manifestly notable, a derivative article from it is not. Exceptions do, of course, exist—especially in the case of very famous books. For example few would argue that Charles Dickens http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Dickens' /A Christmas Carol http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Christmas_Carol/ does not warrant a 'subarticle' on its protagonist, Ebenezer Scrooge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebenezer_Scrooge. In some situations, where the book itself does not fit the established criteria for notability, or if the book is notable but the author has an article in Wikipedia, it may be better to feature material about the book in the author's article, rather than creating a separate article for that book. So there would seem to be a hierarchy acceptable to en-Wikipedia's content guidelines. Article/biography on David Brin preferably written by an objective party. Uplift universe Section on Brightness
Re: SciFi and Fantasy(?) Wiki
I was expecting to find a dominant science fiction wiki, and I am surprised that it doesn't show up on the first page or two of Google. There do seem to be franchise based silos that are effective, Star Wars and Star Trek of course, but anything that's been on TV is a candidate. http://scifi.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page May be what I want, but it is hard to tell. It only has about 1300 articles and the last entry was made 15 December 2009, so it's not very active. I think that if Nick is as good at social networking as he says he is that we can do better. http://wiki.feministsf.net/index.php?title=Main_Page Looks like an excellent site. It has over 4000 articles with entries as recently as 2009-12-28 and 2009-12-29. I get the impression it is a bit high-brow for a site dedicated to such low literature as SciFi. I still think there is room for one-stop shopping for science fiction and imaginaria synopses, reviews, literary criticism, and TRIVIA. Wayne Eddy wrote: I've done a fair bit of wiki work over the last couple of years, using both Wikimedia Wikidot wikis. e.g. http://www.lgam.info Building up a wiki from scratch is a big job, and I think it would be a good idea to do a bit of research into existing science fiction related wikis to see if there are any existing ones that might be worth contributing to. I did a quick search and found the following, but I am sure there are 100's of others out there. http://www.modernscifi.com/tiki-index.php http://www.galaxiki.org/wiki/ http://scifi.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page Apart from the wikis that I have created personally, I think the most interesting future related one that I have stumbled across so far is the accelerating future wiki. http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/wiki/Main_Page Regards, Wayne Eddy On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com mailto:nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Trent Shipley tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com wrote: Nick Arnett wrote: On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:58 AM, tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com wrote: I did not send the original to the list. Feel free to forward this to the list. I'm partial to MediaWiki. I have installed MediaWiki here: http://www.nickarnett.net/sfwiki/ We can create a domain name for it and point it there when we're ready to go public with it. I guess there's no real need for admins... POWER, I have been denied privilege and POWER!! Oh, the agony. What wouldja like? ;-) Seriously, though, the wiki gives everybody lotsa power... I'm not familiar enough with Media Wiki to see (a) what administrators might do via the web interface and (b) exactly how to create 'em. It's a php associative array, the docs tell me. I'm happy to keep the discussion here for now, to get it going. Any other experience wiki-ers here? Nick ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: SciFi and Fantasy(?) Wiki
Alberto Monteiro wrote: Nick Arnett wrote: Seriously, though, the wiki gives everybody lotsa power... I'm not familiar enough with Media Wiki to see (a) what administrators might do via the web interface and (b) exactly how to create 'em. It's a php associative array, the docs tell me. I'm happy to keep the discussion here for now, to get it going. Any other experience wiki-ers here? The whole point of evil wiki admins is to punish and coerce. Unfortunately, it's a necessary job. But I suggest to keep it simple. There are _many_ wikis in the Web, another SF (Fantasy too?) wiki would die of starvation I am just not finding a big sci-fi wiki out there already fulfilling my vision. There are big *literature* wiki's out there, so one option might be to have sci-fi be a little fish in a much larger pond. I am really interested in a Brin--sci-fi--imaginaria evolution. I think a Brin wiki would be the best - but probably you should ask Him about what stuff could go there. And the evil wiki admins would have to keep a keen eye on copyright violations - wiki users have a nasty tendency to copy-and-paste without regard for the legitimacy of the material. Also, it should be acurately determined how deep we could go. For example, should we have a detailed description of every event and character? It could spur interest in buying books, but it could also feed unscrupulous Hollywood scriptwriters to steal and distort Brin's ideas into new awful movies. The trivia is there in the sources. The itch that got this discussion going was the Wikipedia content NAZI's wanting to get rid of our most excellent uplift universe trivia. Trivia down to the most trivial level is in. What good is Uplift, or Star Trek, or Zina, or Buffy without trivia! How much fanfic should be admitted? Logical inferences based on the books are ok? Natural extrapolations are ok? Or should we stick to canonical (and deutero-canonical, like Kevin Costner's movie) material? Alberto Monteiro NO fanfic (unless we do the Brin-and-only-Brin option). Fanfic is as bad as outright copying material. It opens a whole can of bad IP juju. (If we do fan fiction all of it goes in. You want to encourage creativity. A wiki may not be the best way to produce fan fiction, like if an editor hates your dark, depressing ending or interpretation...) Seriously, I have done the Uplift fan fiction thing. I did it a lot. I had fun with it. Now I am burned out. I'm just not too interested in that project. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: SciFi and Fantasy(?) Wiki
Andrew Crystall wrote: On 28 Dec 2009 at 17:16, Nick Arnett wrote: I'm happy to keep the discussion here for now, to get it going. Any other experience wiki-ers here? Hi. I absolutely detest MediaWiki, though, so I won't be much use for this. (Fos/T Wiki, now...) AndrewC Dawn Falcon ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com Why? We can change no problem. There's no content on it yet. Nick has said that whatever we choose has to use MySQL on the back end. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: SciFi and Fantasy(?) Wiki
Nick Arnett wrote: On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Trent Shipley tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com wrote: Why? We can change no problem. There's no content on it yet. Nick has said that whatever we choose has to use MySQL on the back end. That is correct, except that MySQL isn't even absolutely required... it's just that I know it very well, which makes it more appealing to me. And my two cents on content - I totally agree about no fan fiction... that's not the kind of content a wiki is for, in my opinion. Nick ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com So the back end needs to be both a real database and a free database. That lets you use MySQL or Postgresql. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Shopping for a wiki
I am with a little group of science fiction fans. We are looking at starting a science fiction wiki with synopses, reviews, literary criticism, and above all trivia. We have a big vision for the site since Wikipedia won't let us put our trivia there and it annoys us. So basically the vision is for an encyclopedia, but different content from Wikipedia. The obvious choice is MediaWiki. One potential participant writes, I hate MediaWiki and will not participate as a technician if you use it. Fine, so we ask him why he doesn't like it and to pick anything he likes as long as it uses either MySQL or Postgresql on the back end. The potential participant says he hates MediaWiki because it was designed with a flat user model. It has no built in hierarchy and we will want hierarchy. He also says he *LOVES* Foswiki. Oh one little thing, it uses a flat file back end, but no worries it will scale. I have a database background, the news that Foswiki does NOT use a RDBMS as a back end set off all kinds of alarms. Nevertheless, Foswiki is a strong candidate to be the engine for our project. - 1. Is Foswiki a good candidate for our encyclopedia project? 2. How do you store your data? 3. Why is your storage as reliable as MySQL? 4. How do I back up your wiki? 5. I think I can extract data from MediaWiki as MySQL SQL scripts that are almost portable. Can I do something similar with Foswiki? 6. Can I run 24/7/365? 7. Our project leader is not only talented technically, he is a good marketer. We plan to be _very_ successful. How does Foswiki scale? What is the biggest Foswiki wiki today? ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: SciFi and Fantasy(?) Wiki
Nick Arnett wrote: On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Andrew Crystall dawnfal...@upliftwar.com mailto:dawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote: On 29 Dec 2009 at 16:11, Trent Shipley wrote: Any other experience wiki-ers here? Hi. I absolutely detest MediaWiki, though, so I won't be much use for this. (Fos/T Wiki, now...) Why? We can change no problem. There's no content on it yet. Nick has said that whatever we choose has to use MySQL on the back end. Well, Foswiki is flat-file, heh. It scales better than you think from that though. Honestly, if we're going to be doing anything involving access permissions (and a scifi lit wiki sounds like we are), then I'm recommend not using Mediawiki, you tend to end up doing some nasty hacks. Foswiki is a hierarchial wiki with proper access permissions and so on. It also uses a different markup language to Mediawiki, and one which I greatly prefer, although I admit if you've only learned mediawiki there is a small learning curve. You can also do some fairly good tricks with the markup in creating apps and specially formatted pages. As long as it runs on Linux (that's the hosted environment) and we can reach consensus AND it isn't a CPU hog (important for costs), I'm fine with whatever. Memory and disk space seem to be non-issues for practical purposes. Nick ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com Andrew seems to be saying that Foswiki is a dreamboat to administer. That is in keeping with Foswiki's marketing position. http://foswiki.org/Community/DescriptionsOfFoswiki Foswiki is a structured wiki with tools that enable users without programming skills to build powerful yet simple applications to process information and support workflows. The Foswiki community is actually positioning the product as what I call an un-wiki. If you turn everything off it works like wikis were originally intended to work with no workflow model and two levels of heirarchy, administrators and participants (and administrators were supposed to mostly lurk). But they are really meant to be used with multiple roles, hierarchies of users, and workflow events like form approvals and change management -- an un-wiki designed for business. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: The wikipedia trolls may win again :-/
David Hobby wrote: Alberto Monteiro wrote: David Hobby wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_Hph-wayuo Alberto-- Hi. I think you can make a good case to keep it, since it involves a major character in a series of popular science fiction novels. No, not my language, not my place to battle. I've tried to keep the Portuguese language trolls away from deleting relevant material - I can say I have been half-successful. Alberto-- Wow, I guess it is my place to battle. I've been going back and forth with the troll, at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alvin_Hph-wayuo Some of this is because I don't really understand his criteria, or what the problem is with having an entry. The pages for the books should also link to Alvin's page. But wait, the entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity%27s_Shore is just a stub... Yes, it's a stub, and fortunately so. Another stupid decision made in the English wikipedia was that spoilers are _not_ marked as such. Just take a look a the article about The Jesus Chainsaw Massacre movie... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Passion_of_the_Christ ... or about the Titanic (the nazi rip-off by Cameron)... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic_(1997_film) ... and see how carelessly it gives the end of both movies without respect for those who don't know the stories! Aren't they usually marked as plot synopses, or something? But you're right, I bet a lot of people don't care about avoiding spoilers. O.K., so maybe the problem is that a case can eventually be made for Wikipedia to keep the page, but that the related pages aren't detailed enough yet. I can see developing a Wiki devoted to the Uplift Universe in the meantime, and copying its content onto Wikipedia as time passes. I think the best would be to do the opposite: create an Uplift wiki, copy _from_ Wikipedia, and remove from Wikipedia. And all the Wikipedia articles would have would be a link to the extra material? That seems fair, too. ---David ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com From what you've said, he's asking you to prove the Alvin article is important enough to be in the English Wikipedia. Recently, the editors, powers that be, or what have you have taken a much more active interest in being a serious encyclopedia. That means, for example, if I created an article on Trent Shipley, it would be removed since I don't merit mention in an encyclopedia. David Brin is an important science fiction author so he merits mention in Wikipedia. The Jijo trilogy merits mention. Each book in the trilogy merits an article. However, each book is based on an ensemble cast. Alvin is an ensemble character in trilogy by an author of moderate importance in a work of moderate importance. Thus, Alvin is too trivial to be in Wikipedia. If he were a Shakespeare character, no matter how minor, he would be in Wikipedia, because Shakespeare is a very important author. If he were a minor Naruto character he might rate an article because Naruto is very popular. But as it is, Alvin doesn't meet the criteria for important enough. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
SciFi and Fantasy(?) Wiki
Nick Arnett wrote: On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:58 AM, tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com wrote: I did not send the original to the list. Feel free to forward this to the list. I'm partial to MediaWiki. I have installed MediaWiki here: http://www.nickarnett.net/sfwiki/ We can create a domain name for it and point it there when we're ready to go public with it. I guess there's no real need for admins... POWER, I have been denied privilege and POWER!! Oh, the agony. But really we should have this discussion using the Wiki's tools, or a mail list associated with the wiki. I have some admin and policy stuff I want to talk about. I await Nick's further instructions on whether he wants to move this topic or keep it here on brin-l for a while. Some have talked about a super-genre of fiction called imaginaria that would include SciFi, Fantasy, Horror, Super Heroes, etc. it's a wiki, so anybody can sign up and do any of the editorial functions. If there are configuration changes needed on the back end, I can do those, of course. Nick ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: SciFi and Fantasy(?) Wiki
Nick Arnett wrote: On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Trent Shipley tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com wrote: Nick Arnett wrote: On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:58 AM, tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com wrote: I did not send the original to the list. Feel free to forward this to the list. I'm partial to MediaWiki. I have installed MediaWiki here: http://www.nickarnett.net/sfwiki/ We can create a domain name for it and point it there when we're ready to go public with it. I guess there's no real need for admins... POWER, I have been denied privilege and POWER!! Oh, the agony. What wouldja like? ;-) Seriously, though, the wiki gives everybody lotsa power... I'm not familiar enough with Media Wiki to see (a) what administrators might do via the web interface and (b) exactly how to create 'em. It's a php associative array, the docs tell me. I'm happy to keep the discussion here for now, to get it going. Any other experience wiki-ers here Nick I didn't set up my own Mediawiki, but I had my ISP do it. http://www.belfryenterprises.com/redgalaxy/index.php/Main_Page I had some legitimate activity on it before I required users to register to make changes. I had HUGE problems with vandalism, but hardly random vandalism. It was all in the cause of porn sites and aphrodisiac catalogs trying to improve their search order on GOOGLE. At the time Mediawiki recommended using its CAPTCHA plug-in. The next problem is marketing. Who do we want to tell about the site and when do we want to tell them. Then what are we marketing. Suggested content has included these. David Brin Uplift fiction (He would probably let us get away with fan fic) Science Fiction Literature. Science Fiction and Fantasy Literature (NOT what DB would want, but often grouped together and often read and appreciated by the same geeks.) Imaginaria (Science Fiction, Fantasy, Horror, Super Heroes, etc.) I am in favor of a business plan that starts with a Science Fiction focus seeded with a David Brin project. The plan is to grow to encompass imaginaria. Besides what genre we cover, there is the issue of kind of content we want to include. I am in favor of a literary encyclopedia. It would include: * Synopses * Reviews * Literary Criticism. Note that these are fundamentally external discourses about what someone else wrote. It would explicitly exclude: * Writing from a perspective inside a given creator's universe. (That violates the IP owner's rights) * Extending someone else's universe (also an IP nightmare). * New world building * Fan fiction * New fiction. Note that these are fundamentally internal discourses about what the contributor or someone else wrote. As for spoilers ... if you do not want to encounter spoilers why are you reading a literary encyclopedia? The whole wiki is one huge spoiler. Contributing roles: We need article authors. We need various kinds of editors. ** Here it would be useful to have MA's and PhD's in literature and pop culture who like science fiction. Maybe they do research in the area and have to stay current anyway. We need mediators and arbitrators: ** Edit wars ** Controversial subjects, eg. Ayn Rand. Race war science fiction, etc. We need police to find malicious vandalism and unauthorized use of the site for criminal or commercial purposes. We need technical admins. If we are successful we will need layers of admins. If we are to grow we need an organizational plan for growth. We need a growth oriented revenue plan. ** This can wait awhile. ** Nonprofit?? underwriting or no underwriting? ** For profit? (I would be reluctant to contribute for free.) ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
[Fwd: Re: The wikipedia trolls may win again :-/]
Original Message From: - Sun Dec 27 19:10:30 2009 X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080 X-Mozilla-Keys: Message-ID: 4b38138e.1030...@deru.com Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:10:22 -0700 From: Trent Shipley tship...@deru.com User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sendai sen...@iicx.net Subject:Re: The wikipedia trolls may win again :-/ References: 1114620827-1261963340-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-6669531...@bda710.bisx.prod.on.blackberry 43b7d2e7-9be1-4e9e-a5f5-1e1152fe2...@iicx.net In-Reply-To:43b7d2e7-9be1-4e9e-a5f5-1e1152fe2...@iicx.net X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A quick Google doesn't turn up any strong scifi literary wikis. Given the structure of a well designed wiki, David Brin's Uplift Universe should be a viable category effectively acting as a sub-wiki. In short, you can have both. sendai wrote: On 28/12/2009, at 11:23 AM, tship...@deru.com wrote: Let's be more ambitious. I've gone the other way and reduced the scope to just Uplift. It's currently hosted on Wikia, and I've only just started dumping some of the lists (along with the Alvin stub) from Wikipedia to it, so it's not an issue if Nick wishes to host it on the same server as the list. http://uplift.wikia.com/wiki/Uplift_Wiki A science fiction and fantasy literary wiki! (And just when I needed a new project too.) --Original Message-- From: Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro To: Brin-L ReplyTo: Brin-L Subject: The wikipedia trolls may win again :-/ Sent: Dec 27, 2009 4:56 PM Article Alvin Hph-wayuo was proposed for elimination. From what I know about such things, it will be eliminated :-( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_Hph-wayuo Maybe it's time to setup a Brin wiki Alberto Monteiro ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Google vs Bing
Google? Bing? I don't care. Not long ago if I was given an MSN or Yahoo search tool I went out of my way to get to a Google search. Not any more. The competition has come a long way. That's BAD news for Google. I like Google as a corporate citizen, but they are still a one trick pony. If someone comes out with a better search engine I'm abandoning Google in a New York minute. I can't do that to Microsoft. Microsoft has infrastructure. I have Microsoft formatted files on Microsoft operating systems using killer apps that only run on Microsoft at home and at work -- especially at work. It would take time to wean myself off Microsoft even if someone made an desktop operating system that was twice as good. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Google vs Bing
Charlie Bell wrote: On 25/11/2009, at 9:57 PM, Trent Shipley wrote: It would take time to wean myself off Microsoft even if someone made an desktop operating system that was twice as good. There is. I did. Except for gaming. So I use a MacBook for day-to-day shite, email, letters, browsing, whatever, and I have a self-built tower-of-doom (I7-920,6GB,4870x2x2) for serious gaming and stuff that needs MIPS like some of Claire's modelling assignments... Charlie. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com I have Kubuntu, Ubuntu, OS X, and Vista(*2) on machines at home and I use XP at work. I have to use Explorer for my A+ distance learning class at the community college and work would be impossible without the application that *only* run on Windows desktops. I had to have Windows to complete my MS in Information Management. My contention is that for Microsoft market domination translates into a tactical margin of error since their products are critical and well nigh universal infrastructure. Replacing Microsoft would require a competitor that can beat Microsoft in the market over the long haul (maybe Google Linux based OSes) and that wants to (Apple is very happy as a boutique brand. Apple doesn't *want* to unseat Microsoft.) Google search is a transient service. In literally a few minutes I can decide another service is better, and if I do decide a competing search service is better, I *will* forsake Google. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Brin-:L the 2nd decade
We know each other and know each other's positions. What about those of us who try not to have positions? ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market
No, when I say we in this context, I mean that we have in the past booted people from the list as a group in most cases. There being no one person in particular one can suck up to in order to avoid consequences, it behooves everyone to be generally inoffensive. A few people have been removed, a couple of them long term listees and one was a moderator here. We definitely are not queasy when it comes to pulling the pin. xponent Wide Borders Maru rob Who was the moderator who got booted? Are you suggesting J.W. is near that limit? I'm not nearly that ready to take offense yet. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market
John Williams wrote: On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:48 PM, xponentrobxponent...@comcast.net wrote: But no, I do not give you the benefit of the doubt. I think I have you pegged as exactly the kind of intentionally obtuse person you appear to be. My apologies for not being as perceptive as you are. No, when I say we in this context, I mean that we have in the past booted people from the list as a group in most cases. So, is there is a vote of the 50 unnamed we people David referred to? No. There is discussion about the excommunication and then the list moderators perform the ceremony. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market
Obama, yesterday, was right on target when he said there was no single silver bullet for this problem. But, we do know things can be better, because we are paying twice as much as the average developed country per person with worse than average results. I have heard, but have been too lazy to confirm, that there is a GDP per capita health care spending curve, and as a very affluent country the USA is almost right where it should be on that predictive model. What is whacked is that relative to our per capita spending (which meet expectations) we get crappy *public* health results. So health care savings probably are not in the works--unless we move off the health care spending / per capita income curve. We can improve typical health care outcomes, but that will produce a lot of health care reform losers. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: A Real Free Market in Health Care
Lance A. Brown wrote: John Williams said the following on 8/16/2009 5:08 PM: On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 1:47 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote: It does strike me as a kludge, though. To continue your example of car insurance, I don't believe that anybody markets insurance against having your car insurance premiums rise dramatically. I do not think there is a as large a risk of such a dramatic rise in auto insurance premiums. Possibly auto insurance premiums could go up 5x after 2 DUI's, but short of that, I cannot think of anything that would result in such a thing. And that is relatively unlikely, compared to developing a chronic condition at some point in one's life. The analogy between auto and health insurance fails in one regard: Most of the time, a 5x increase in auto insurance premiums is a direct result of decisions by the covered person. Many of causes for increases in health insurance premiums are outside the control of the covered person. Should this play into the plans? I don't know. --[Lance] I've heard people say that insurance reform should discriminate between lifestyle risks and inherent risks. So insurance could charge someone with type II diabetes more, but not someone with type I diabetes. You could charge more to people who, smoke, are over weight, who don't exercise, or who practice un-safe sex. You couldn't charge more because of sex, age, or a prior cancer--except to the extent it was caused by a lifestyle choice. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market
Trent Shipley wrote: Obama, yesterday, was right on target when he said there was no single silver bullet for this problem. But, we do know things can be better, because we are paying twice as much as the average developed country per person with worse than average results. I have heard, but have been too lazy to confirm, that there is a GDP per capita health care spending curve, and as a very affluent country the USA is almost right where it should be on that predictive model. What is whacked is that relative to our per capita spending (which meet expectations) we get crappy *public* health results. So health care savings probably are not in the works--unless we move off the health care spending / per capita income curve. We can improve typical health care outcomes, but that will produce a lot of health care reform losers. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/why-does-us-health-care-cost-so-much-part-i/?apage=2 An additional insight from the graph, however, is that even after adjustment for differences in G.D.P. per capita, the United States in 2006 spent $1,895 more on health care than would have been predicted after such an adjustment. If G.D.P. per capita were the only factor driving the difference between United States health spending and that of other nations, the United States would be expected to have spent an average of only $4,819 per capita on health care rather than the $6,714 it actually spent. Health-services researchers call the difference between these numbers, here $1,895, “excess spending.” That term, however, is not meant to convey “excessive spending,” but merely a difference driven by factors other than G.D.P. per capita. Prominent among these other factors are: 1 trent:bad/. higher prices for the same health care goods and services than are paid in other countries for the same goods and services; 2 trent:bad/. significantly higher administrative overhead costs than are incurred in other countries with simpler health-insurance systems; 3 trent:good/. more widespread use of high-cost, high-tech equipment and procedures than are used in other countries; 4 trent:/good. higher treatment costs triggered by our uniquely American tort laws, which in the context of medicine can lead to “defensive medicine” — that is, the application of tests and procedures mainly as a defense against possible malpractice litigation, rather than as a clinical imperative. There are three other explanations that are widely — but erroneously — thought among non-experts to be cost drivers in the American health spending. To wit: 1. that the aging of our population drives health spending 2. that we get better quality from our health system than do other nations, and 3. that we get better health outcomes from our system ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: A Real Free Market in Health Care
John Williams wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Trent Shipleytship...@deru.com wrote: John Williams wrote: There are billions of people around the world with worse healthcare than virtually everyone in the United States. If the goal is to redistribute wealth to improve healthcare because of the belief that everyone should have a chance to live and be healthy, then why not focus on redistributing wealth from people in the US to the people in the world who have far worse health care than those in the US? Why not? The basic reason is that people are both tribal and self-interested. Would this be an accurate expansion of that? It is ethical to take wealth from some people in order to help other people with less resources, but only if all of those people are in the same political boundary? Whether it is ethical or not depends on what ethical system you adhere to. It sounds like a reasonable ethical proposition to me. Many Americans would find no fault with it. If so, then why is the political boundary more important than the fact that there are other people outside the political boundary who are much worse off than most of those inside? And when I say why, I am not looking for a sociological answer about tribes, but rather an argument about ethics. The people outside the boundary are not my responsibility. They are not my people. Furthermore, they don't participate in my moral economy. The status of the poor in my country has an immediate effect on me. I may be among the poor, and if I am not I may have feelings for my fellow countrymen, and even if I don't there is a real cost to tripping over the hungry and homeless in the streets, and the crime associated with extreme poverty. Poverty is a society wide expense. Poverty in another country is an external expense, especially if it is a result of unfair global capitalism favoring the metropole or of old style colonialism. And as every business student knows, and externalized cost is a good cost. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Uplift Fan Fiction
A while back there was a thread on the list about people wanting David Brin to write more Uplift fiction. Back when I was writing the Alliance for Progress Encyclopedia I wrote some Fan-Fic history and fiction--the longer works I never finished. A few people wrote and said they liked what I had written. I am not in grad school, I'm pretty healthy, I have some free time, and I need a hobby. If I were to write new Uplift Fan Fiction would anybody be interested in reading it? ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: A Real Free Market in Health Care
dsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote: People on this list have argued for the advantages of a free market system for health care and health care insurance. I have thought about it, and decided to apply what we know from other markets that have considerable less government intervention. For example, big screen TVs. If you have the money and want it enough, you decide to buy it. If you don't have the money, you don't buy it. So, if a heart bypass will save someone's life, and they don't have the cash to pay for it and the banks won't loan them the money, they die. If someone cannot afford chemotherapy, they don't get it. Thus, they die. The closest thing we have to this in the US are those folks who don't have health insurance and do not qualify for Medicare. We find that those among this group are more likely to die if they have a first stage cancer than someone with health insurance and a second stage cancer. And, this even with the non-free market principal that hospitals must provide care if death is imminent without care. Now, one might argue that privately bought insurance is the answer to this. Well, normal insurance for someone with no history of health problems is about 6500 per year for an individual and about 14k/year for a family (paying for COBRA for my daughter who's between being covered by our health care and health care from her first real job gives me the first number pretty accurately). But, if one has risk, one has to get risk pool insurance. I own my own business, and looked at private insurance vs. COBRA for our family. The health insurance broker looked at our family and gave up...my wife had a pre-existing condition, which meant he couldn't compete. My friend who is also self-employed has a wife with diabetes. He has to pay in the 40k range for basic, no frills insurance. If we extend this to eliminating Medicare, we will clearly see that as one ages, one goes from the low risk to the high risk pool. Thus, older people will find that they would have to pay 40k+ for insurance. For the vast majority of them, this will exceed the maximum amount of income they could devote to insurance (assuming they ate and lived somewhere cheap). Thus, they would not have insurance, and would be looking at any serious treatment as too expensive. The result would be that a lot of people would die far sooner. John Williams pointed out the absurdity of paying for very expensive surgery for those in there late 80s, who are likely to die soon. I don't disagree with thatthe US system is just about the only one where that happens. But, let’s say someone can have chemotherapy at 70, the cancer goes into remission, and they live another 15 years. That's not absurd, IMHO. So, I'm curious. Do the advocates of switching to the only totally free market health care system in the world, you know those who are not their brothers keepers, think that we are morally obliged to go to a system that will lower US life expectancy significantly (probably 5-10 years)? Dan M. NO. That is an acceptable side effect for greater freedom and economic efficiency. Freedom isn't free. I think it would be very reasonable to have real free market health care. If that were our collective choice then emergency rooms would need to refuse care to heart attack patients who couldn't pay. There's nothing wrong with that except that it is politically impossible to implement. If we choose I also think there's nothing wrong with giving everyone reasonable health care and rationing access fairly through bureaucracy. I even have no problem with hybrid systems like they have in Australia, The Netherlands, and Germany. What is REALLY STUPID is having government coverage for some people, private health care for other people, and allowing those with private coverage (or rather lack of coverage) who can't pay to use the emergency room. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: A Real Free Market in Health Care
John Williams wrote: There are billions of people around the world with worse healthcare than virtually everyone in the United States. If the goal is to redistribute wealth to improve healthcare because of the belief that everyone should have a chance to live and be healthy, then why not focus on redistributing wealth from people in the US to the people in the world who have far worse health care than those in the US? Why not? The basic reason is that people are both tribal and self-interested. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market
David Hobby wrote: John Williams wrote: #1 patent-related #2 patent-related #4 IP-related #5 patent-related Sounds like you have a problem with the government-run patent system. Yes. He's saying it doesn't actually work the way you think it would, since there's latitude for people to game the system. How would a non-government-run patent system (whatever it was) not be just as flawed? Or better, how would you design a patent system that did not give a significant advantage to the side with the best lawyers? (Feel free to propose changes to the legal system too, if you want.) ---David You could go with the radical Linuxers and Pirate Party types and decide that intellectual property is an anachronism that should be put out of its misery. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Politicians sell out again
Chris Frandsen wrote: On Aug 10, 2009, at 8:40 PM, John Williams wrote: The politician pretends to be acting altruistically while still behaving in a self-serving manner. But the politicians take your money by force and THEN give it to the businesses. John: These two sentences are the problem with people accepting your arguments. The first is a gross generalization. Most of the politicians that I have personally met are not 'self-serving , rather they are making a great effort to serve. The second is not true! We live in a constitutional republic which allows us to vote for representatives at every level of government and have given those representatives the right through the constitution and the courts to tax us to maintain the societal infrastructure required to support a civilized way of life. This is not taking your money by force. This is the system that our fore-fathers left us. If it is not working for you then you have options, that is what free speech is all about. Getting on the internet and ranting is one of them. However I must tell you that generalizing and sarcasm usually code zero in a classroom which means they will not win you much support. learner States have a monopoly on coercive force. If they don't, they don't meet the definition of a sovereign state. States collect taxes by the implied threat of coercive force. If you don't pay taxes, you go to jail. John Williams is absolutely right. The government of a sovereign state takes taxes by force. Most of us believe that is right and necessary. J.W. doesn't. More fundamental is his objection to the U.S. Government. In effect, he is saying that the U.S. system of government is inherently illegitimate, largely because it is run by politicians. By John William's standards ALL representative democracy is illegitimate precisely because a representative democracy REQUIRES professional politicians. The problem is that we have representatives at every level of government and they are all necessarily politicians. Being politicians they are inherently incapable of representing the commonweal. The problem is that the judges are appointed by politicians. The problem is that it is the inherent nature of politicians to cause government to use tax money for largely illegitimate and immoral ends. == So there questions we want John Williams to answer. * Is government undesirable? That is, is less government better? This is a heuristic based on pragmatic considerations. * Is government inherently evil? This is a moral principle. * Is government necessary? * Does government have the right to levy taxes? * What kind of politician-free government does he propose? Eventually all of us in the debate may need to clarify who qualifies as a politician since the category politician seems particularly salient in John William's world view. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Archives: attention list management
Where can I find the list archives? Note also that typing Brin-L in Google returns: http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Which produces a page No such list brin-l, which is not helpful if we want to recruit new members. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Politicians sell out again
Max Battcher wrote: On 8/11/2009 18:53, Trent Shipley wrote: More fundamental is his objection to the U.S. Government. In effect, he is saying that the U.S. system of government is inherently illegitimate, largely because it is run by politicians. By John William's standards ALL representative democracy is illegitimate precisely because a representative democracy REQUIRES professional politicians. Crazy tangent: I've always wondered if it might be worth the effort to introduce a third house, a tricameral legislature of sorts, where the members are brought in through a random civic duty lottery (akin to jury duty selection in most states, perhaps). Call it the House of Peers or House of the Public, for instance. I think such a crazy idea would only work in the modern communications era. You can't expect a person to serve even a 1-year term if they have to pack their bags for Washington and may not be able to expect to have their existing job when they return (much less can't afford the salary differential during the term). However, with the Moderne Internet, I think that average folks might be persuaded to do a little bit of work for their country online every so often for even a tiny amount of compensation. You could even contemplate things like micro-terms of only a few weeks duration with the right technological leverage. With micro-terms and lots of paid eyeballs you might even get awfully close to a sort of representative wiki democracy. Even if this House was of lesser standing than the existing legislature it would be useful just to have a public oversight committee directly drawn from the public and in the same turf as existing legislatures. Anyway, it's just a crazy thought experiment (that I created for use in a short story I never wrote) and I doubt that it would be easy to amend the Constitution to try it, but it might be something to play with at local or state levels and see if it survives/replicates... -- --Max Battcher-- http://worldmaker.net Every house you add to a legislative system increases gridlock. Let's suppose you did have representation by jury duty. You aren't going to get Plato's Republic of leadership by philosopher. Your average legislative juror will be average: average IQ, average education, average income, you know, average. This means you will want a large pool so you get some good leadership--300 to 3000 should do. You won't want mini-terms. The issues don't get easier just because you draft your congress critter. Mini-terms won't be much better than rule by public opinion poll or focus group. You will want to have substantial terms so that the legislators learn to negotiate, understand the issues, learn about their constituency, and so on. Since you need substantial terms you will need to give your representatives REAL salaries and real support staff to help with all the research. It won't be cheap. However, you wouldn't have political campaigns and you wouldn't have self-selected political professionals. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Libertarian Morality--Up with good King John, down with Robin Hood.
Dan M wrote: Of course, I knew there was another strain in libertarianism that was based in morality. This was an ideological commitment to maximize individual freedom. Basically Aleister Crowley's Harm no one and do what thou wilt, with the harm no one clause being optional--particularly when doing business. That's not a moral principle. That's principled amorality, an abandonment of social responsibility. At best it is mysticism; faith that we don't have to do anything for our neighbors because the universe will take care of them (if they deserve it, or whatever). Morality an antidote, not a synonym, for self-centered pragmatism. The antecedent for you in this thread isn't clear. I suspect it is not Trent Shipley, but I will provide my input anyway. Well, how do you define what a moral principal is? I'd argue it is an axiom of a system of ethics. Now, from your arguments, I suspect you and I both strongly differ with some of the basic axioms of, say, Objectivistic ethics, but that does not keep it from being an ethical system. I make a distinction between moral principles that are often religious or more folksy and ethical principles that tend to come from high theology or philosophy and are usually more formal. example Given: Slavery is legal. Given: You are CEO of a publicly traded company. Given: The company will make a lot of money if it uses slaves. Then: Using slaves is immoral (the CEO commits a sin). But not using slaves is unethical because the CEO deprives his shareholders of wealth. /example Futhermore, there are ethical systems, but morals are never systematic. Instead one should talk about an individuals moral collection or a group's hegemonic morality. You can't prove or disprove ethical, moral principals. Ethical principles are subject to rational and logical dispute. Moral principles, on the other hand, are dealt with using apologetics and are beyond proof. You can either posit them explicitly, or implicitly. Personally, I prefer explicit, because the principals are out there to be discussed, and the implications of those principals can be arrived at logically and more clearly. Dan M. The trick is that moral principles and the relations between them are seldom explicit. Discovering moral principles and making them explicit requires cultural, linguistic and symbolic analysis. The same applies to ethics at one remove where discovering an ethical system's deep structure, unstated assumptions, and meta-morality require analysis. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Br!n: Libertarian Morality--Up with good King John, down withRobin Hood.
Dan M wrote: -Original Message- From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On Behalf Of Trent Shipley Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 3:23 PM To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Subject: Re: Br!n: Libertarian Morality--Up with good King John, down withRobin Hood. While writing this I tried to imagine how a certain kind of libertarian thought about the world. It is a shallow exercise in participant observation. To appreciate what I wrote you must at least partially empathize with our libertarian subject. I have a question for you Trentdon't libertarians assume that, in a free market, those that create wealth get to keep at least a tenth of a percent of the wealth they create? I've got a trillion dollar counterfactual that I've discussed here before for that argument. Dan M. I don't know. Personally, I don't assume any per se structure to the income and wealth curves produced under highly libertarian markets. Brin's says that libertarian marketism, let alone fundamentalist marketism, tend to produce aristocracies or oligarchies. I agree with the implication that over time libertarianism is prone to produce pronounced income and wealth curves, and furthermore individuals will be structurally stuck near their originating socio-economic status. That said, one expects there should be some limit to how pronounced the wealth ratio can get, but 1:1000 seems arbitary and low. You also use the term creators of wealth, this sounds like a gloss for the Marxian term labor with labor as the critical input for creating capital. Dan, you know that all Marxian ideas are inadmissible because they are socialist. Labor deserves only what the market apportions to it. Under libertarianism there will be no lumpen proletariat, and the un-lumpen proletariat will be free. You wanted to make a point, however. For the sake of argument I will stipulate that within three standard deviations of the mean individual wealth holding the wealth ratio will not exceed 1:1000. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Br!n: Libertarian Morality--Up with good King John, down with Robin Hood.
While writing this I tried to imagine how a certain kind of libertarian thought about the world. It is a shallow exercise in participant observation. To appreciate what I wrote you must at least partially empathize with our libertarian subject. Nick Arnett wrote: On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Trent Shipley tship...@deru.com mailto:tship...@deru.com wrote: It started me thinking about the bases of libertarianism and American conservatism. Previously when I had thought of libertarianism, I had not thought of it as particularly based in a moral principle. Good for you... it's not, IMO. It is in the sense that a libertarian tends to believe that markets optimally allocate resources, so a market based economy is best for promoting the commonwealth. The greatest good is a rather pragmatic moral principle and very widely held. That is what I meant by not particularly based on moral principle. Of course, I knew there was another strain in libertarianism that was based in morality. This was an ideological commitment to maximize individual freedom. Basically Aleister Crowley's Harm no one and do what thou wilt, with the harm no one clause being optional--particularly when doing business. That's not a moral principle. That's principled amorality, an abandonment of social responsibility. At best it is mysticism; faith that we don't have to do anything for our neighbors because the universe will take care of them (if they deserve it, or whatever). Morality an antidote, not a synonym, for self-centered pragmatism. No it is a morality. A libertarian believes that nosy neighbors, let alone the state, should stay out of ones personal life. Thus, recreational drugs should be decriminalized and sexual queers should not be discriminated against. But there other moral strains mentioned by one of my libertarian Linux respondents. Taking money from some one who earned it to give it to some one who didn't is stealing, government or otherwise. This actually combines two moral axioms common to libertarians and conservatives. The first is that taxes are a form of theft. The second is that it is immoral to give (poor) people money. Ack. Again, no morality here. Pragmatic arguments are not moral arguments, they are complementary. Many seemingly practical arguments are outlandish because they are immoral, which, for example, is Swift's point in A Modest Proposal. I did not intend to state that these were pragmatic. Quite the contrary, I consider them VERY logical but utterly un-pragmatic. I will focus on the principle taxes are theft. If you asked my informant is theft right, he would say no, theft is wrong. Thus, he would also say that taxes are wrong, perhaps a necessary evil, but evil nonetheless. Behind the principle that taxes are wrong is a ratio to the effect that taking someone else's property whether by stealth, guile, or force is theft and morally reprehensible. Indeed, unless I part company with my property entirely of my own free will, or exceptionally as punishment for wrongdoing, it must be theft. It is a moral principle of Others. It's just not yours. The moral principle that taxes are theft suffers from a similar limitation. Logically taxes ARE theft. Newspeak! I stand behind this. When theft is understood as any taking, except as punishment, then taxes are logically a form of theft. It's a logical singularity, but its still logical. It is not reasonable however. ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Brin: Libertarian Morality--Up with good King John, down with Robin Hood.
I wrote a suggestion to my Arizona State legislators about de-funding the state universities in favor of tuition vouchers. Vouchers would be in keeping with Arizona's conservative libertarian bias in favor of a low taxes-low wages-strong small business environment. If I lived in Massachusetts or Minnesota where the culture favors high tax-high wage-strong big business I would never have made this suggestion. Anyhow, I am through with school. As a good libertarian and social Darwinist it is now time to screw the following generations. When I inappropriately sent a selection of my idea as an off topic contribution to the Phoenix Linux email list I was astounded that the comments came not from the left but from the RIGHT! The respondents were self-educated technicians suspicious of higher education in general and wanted NO public funds spent on higher education. It started me thinking about the bases of libertarianism and American conservatism. Previously when I had thought of libertarianism, I had not thought of it as particularly based in a moral principle. I thought it just a political extension of liberal or neo-classical economics that reduced the general welfare to economic efficiency. Of course, I knew there was another strain in libertarianism that was based in morality. This was an ideological commitment to maximize individual freedom. Basically Aleister Crowley's Harm no one and do what thou wilt, with the harm no one clause being optional--particularly when doing business. But there other moral strains mentioned by one of my libertarian Linux respondents. Taking money from some one who earned it to give it to some one who didn't is stealing, government or otherwise. This actually combines two moral axioms common to libertarians and conservatives. The first is that taxes are a form of theft. The second is that it is immoral to give (poor) people money. (Exceptions are made for rich people and corporations because in that case they earn the money through their cleverness and not through class conscious theft). The morality of taxes are theft, in particular, is logically self consistent; therefore, convincing on its face. lemma I used to be a pacifist. I was raised Mennonite. Pacifism is a logically self-consistent principle. Killing is horrific, killing is murder, killing for a cause or for war is still horrific and is still murder. The problem is that war is an inescapable part of the human condition. Even in the best of times the potential is there. Pacifism doesn't allow for the complexities of human reality, it isn't pragmatic. end lemma The moral principle that taxes are theft suffers from a similar limitation. Logically taxes ARE theft. However, one must be expedient and practical. We have a society to run. We need to buy social goods. Social goods have to be paid for and that money has always come from taxes. There is a more fundamental problem with libertarianism and some of David Brin's thought. Libertarianism assumes humans descended from tigers. Unfortunately, humans descended from chimpanzees which are the most intensely social primates. Humans are as social creatures, they have an individual dimension, but human experience cannot be reduced to individualism. Government--or rather governance--is NEVER going to whither away. Governance is part of organizational behavior, and any human society larger than a hunter-gatherer troop has to have some formal organization and that organization has to be governed. Even if we assume that one day soon (no more that 10,000 years) humans will be succeeded by their brain children, those children will soon run into the organizational behavior and governance problem. Managing your relationships in ever increasing troop sizes will not scale in polynomial time. Begin forwarded message: From: Trent Shipley tship...@deru.com Date: August 3, 2009 3:01:01 PM GMT-07:00 To: lg...@azleg.gov, dquell...@azleg.gov, jwei...@azleg.gov Subject: Higher Education Vouchers and Oddments Dear Senator Linda Gray, Representative Doug Quelland, and Representative Jim Weiers, I am a resident of District 10 living a 4750 West Acoma Drive, Glendale (vote in Phoenix), AZ 85306 Suggestions for the Reform of Public Higher Education in Arizona. The following are suggestions to reduce the deficit in the current budget crisis and are in keeping with Arizonans' values of free enterprise and small government. 1 Replace Subsidy with Vouchers Subsidies to community colleges and state universities should be replaced with a one-size-fits-all higher education vouchers. Students and parents have little or no sense of how much public higher education is subsidized so receiving a voucher will seem a huge boon, even if the actual size of the per capita subsidy is reduced. Using vouchers will also contribute to a free market in higher education services, leveling the playing field between the University
Re: Brin: Libertarian Morality--Up with good King John, down with Robin Hood.
David Hobby wrote: Trent Shipley wrote: I wrote a suggestion to my Arizona State legislators about de-funding the state universities in favor of tuition vouchers. ... Dear Senator Linda Gray, Representative Doug Quelland, and Representative Jim Weiers, ... “Be it resolved that the mission of Arizona's public institutions of higher education is to educate undergraduates and train graduates for essential professions.” Trent-- Hi. It's interesting. I wonder about the last bit, though. How does one tell whether or not a profession is essential? (I can certainly name some that I feel are NOT essential, but let's get beyond our personal biases.) One answer may be a profession is essential as long as people in it manage to find work. Markets certainly don't solve everything, but may be giving information about the relative importance of various kinds of work. : ) ---David Taxpayers tend to see the Universities exclusive mission as training (not educating) their kids to get a certificate that will let the kid be middle class. In short we pay taxes for undergraduate education NOT research or grad school. I imagined the state department of education defining some professional level degrees like Medicine, Master of Nursing, M.Ed. and D.Ed., Masters of Engineering, MSW as essential for Arizona. Others, like Law, MFA, or a PhD in Astronomy would be elective and unsubsidized. Some, notably the profitable hard sciences, like geology, biology, or chemistry, might qualify for partial subsidy. __ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: [Brin]: Libertarian Morality--Up with good King John, down with Robin Hood.
David Hobby wrote: Trent Shipley wrote: Hi. It's interesting. I wonder about the last bit, though. How does one tell whether or not a profession is essential? (I can certainly name some that I feel are NOT essential, but let's get beyond our personal biases.) One answer may be a profession is essential as long as people in it manage to find work. Markets certainly don't solve everything, but may be giving information about the relative importance of various kinds of work. : ) ---David Taxpayers tend to see the Universities exclusive mission as training (not educating) their kids to get a certificate that will let the kid be middle class. In short we pay taxes for undergraduate education NOT research or grad school. I imagined the state department of education defining some professional level degrees like Medicine, Master of Nursing, M.Ed. and D.Ed., Masters of Engineering, MSW as essential for Arizona. Others, like Law, MFA, or a PhD in Astronomy would be elective and unsubsidized. Some, notably the profitable hard sciences, like geology, biology, or chemistry, might qualify for partial subsidy. Trent-- So you're not big on the wisdom of the market? Your post did mention libertarians a bit, but I was unclear where you stood. Why should profitable hard sciences need a subsidy? I'd hope that the state money would go towards fields that we worthwhile yet underfunded. : ) The post is divided into two parts. The top part is the actual topic of the post. The main text. The part about vouchers and so on is an appendix provided as background. Now a pure market fundamentalist libertarian would be against subsidizing legislation. So even by brooking vouchers we are in the realm of libertarian lite. However, the voucher proposal is a HUGE libertarian increment over the system of funding higher education common in all states. It would make undergraduates true consumers. They could study at a community college, for-profit institution, religious institution, or state university as long as it was approved as a bona fide higher education program by the Department of Education. The student could study English lit or electrical engineering, or for that matter auto mechanics or go to beauty school. Power to the individual, student to customer. How's that for libertarian morality? Restricting grad school is a political sop. Voters really do tend to see the state universities as their to credential their kids into middle classdom. Oh, and tack a medical school on the side. What I would really like to see is a matching funds market in grants and loans so that young undergrads don't do the stupid thing I did and study history, but are expediently philistine and study business. The idea is that if Intel put in 1% for EE, the government matches it 99%. Oh look! No money for fine arts. Maybe you should major in nursing, hospitals put up money so the nursing grants would be funded. My daughter is in law school, and is paying for it with a pile of student loans. It's reasonable that she not be subsidized, since she'll (hopefully) wind up making enough to pay back the loans. We're in New York state, which has fairly high barriers to entering K-12 teaching. The teachers who come to my school to get the Master's they need for permanent certification tend to be making enough money that they don't need subsidies. As for subsidizing a Masters in Social Work, why not just pay social workers a bit more? ---David ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Take that, Iowa!!
On Friday 2008-01-11 12:04, Jim Sharkey wrote: Lance A. Brown wrote: Being able to grow switchgrass on marginal land not suitable for other, more traditional, crops is one of its benefits. To me that certainly seems like one of its biggest benefits. It's grass; it doesn't require nearly the same kind of care that more traditional food crops do. And I recall the article indicated that unlike those crops, it doesn't need replanting every year. If they can work around the cellulouse issues, I think it's very promising. Jim I think that the whole US cellulosic ethanol project must be driven almost entirely by *energy security* not global warming. If you really wanted to combat global warming you would replace coal (the most carbiniferous energy source) with cellulose and sequester the cellulose fuel's CO2. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Take that, Iowa!!
On Friday 2008-01-11 12:04, Jim Sharkey wrote: Lance A. Brown wrote: Being able to grow switchgrass on marginal land not suitable for other, more traditional, crops is one of its benefits. To me that certainly seems like one of its biggest benefits. It's grass; it doesn't require nearly the same kind of care that more traditional food crops do. And I recall the article indicated that unlike those crops, it doesn't need replanting every year. If they can work around the cellulouse issues, I think it's very promising. Jim How much private land is there that could be converted from lower yield to cellulose production? Could ex-farms on the Montana and Dakota prairies be put back into production as cellulose ranches? (In AZ we can grow agave on some private ranch land.) In the US the environmental lobby would prevent public land being leased for cellulose ranching. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Take that, Iowa!!
On Thursday 2008-01-10 17:13, Lance A. Brown wrote: Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote: Jim Sharkey wrote: I'm sure some of you knew this, what with your big brains and all, but I found it interesting: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=grass-makes-better-ethanol-than-corn _Scientific American_ is saying grass as a source of ethanol has the potential to be vastly more efficient than corn. Pretty cool stuff, I think. But still less efficient than sugarcane :-P Perhaps. The use of corn to produce ethanol is already driving the cost of corn higher, impacting food costs already[1]. I don't think we want to use corn _or_ sugarcane for producing ethanol in the long term. [1] http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/18173/ --[Lance] Can new arable land be brought into production for hardy energy crops? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Sci-fi physics
Is this plausible? http://www.belfryenterprises.com/redgalaxy/index.php/Singularity_power ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
World building wiki
Please visit and spread the word about http://www.belfryenterprises.com/redgalaxy ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: World Building Wiki
On Saturday 2007-12-29 16:46, jon louis mann wrote: ... why does it take millions of years to fill the galaxy with sentient life... jlm The galaxy is one hundred thousand light years across. At 1% light speed, i.e., 3000 km/sec or 1860 miles per second, that is ten million years. At one-tenth that, i.e., at 0.1% light speed that is one-hundred million years. We humans have a hard time going at 30 km/sec (19 miles per second) or 0.001% light speed. At 0.001% light speed, that takes ten billion years to cross the galaxy. Robert J. Chassell i see, now, the rule limiting interstellar travel, but what is the effect of acceleration as velocity increase and possibly approximates the speed of light? At near light speed it still takes about 100,000 years to cross the galaxy. if there is advanced forms of life on one planet, then it seems reasonable to assume that intelligent life could have evolved elsewhere in the galaxy, and colonize near by planets. under that scenario we should have observed the signature of some of those civilizations by now, especially those from stars much older than our own. That's the Fermi Paradox. Intelligent life should exist, but if it exists it should be apparent that it exists by now. perhaps the singularity only exists for a short window before transcending? could this be the explanation why we have never been able to verify the existence of extra terrestrial life? Being Luddite the Red Galaxy should would probably not have what are commonly thought of as transcendents. All intelligence would need to have a material basis. However, since some intelligence might consist of system-wide networks of computronium, there would be intellects that make human intellect look like that of an ant in comparison. is this the reason you say humans will be extinct? No. The reason humans are assumed to be extinct is because the world is situated 10 million years in the future at a minimum. Homo sapiens dates back maybe as much as 100,000 years. The entire history of Homo is maybe four million years. Apes as a clade are not much older than that. The odds of Homo sapiens surviving are just about nil. Indeed, some futurists expect dry technology (dry nanotechnology and computronium) to make organic, biological life and technology obsolete. It is possible that biological life could be extinct. However, there would be a habitable zone in a dyson swarm. I expect that many systems would include a (small) biological component in the overall ecological-economy. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin:World Building Wiki
Yes. They threw me off the Orion's Arm discussion list for being a worm hole skeptic. On Thursday 2007-12-27 20:57, Max Battcher wrote: Did you look at Orion's Arm? It has a couple of the things you mention: http://www.orionsarm.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Brin:World Building Wiki
I am going to launch a world building wiki. The working name for the project is Red. Since world building shares a lot with encyclopedias I'm planning to use MediaWiki. I haven't decided on GFDL or Creative Commons license yet. The wiki will not be an Uplift site. These are the features that I'm thinking of as part of a fairly Luddite cannon. --Only STL travel is possible. No FTL, no worm holes. --No reactionless drives. --No antigravity. The main means of travel is by beam riding ships weighing a few grams and made of computronium. --Most forms of sophonce do not rely on quantum states Therefore, mental states can be non-destructively copied. --The galaxy is entirely colonized. Therefore we are millions of years in the future. -Therefore humans are extinct. -Therefore economic ecology is very post-singularity. --Fermi was right. All life is Terragenetic. --Sapient beings who are any distance up the eco-econ trophic levels live a LONG time. Interstellar correspondence is reasonable, even at light speed or slower. --There are many unimaginably smart sapients --The island nature of each star means that an eco-econ tends to involution. Stellar habitats tend to convert matter into huge Dyson swarms. --Dyson swarms use as much solar energy as possible. --Solar systems look like big, cold spheres from the outside. --Eco-econs suffer from relative scarcity. Feedback is sought. I'm wondering if this cannon is going to be too unpopular. Maybe no one will play with me. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Car free London?
On Tuesday 2007-10-02 17:11, William T Goodall wrote: On 2 Oct 2007, at 22:38, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: At 09:25 AM Tuesday 10/2/2007, Charlie Bell wrote: On 30/09/2007, at 8:50 PM, Gary Nunn wrote: Holy Cow!! I make a post and step away for a few weeks and find this topic ran rampant - and I missed it! Yep. I'm still wondering what bits of London are 20 mins apart by car and hours apart by public transport I don't know about London, but most cities I have lived in in the U.S. are like that if the two points are both on the edge of the city proper, as the only bus routes or other public transportation available tends to run more or less radially from the downtown terminal, so to get from one point on the edge of the city (e.g., your house) to another relatively nearby on the edge of the city (e.g., your place of employment or in some cases the nearest shopping center), rather than going directly there which would be a 20-minute drive you must board the bus which comes closest to your house, ride all the way to the terminal downtown (taking the better part of an hour), snip Sounds like your public transport is designed by people who want to discredit public transport. Works here Maru In Phoenix the problem is car-enabled urban sprawl combined with relatively low ridership. The city is big enough that it has subsidiary hubs as well as bus lines that run along the grid. If you are lucky enough to have a direct line or have connections on heavily used routes then travel times can be reasonable. On the other hand you can have an infrequent route with a 1 hour connection in 110F with a half-mile walk at each end. That assumes that the bus system gets to your part of the eternal sprawling suburb. What the world needs is something like the Mercedes Smart car that is plug-in hybrid diesel electric. You combine that with heavy rail and heavy truck single-level car carriers then you have something. If you had a car carrier system there would be no freezing, or wet, or sweltering 1/2 mile walk to the center of a grid rectangle. If you had a form factor for carrier ready cars you could work or party late even if the public transit system went to sleep for the night. Just get in your little mini car and go home. (It would be best if the little cars fit width-wise so you could just roll on to the heavy-rail carrier and roll off at your destination.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Alliance for Progress Encyclopedia Wiki?
Translating the uplift encyclopedia into a wiki format is feasible. Would anyone be interested in having it in that form? There don't seem to have been any contributions for ages. Does anyone have ideas about how we would protect David Brin's intellectual property if the Encyclopedia used a wiki format? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Depleted Uranium, Floridated Water, and Bisphenol Food Wrapping
On Saturday 2006-04-22 11:55, Andrew Crystall wrote: On 19 Apr 2006 at 17:42, The Fool wrote: http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=133828 Stearns' research, published in the journals Mutagenesis and Molecular Carcinogenesis, confirms what many have suspected for some time - that uranium can damage DNA as a heavy metal, independently of its radioactive properties. Yes, really not a shock. Sadly missed opportunity for sarcasm. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: A question about Contacting Aliens
David Brin has many virtues, but he is hardly obsessive about editing for continuity. Contacting Aliens has a huge number of discrepancies. The discrepancies are internal, it contradicts itself, it contradicts things written by Brin, it contradicted all sorts of stuff from Gurps Uplift, 1st edition, and (though the Encyclopedia is not canonical) it contradicted the Encyclopedia when the Encyclopedia could have been accommodated. As a systematizer I choose to think of CA this way. It was written as a very introductory training manual for all manner of Terragens who might work with aliens. One has to presume that anything distributed so widely would get into the hands of non-friendly agents; therefore, CA contained many intentional gaffes as a form of disinformation meant to lull any alien who might study Contacting Aliens into a false sense of security. On Thursday 2006-03-16 13:02, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Jim Sharkey wrote: That's an interesting idea, and one I hadn't considered! However, as they might say at Terragens training schools, you can't really take human experience and overlay it onto Galactic experience. The extrapolation of generations makes some logical sense, but the core idea that you *can* extrapolate from human history to Galactic history may be flawed. Ok, but at least it gives some magnitudes about what we are talking about. And we hit the 150 My ago critical date, when something nasty happened :-) I have no problem with the mean O-2 race living in main sequence civilization about 1My. That's a long time. Why don't most races hit the post-Hollarith [sp?] singularity and retire much earlier? Maybe they do. Some outliers seem to hang around the edge of main sequence civilization for tens or even the low hundreds of megayears. If the mean life span is 1My a lot of races need to pass on fast if they are to offset an elder race that is 200My old and not Retired yet. It also means that disproportionately long-lived races will tend to be more wealthy and powerful. Also, from strictly a this is an awe-filled universe point of view, I *like* the idea of races such as the Tothtoon and Krallnith still being out there adn having a legacy that stretches over half-a- billion years. It gives the Four Galaxies a broader and (while I know the Good Doctor would hate the expression) more romantic scope. Maybe it's ok to have _one_ ancient race, but the problem is _too many_ ancient races. Worse: these races have just one client, and this client was uplifted some 500 My after the 1st race. This does not make much sense. Billions of years is PLENTY of time to build up quite a pantheon of heroic elders. I imagine that's just another reason why some Galactics hate Earthclan; here are these obnoxious wolflings who got to become treated like nid- level patrons because they've got two client races. ** Uplift and number of clients. Also, races that do more than _one_ Uplift should be the exception, not the rule [unless you count Uplift-consorting], otherwise there would be too many races with _no_ Clients! I can't really agree with that. The implication in all the books is clearly that there are hundreds of races totaling trillions of beings. Plenty of pre-sapients for all. And of course, clearly most of the important clans have multiple clients, often concurrently. No. I'm with Alberto here. The clear implication is that suitable presapients or ur-species are in very short supply. The main sequence sapients are O-2, H-2, and machine and of these the biological sapients (at least) are very careful ecologically. The books actually imply tens or even hundreds of thousands of O-2 races with (at least) trillions of individuals. But the Institutes are bound to keep O-2 civilization in environmental equilibrium. One will want millions or billions of individuals in an median race. This implies a relatively fixed number of races (not taking into account loss of galaxies) with a VERY slow rate of growth. Thus, the average mature race will patron just over 1 client. After a major space-time quake the institutes may make clients particularly scarce as they try to reduce the race count so that races will tend to some optimal species population. Most of the important clans have multiple clients: this is the whole reason [with cause and effect mixed] that they are important! Most of the clans would have just one huge line of Patron-Client. I don't think most races will be part of long, thin chains. These chains will occur, but will be more rare than one might expect. Instead, a tree of patron client relations would be dominated by explosions. Fertile patrons will have lots of clients. Most of these client lines will die out relatively soon, but some will have their own large families. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Coming Tug of War Over the Internet
I tend to favor technicalism -- a political stance that favoring the free play of technology. I hate the digital millennium copyright act because it is capitalist Ludditeism. The DMCA tries to protect an version (a relatively recent version) of intellectual property against free technological innovation. In the same way, trying to protect TCP/IP users from discrimination by switched carriers is bad policy. It is technically feasible for the carriers to partition the market for bandwidth. As a matter of general policy, the carriers free access to technology should not be prevented. On Sunday 2006-01-22 10:44, Robert G. Seeberger wrote: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/21/AR200601210 0094.html?nav=rss_technology http://urlx.org/washingtonpost.com/b814 big DEFANGED_snip/ xponent Developing Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Abstinence Only Sex Ed: 65 out of 490 Girls Pregnant in Ohio School
On Friday 2005-08-26 11:28, William T Goodall wrote: Or we could outsource it to countries that can manage it cheaper like China or India and have them shipped over at 22 or whatever when they have their degrees and are ready to start working. Brought up using European standards of language and beliefs of course :) That has been the American policy for decades. We call it the brain drain. It hasn't worked so well in Europe where the culture is not built around assimilation of immigrants. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Uplift locations and dates. Hey, Alberto?
On Monday 2005-07-18 18:17, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Vilyehm wrote: there is a strong possibility that UW Chapter 81 takes place in 2489-November. That would make things easier. The first of the Thennanin fleet arriving December 2489 Hmmm... No, because the Tymbrimi-Thennanin treaty would take place some time after that. Alberto Monteiro Tymbrimi-Thennanin treaty?? Why would a Terragen-Thennanin treaty and alliance imply a Tymbrimi-Thennanin treaty? Perhaps a series of memoranda of understanding concerning Terragen relations? That would be a minimal approach to cooperation where it would be strictly necessary. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SPOUTED: Knee-jerk Atheist Spams List With Stories of Christians Gone Bad
And let us now remember the evil done by doctrinaire atheists such as Stalin and Mao. Verily it is not faith in diety or religion that causeth evil, but belief in all master narratives. If thou wouldst do no evil, have not faith, not even faith in no-faith. == If religion is indeed as hateful as William T Goodall says it is, then the fervent hatred of religion is also just an inverted religion. Anti-religion just manifests religious intolerance in another guise. Hatred without balance, reason, or limit is still hatred no matter how well founded the underlying theory. Indeed, the rational conclusion that religion is harmful has in modern times produced worse harm than religion itself, notably in the wake of the French Revolution and Communism. Furthermore, let us not forget, that from the 1850s to the 1960s or 1970s Marxism was based in (what for the times) were advanced historical and social scholarship. Even today global scholarship benefits from Marxian theory. Communists had and have an irrefutable modernist, rationalist pedigree. Being rational and modern is no guarantee at all against monstrosity. I'm with Voltaire. Most people NEED religion. Trying to quash religion makes as much sense as trying to repress sexuality. It simply won't work. Humans simply have a spiritual instinct. I see nothing constructive, or even terribly informative, in W.T. Goodall's hate-speech against some ill-defined phenomenon called religion. On Sunday 2005-06-19 15:28, William T Goodall wrote: On 19 Jun 2005, at 10:55 pm, Dave Land wrote: On Jun 19, 2005, at 5:26 AM, William T Goodall wrote: ... Oh, really? Who cares? LOL. Hiding your head in the sand doesn't make religion any less monstrously evil. I'm fed up reading knee-jerk woolly-minded garbage about how great religion is. I'll just post a few actual facts about what religion is really about. Obscene evil, that's what. Rape, murder, child-abuse, cannibalism, genocide, oppression and hatred. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What Is Your Worldview?
On Thursday 2005-06-02 19:10, Dave Land wrote: On Jun 2, 2005, at 6:41 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote: A fun test! http://quizfarm.com/test.php?q_id=23320 You scored as Modernist. You scored as Materialist. Materialism stresses the essence of fundamental particles. Everything that exists is purely physical matter and there is no special force that holds life together. You believe that anything can be explained by breaking it up into its pieces. i.e. the big picture can be understood by its smaller elements. Materialist 94% Postmodernist 88% Existentialist 81% Modernist 50% Cultural Creative 50% Romanticist 25% Fundamentalist 25% Idealist 0% To the surprise of no one. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Islamic Neocons
Depends on what you mean by Neocon. Wahhabism is a very literalist approach to Islam and has had a radical influence on global Islam in the late 20th and early 21st centuries AD. There are some weak parallels with literalist North American approaches to Evangelical Protestant Christianity. It is also true that American Evangelicals are very very Republican, but in my book the Evangelical caucus and Neoconservative elements in the Republican party are merely allied, not identical. On Tuesday 2005-05-31 05:32, Leonard Matusik wrote: Anybody smarter than me see any paralleles between what happened in Saudi Arabia with Whahabi-Whatis Islam and the Neocom movement in the US? -Leonard Matusik RN/MSN - Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: anti modernism blog continues.
On Monday 2005-05-02 17:39, d.brin wrote: Any of you who haven't joined our regular Thursday pm gathering online, using my Holocene Chat interface, are welcome to let me know. Several brinellers participate. Each Thursday 4pm Pacific. --- This from my blog Still too swamped to continue the formal essay. But let me call to your attention a TV show that has run in some markets, covering elements in our world that I have called anti-modernist. The following (italicized) is from the web site. ib The Power of Nightmares/b explores how the idea that we are threatened by a hidden and organized terrorist network is an illusion. Director Adam Curtis theorizes that it's a myth that has spread unquestioned through politics, the security services and the international media. At the heart of his story are two groups: the American neo-conservatives and the radical Islamists. bSayyed Qutb: Father of Radical Islam /b In the 1950s Sayyed Qutb, an Egyptian civil servant was sent to the U.S. to learn about its public education system. As he traveled around the county, Qutb became increasingly disgusted by what he felt was the selfish and materialistic nature of American life. When he returned to Egypt, Qutb turned into a revolutionary. I have read and forgotten Qutb's biography and some of his work. At this point he is an activist and budding revolutionary. So Brin's narrative is slightly misleading. Determined to find some way to control the forces of selfish individualism that he saw in America, he envisioned an Arab society where Islam would play a more central role. He became an influential spokesperson in the Muslim Brotherhood but was jailed after some of its members attempted to assassinate Egyptian President Nasser. In prison a more radical Qutb Again this is misleading. It is important to make clear that imprisonment and government torture of Qutb and his bretheren radicalized Qutb. Eg. His experience in prison radicalized Qutb, and his revolutionary ideology reached full bloom... wrote several books which argued that extreme measures, including deception and even violence, could be justified in an effort to restore shared moral values to society. He was executed in 1966 for treason in Egypt. Something about the execution making him a martyr. But his ideas lived on and formed the basis of the radical Islamist movement. Break for new subject. Leo Strauss Leo Strauss was a professor of political philosophy at the University of Chicago. bLeo Strauss: A Neo-Conservative /b At the same time Leo Strauss, an American professor of political philosophy, also came to see western liberalism as corrosive to morality and to society. Like Qutb, Strauss believed that individual freedoms threatened to tear apart the values which held society together. He taught his students that politicians should assert powerful and inspiring myths - like religion or the myth of the nation - that everyone could believe in. Glosses over Strauss' (Strauss or Stauss?) glorification of Western Civilization and values in contrast to Qutb's complete condemnation of the same greco-pagan and Judeo-Christian values. I have not read Strauss, but my impression is that it started as a movement WITHIN the liberal or leftist wing of the struggle for Western Culture arguing for the absolute and universal imperative toward Western Civilizational Values and explicitly against liberal and radical relativism. Indeed, the Kennedy administration was Neo-Conservative in contemporary terms. Through the 1960's and 1970's, however, ethical relativism (once the darling of the extreme fascist right) moved to the very center of liberal-leftist-radical thought. Ironically, relativism gives no ideological or political traction to the left. Faith is of no utility and fundamentalism impossible when leftism is hybridized with relativism. Without fundamentalism there is no fanaticism and with no fanaticism, activism dies. Relativism realized leftism thereby rendering leftism impotent. The leftist sea-change in favor of relativism left the Straussian liberals with no one to ally with but the right. It is only in the 1970's than one can properly begin to talk about Neo-Conservatives. Well at any rate you need to mention Alan Bloom since he connects the young turks to Strauss. A group of young students, including Paul Wolfowitz, Francis Fukuyama and William Kristol studied Strauss' ideas and formed a loose group in Washington which became known as the neo-conservatives. They set out to create a myth of America as a unique nation whose destiny was to battle against evil in the world. Both Qutb and Strauss were idealists whose ideas were born out of the failure of the liberal dream to build a better world. Perceived failure, mind you. One could argue that the liberal/communist era DID build a better world. Brin should, it is easy to argue that even
Attn Brin: Re: anti modernism blog continues.
On Monday 2005-05-02 17:39, d.brin wrote: Any of you who haven't joined our regular Thursday pm gathering online, using my Holocene Chat interface, are welcome to let me know. Several brinellers participate. Each Thursday 4pm Pacific. --- This from my blog Still too swamped to continue the formal essay. But let me call to your attention a TV show that has run in some markets, covering elements in our world that I have called anti-modernist. The following (italicized) is from the web site. ib The Power of Nightmares/b explores how the idea that we are threatened by a hidden and organized terrorist network is an illusion. Director Adam Curtis theorizes that it's a myth that has spread unquestioned through politics, the security services and the international media. At the heart of his story are two groups: the American neo-conservatives and the radical Islamists. bSayyed Qutb: Father of Radical Islam /b In the 1950s Sayyed Qutb, an Egyptian civil servant was sent to the U.S. to learn about its public education system. As he traveled around the county, Qutb became increasingly disgusted by what he felt was the selfish and materialistic nature of American life. When he returned to Egypt, Qutb turned into a revolutionary. I have read and forgotten Qutb's biography and some of his work. At this point he is an activist and budding revolutionary. So Brin's narrative is slightly misleading. Determined to find some way to control the forces of selfish individualism that he saw in America, he envisioned an Arab society where Islam would play a more central role. He became an influential spokesperson in the Muslim Brotherhood but was jailed after some of its members attempted to assassinate Egyptian President Nasser. In prison a more radical Qutb Again this is misleading. It is important to make clear that imprisonment and government torture of Qutb and his bretheren radicalized Qutb. Eg. His experience in prison radicalized Qutb, and his revolutionary ideology reached full bloom... wrote several books which argued that extreme measures, including deception and even violence, could be justified in an effort to restore shared moral values to society. He was executed in 1966 for treason in Egypt. Something about the execution making him a martyr. But his ideas lived on and formed the basis of the radical Islamist movement. Break for new subject. Leo Strauss Leo Strauss was a professor of political philosophy at the University of Chicago. bLeo Strauss: A Neo-Conservative /b At the same time Leo Strauss, an American professor of political philosophy, also came to see western liberalism as corrosive to morality and to society. Like Qutb, Strauss believed that individual freedoms threatened to tear apart the values which held society together. He taught his students that politicians should assert powerful and inspiring myths - like religion or the myth of the nation - that everyone could believe in. Glosses over Strauss' (Strauss or Stauss?) glorification of Western Civilization and values in contrast to Qutb's complete condemnation of the same greco-pagan and Judeo-Christian values. I have not read Strauss, but my impression is that it started as a movement WITHIN the liberal or leftist wing of the struggle for Western Culture arguing for the absolute and universal imperative toward Western Civilizational Values and explicitly against liberal and radical relativism. Indeed, the Kennedy administration was Neo-Conservative in contemporary terms. Through the 1960's and 1970's, however, ethical relativism (once the darling of the extreme fascist right) moved to the very center of liberal-leftist-radical thought. Ironically, relativism gives no ideological or political traction to the left. Faith is of no utility and fundamentalism impossible when leftism is hybridized with relativism. Without fundamentalism there is no fanaticism and with no fanaticism, activism dies. Relativism realized leftism thereby rendering leftism impotent. The leftist sea-change in favor of relativism left the Straussian liberals with no one to ally with but the right. It is only in the 1970's than one can properly begin to talk about Neo-Conservatives. Well at any rate you need to mention Alan Bloom since he connects the young turks to Strauss. A group of young students, including Paul Wolfowitz, Francis Fukuyama and William Kristol studied Strauss' ideas and formed a loose group in Washington which became known as the neo-conservatives. They set out to create a myth of America as a unique nation whose destiny was to battle against evil in the world. Both Qutb and Strauss were idealists whose ideas were born out of the failure of the liberal dream to build a better world. Perceived failure, mind you. One could argue that the liberal/communist era DID build a better world. Brin should, it is easy to argue that even communism was an advance over Tsarist
Re: Imax 'shuns films on evolution'
On Monday 2005-03-21 17:11, William T Goodall wrote: On 21 Mar 2005, at 8:51 pm, Nick Arnett wrote: On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 03:26:18 +, William T Goodall wrote The people in the original story who had religious objections to evolution. You are objecting to them being referred to as religious. Are you claiming they are not religious or what? Confusion reigns. I'm not disagreeing that they're religious. I was trying to point out that the article itself, not just the people it was reporting on, presents as fact the idea that movies about evolution contradict the Bible. It presents as fact the fact that some people have religious objections to the theory of evolution. They *could* have added that there are thousands of different religions which have various different positions wrt evolution, but I don't see why they should. As I recall, the lead sentence for the article could be read as implying that Americans in general were so given to religious literalism that Imax was forced to censor itself. While many surveys have over 50% of Americans being opposed to evolution in some way, this has in no way impaired the popularity of things like the Jurassic Park franchise. In a very real sense the BBC piece cuts right to the heart of the story, yet at the same time it succeeds in subtly misrepresenting the underlying cultural dynamics. Fore example, after reading the article, the reader is no closer to understanding why the fictional Jurasic Park makes money and the educational Volcanoes does not. The article sensationalizes American anti-intellectualism and intolerance, both of which are significant, but does so in a way that reinforces smug stereotypes held by Europeans about Americans. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: the purge
On Thursday 2005-03-17 20:25, d.brin wrote: Today. In person. One of the most conservative men I know and former special forces. One of dozens who have told me - when I asked about the purge - David, it is worse than you can imagine. This is not just the fault of the Straussian fanatics, or even their masters. After all, it was our job to prevent this. The left bears much of the blame. Extreme liberals are incapable of realizing that our freedom's bulwark has always been the Officer Corps. Frekazoid super-lefties have fetishistically gone out of their way to alienate the military and the churches and everything white or middle class they could spot, effectively handing any election over to the neocons and kleptos. These lefty jerks put us in today's position, where moderate liberals and the Officer Corps cannot even perceive the need to help each other in the context of an attempted putsch that is starting to look eerily and horrifically familiar. The commies did the same thing in the run-up to 1933. Or possibly in the Soviet Union in the 1930's. Our officers need help. They need it now. But the liberals cannot hear their muffled cries. Unfortunately, none of our officers, active or retired, has publically asked for help. Until somebody goes on the record and a major news organization reports a purge there are no victims needing help and no problem needing a solution. You are the son of a journalist, and everyday you move closer to being a non-fiction essayist than a writer of fictional novels. You know that this is WHY we have a free press. If you cannot produce specifics Look, if you are 10% right this is a huge problem. But you cannot document it. Find a journalist to take the story and introduce her to some of your sources. And if it's true then SEVERAL good officers will have to give up break ordinary professional ethics and sacrifice careers by making a political complaint to the press. I CANNOT do anything about it. All I have is hearsay. Since you have direct reports, you could take your concerns to members of your state's congressional delegation. Of course, they will also probably want proof and some leads to start an investigation. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: Re: more neocons
On Monday 2005-03-14 23:01, Doug Pensinger wrote: On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:37:34 -0800 (PST), David Brin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's stunning is the ability of hypocrites to make excuses for (or ignore) the most relentless and deliberate politicization and political purge of our officer corps. Where can I find out more about this? I checked your website/blog but didn't see anyhthing there and couldn't find anything in a news search either. Second. Citations please. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
You will be sorry you asked: was Re: Counting
On Friday 2005-03-04 06:27, David Hobby wrote: Trent Shipley wrote: What the I can't find any context for this. But see comments, below. ---David 1) You might have seen this on brin-l aztechlist or [EMAIL PROTECTED] I did not recognize this as a simple pigeonhole problem of 2n choose n, so I cross posted to lists where I thought I might get help and would not be accused of an off topic post. David Hobby, do you live in the Phoenix area? == As for context: Well all the chatter about things quantum on brin-l made me think of quantum computers and computation. Thinking about quantum computing reminded me that I know virtually nothing about the topic, but that ever since taking introductory digital circuit design I have known that flip-flops (the basis of memory circuits) can be put into an indeterminate state called metastable. Metastability is usually regarded by EEs as A Bad Thing.My immediate reaction was that looks like a QM effect at a macro scale. When I read about metastability in my text book my first idea was that one could use the phenomenon to build a random number generator or coin tosser. (It turns out that there are references on the web to patents for random generators based on metastability.) Then I thought, if you can use metastability to make random generators, then MAYBE (if you can find a way to entangle more states) you could use metastability to make a quantum computer with off the shelf parts ... in a garage on your vacation. Shure, there is at best a 0.05% chance of success, but IF it worked it would rank as more important than the integrated circuit and less important than the solid-state transistor. I even wrote to ask about inducing metastability. See: http://www.sigcon.com/Pubs/news/4_4.htm Most of Dr. Howard Johnson's objections to inducing metastability can either be answered or are generically a problem for ANY quantum-ALU (QLU) design one might consider. The metastable window on a flip-flop is extremely narrow, perhaps only a few picoseconds wide. This is a design issue. Since EEs do not want metastability screwing up their designs, they minimize the window where metastability can occur. Working from scratch, one could MAXIMIZE a flip-flop's metastable window. Furthermore, it [the metastable window] drifts with time, temperature, power supply voltage, and other factors. For quantum computation you need to be able to (more or less) reliably induce metastability. The latch is touchy about initial conditions, so if you want to build a quantum computer around one you need to carefully control those initial conditions. Once you set the potentiometer to create a lot of metastable events, drift in the flip-flop's metastable window will soon cause the circuit to fall off the metastable cusp, and the circuit will return to normal operation. You have to keep chasing the metastable window around if you want to observe events over a long period of time. Using a latch (or any other basis for a QC) throws the basis out of its initial state. Any engine (including a latch) will have a refractory period before it returns to an initial or 'ground' state and is again ready to perform another operation. These refractory periods are likely to be best described with probability curves. One can partly overcome this problem by having multiple QPUs in a series so that a fresh QPU in ground state is always waiting to take the output from the last QPU that performed an operation. == Now with an ordinary latch we have an input control lead (it sets the latch to remember current state or receive a new state) an data input lead (if the control is T, then the data lead sets the latch to either T or F), and an output lead that just tells you whether the latch is remembering T or F. More literally the latch has TWO output leads, but if one is T the other must be F, so we gain no data from the second one. I had my Digital Design textbook stolen partway through the semester, but as i remember it a latch was mathematically: A[out] - B[in], Output B[out] - A[in] So, if we have a latch with two output leads we should be able to get it to act as the brain of a trivial qpu: it will perform the not so interesting operation of ADD 1. Unfortunately if we have two latches we do not get either a 2 or a 4 q-bit computer. We just have two weak little 1 q-bit qpu's. They cannot be quantum entangled. I conjecture that a three component latch (3-latch) will not be stable, but have a tendency to ring. (Note this is a K-3 graph.) A[o] - B[i],C[i], Out B[o] - A[i],C[i], Out C[o] - A[i],C[i], Out A 4-latch, however, should be stable. Like a 2-latch I conjecture it should only output bits so that the number of Fs equals the number of Ts. A[o] - B[i], C[i], D[i], Out B[o] - A[i], C[i], D[i], Out C[o] - A[i], B[i], D[i], Out D[o
Counting
(Replies to plug-discuss preferred) best viewed monospaced 0th item: 0 places: 0 parity combinations, 2^0 possible nil:nil: 1 :1 1th item: 2 places: 01 10 2 parity combinations, sum of each row is 1, 2^2 possible 1:1: 2 :4 2th item: 4 places: 0011 0101 0110 1001 1010 1100 6 parity combinations, sum of each row is 2 2^4 possible (16) 4: 6 :8:16 3th item: 6 places: 000111 001011 001101 001011 001110 010011 010101 010110 011001 011010 011100 100011 100101 100110 101001 101010 101100 110001 110010 110100 111000 20 parity combinations (if my spreadsheet is right) sum of each row is 3 2^6 possible 16: 20 :32:64 4th item: 8 places: 00010111 . . 11101000 70 parity combinations (if spreadsheet right) sum of each row is 4 2^8 possible 64: 70 :128:256 This is beyond my initially weak, and now rusted, skill at counting and combinatorics. NOTE each binary number (or representation of state) has an equal number of 'zeroes' and 'ones'. Because of the parity of zeroes and ones we are only interested in binary numbers with an even number of places. The idea that the sum of symbols for each number equals the rank of the item in the sequence is not proven, but is evident. --- Question: For a given item n in the sequence N, how many parity number combinations will occur in the resulting set of all modulo 2^(2n) binary representations? (How many parity combinations for a given item N?) Is number of binary parities bounded underneath by 2^(2[n-1]) for all N? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
[aztechlist] Counting
(Replies to plug-discuss preferred) best viewed monospaced 0th item: 0 places: 0 parity combinations, 2^0 possible nil:nil: 1 :1 1th item: 2 places: 01 10 2 parity combinations, sum of each row is 1, 2^2 possible 1:1: 2 :4 2th item: 4 places: 0011 0101 0110 1001 1010 1100 6 parity combinations, sum of each row is 2 2^4 possible (16) 4: 6 :8:16 3th item: 6 places: 000111 001011 001101 001011 001110 010011 010101 010110 011001 011010 011100 100011 100101 100110 101001 101010 101100 110001 110010 110100 111000 20 parity combinations (if my spreadsheet is right) sum of each row is 3 2^6 possible 16: 20 :32:64 4th item: 8 places: 00010111 . . 11101000 70 parity combinations (if spreadsheet right) sum of each row is 4 2^8 possible 64: 70 :128:256 This is beyond my initially weak, and now rusted, skill at counting and combinatorics. NOTE each binary number (or representation of state) has an equal number of 'zeroes' and 'ones'. Because of the parity of zeroes and ones we are only interested in binary numbers with an even number of places. The idea that the sum of symbols for each number equals the rank of the item in the sequence is not proven, but is evident. --- Question: For a given item n in the sequence N, how many parity number combinations will occur in the resulting set of all modulo 2^(2n) binary representations? (How many parity combinations for a given item N?) Is number of binary parities bounded underneath by 2^(2[n-1]) for all N? ==AzTechList AzTechList Discussion List http://www.aztechlist.org Subscribe by sending an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Report list related problems/concerns: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Become a Member and/or Sponsor: http://paypal.azipa.org * Co-sourcing with Inflow is the future - http://www.inflow.com * PublicOpinion.com. Share with the world - http://www.publicopinion.com * Contactlink Keeps You Connected! - http://www.contactlink.com * $7.85 Domain Name Registrations/Transfers - http://www.domaindo.com AzTechList== Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aztechlist/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Sunni Arab Anti-Americanism and Paramilitarism (was: scorching hell...)
On Sunday 2005-02-20 20:36, d.brin wrote: 1/ Why do CIA Director, Porter Goss, and the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lowell Jacoby, HATE AMERICA? Islamic extremists are exploiting the Iraqi conflict to recruit new anti-U.S. jihadists, CIA Director Porter J. Goss told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. These jihadists who survive will leave Iraq experienced and focused on acts of urban terrorism, he said. They represent a potential pool of contacts to build transnational terrorist cells, groups and networks in Saudi Arabia, Jordan and other countries. ... I am not immediately worried that the Sunni Arab insurgency in Iraq will directly or immediately destabilize adjacent Arab countries. Given virulent anti-Shia sentiment among Sunnis from Pakistan and all points West to Morrocco that communal violence in Iraq could exacerbate violence against Kurds in Syria, and against Shias in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, the Gulf states (especially Saudia and Bahrain), Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Pakistan already has a major problem with hate crimes against its Shia minority. In short, communal war in Iraq could worsen already tense relations between Iran and its neighbors. Sunni Arabs are looking to repeat their defeat of the Soviets in Afghanistan in Iraq with asymmetric urban warfare replacing asymmetric mountain warfare and with America replacing the USSR, at least extremists are and the non-extremists would not shed a tear about the USA losing. Only in the unlikely event the Anglo-American, Arab Shia, and Kurdish coalition loose to the Iraqi Arab Sunnis would the Arab Sunni insurgents be able to move on to directly destabilize neighboring Sunni states. Our policies in the Middle East fuel Islamic resentment, Vice Adm. Lowell E. Jacoby, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told the Senate panel. Overwhelming majorities in Morocco, Jordan and Saudi Arabia believe the U.S. has a negative policy toward the Arab world. Yes but war or no war overwhelming majorities from Morocco to Oman have had and will have negative attitudes toward US regional policy. Anglophones and Arabs simply have incompatible interests in the Arabophone region at both the regional level and at the level of its constituent states. The war has just made a perennially bad US public relations significantly worse. Big deal, so what. We devistated Vietnam and the Vietnamese are willing to forgive and forget. Arabs seem to hate us no matter what we do. snip/ Our Iraq war has become a recruiting tool and training ground for terrorists? What kind of liberal propaganda is this? Don't Goss and Jacoby care about SPREADING FREEDOM? I am certain the the administration will soon have them back on message. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
War Prison Abuses (was: scorching hell...)
On Sunday 2005-02-20 20:36, d.brin wrote: 2/ Why would our Iraq war fuel Islamic resentment? Don't they see the great things we are doing? snip content=examples of abuses/ I think we did not hear these kinds of stories from Vietnam because we could use the South Vietnamese as cutouts to interrogate war prisoners using physical and psychological stressor. Note that in Algeria, the French enjoyed no such convenient patsy and earned a nasty reputation, in no small part thanks to Fannon. Guards need to be better supervised. If no surrogate can be found, American interrogators need to improve their technique and cover their tracks. They should NOT use American guards as surrogates. This is the price of empire: Our souls. What souls? Surely the glory of empire is worth a national soul? Empire and glory are real virtues remembered through ages, national souls (if they exist) exist to realize classical collective virtues. Or perhaps we should say it is the realization return to our essential national soul and traditional values. It is this sort of behavior that made America a Great Power. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Shii Theocracy (was: scorching hell...)
On Sunday 2005-02-20 20:36, d.brin wrote: 3/ Meanwhile, the big winner in Iraq is the latest target of the Bush administration's macho rhetoric, Iran: When the Bush administration decided to invade Iraq two years ago, it envisioned a quick handover to handpicked allies in a secular government that would be the antithesis of Iran's theocracy -- potentially even a foil to Tehran's regional ambitions. But, in one of the greatest ironies of the U.S. intervention, Iraqis instead went to the polls and elected a government with a strong religious base -- and very close ties to the Islamic republic next door. It is the last thing the administration expected from its costly Iraq policy -- $300 billion and counting, U.S. and regional analysts say. ... Yet the top two winning parties -- which together won more than 70 percent of the vote and are expected to name Iraq's new prime minister and president -- are Iran's closest allies in Iraq. snip/ For now, the United States appears prepared to accept the results -- in large part because it has no choice. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21679-2005Feb13.html G$300 is actually the cost of trying to execute an Imperial policy on the cheap. The inability to install your own puppet regime is another cost of doing imperialism on the cheap. Iraq will have an Arab Shia majority, in even the BEST case scenario, one could forsee that removing the Baathist regime in Baghdad would remove strategic pressure on Tehran since even a secular regime would have little incentive to tow the American line on Iran but rather to get along with their neighbor. As it stands, it looks like the Iraqi constitutional convention will produce at a minimum some sort of theocracy-light. Furthermore, both the interim parliament and subsequent constitutional administration are likely to be rather friendly toward Tehran and will avoid looking too pro-Anglophone. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Iranian policy (was: scorching hell...)
On Sunday 2005-02-20 20:36, d.brin wrote: 4/ So, how are our relations with Iran now that it is the dominant regional power, with a sympathetic Shiite government in a weak and chaotic neighboring Iraq, its former enemy? Iran, facing mounting U.S. pressure over its nuclear program, promised yesterday a scorching hell for any aggressor as tens of thousands marched to mark the 26th anniversary of its Islamic revolution. A month after President Bush warned that the United States hasn't ruled out military action against Iran, President Mohammed Khatami responded before a crowd gathered on a snowy square in Tehran. ... Will this nation allow the feet of an aggressor to touch this land? Khatami asked at the crowd. If, God forbid, it happens, Iran will turn into a scorching hell for the aggressors. His statements drew chants of Death to America! from the crowd. Khatami is widely recognized as a leader of a moderate faction in Iran. Indeed, Khatami himself indicated in his speech that the talk of a possible U.S. invasion was pushing him into a united camp with Iran's hard-liners against foreign meddling. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002177190_iran11.html Remember Khatami? He was our great hope among the liberal reformers in Iran. Now he says he is being driven by the US into the arms of the hardliners. Our invasion of Iraq has basically killed the reform movement in Iran, with hardliners dominating elections since then. I do not believe that the USA's invasion of Iraq has killed Iran's reform movement. The opposition WANTED to contest hardliners in Iran's last national parliamentary elections, but were prevented from doing so because in Iran the judiciary is the foremost branch of government. The constitution specifies that Islamic legal scholars constitute the judiciary. Furthermore, per the Iranian constitution, judicial authorities must vet potential candidates for elected administrative or legislative office. American foreign policy had little or nothing to do with the so-called defeat of the opposition. Opposition candidates were simply judged insufficiently orthodox and not allowed to run. This was EXACTLY the intent of the constitution which sought to implement Khomeni's revolutionary theory of government by Islamic jurisprudents. Nevertheless, American warmongering has certainly put any Iranian reform movement into a holding pattern. Reform is not dead, but it is torpid. Who cares about reform when your nation's mortal enemy is at the gates? Reform will remain torpid until Washington's cold war brinkmanship pulls back significantly. Furthermore, I have no doubt that if America's defense and foreign policy team decide to invade Iran, the Iranians (who unlike the Iraqis indisputably see themselves as a single nation, baring some small minorities like Kurds) will oppose invasion and occupation with a united front. Iran could make Iraq look like a stroll in a suburban park. I am not certain that Iran is planning to test a nuclear device. If I were Iranian, I would definitely want the option to get a bomb quick. I would want fissionable material on hand with lots of bomb components. I would even want prototypes ready to fuel, arm, and test. Even if Iran had a liberal regime and good relations with Washington, any sane flag-rank Iranian officer would STILL insist that Washington provide nuclear guarantees AND would want to have the failsafe of weapons grade fissionable material stored in quantity. Pakistan has the bomb and could become insanely anti-Shia any day. The Russian sphere of control borders Iran. Russia has the bomb. Russia has previously occupied parts of Iran. The Arab Gulf States, especially Saudi Arabia, are irrationally anti-Shia. They are a military threat, though no match for Iran's conventional forces. Note, however, that Wahhabi zeal has sometimes resulted in the defeat of superior military forces. If relations with Washington were to change, Saudi Arabia or a consortium of Gulf States might be forced to develop a nuclear capability. Iraq is currently occupied by a hostile superpower's forces. Though it looks like a friendly regime will soon come to power, powers corresponding to what is today called Iraq have often fought wars with Iran. Turkey is a close ally of a hostile superpower. Turkey is not favorably disposed to Shias, minorities, or theocracies. Over the centuries Iran and Turkey have fought wars. At present, however, relations are stable. The United States, an economic and military superpower is actively hostile toward Iran. Iran and the USA have effectively been in a coldwar since the 1979 revolution. Worse, the current administration is looking to further isolate Iran, ramping up coldwar style pressure, and has shown a real willingness to use full military options even when they strike external observers as both expensive and less than
Iraqi Vote (was Re: Live video of ...)
On Wednesday 2005-02-09 12:43, Gary Denton wrote: With a slow connection I don't do video feeds but am glad they recognize the sacrifices our troops are making. My nephew the Army Ranger is back in Iraq. He was protecting the vote. He is at Mosul, where they had 10% voter turnout. I was doing a calculation the other day - it looks like Iraqi voter turnout as percentage of voting age population was much lower than we might have heard here. They did not meet the goal of 50%. I guess our so-called liberal media missed that call. When final results are in I suspect we will have helped the Iraqis elect their equivalent of the Taliban. Sioldiers die to do whatever the politicians want, we should have better men as politicians. At least as good as our soldiers. - Gary Denton Easter Lemming Liberal News Digest The election for the Iraqi interim parliament and constitutional covention was a general national poll, based on party lists, with proportional representation. Arab Shia voted at relatively high rates. Kurds (mostly Sunni) would also have voted as would most of the small minorities (Turkomen and Christians, and others). Lets _assume_ that Kurds and small minorities voted at near the overall median rate for the election. The Arab Sunni, already very touchy about their minority status, to a significant degree boycotted the vote, resulting in participation figures along the lines you quote for Mosul of 10% (Mosul is dominated by Arab Sunni I understand). The Taliban regard themselves as ultra-Sunni from Hanbali-Wahhabi-Deobandi school of Sunni tradition. Those most sympathetic to the Taliban were reactionary Arab Sunnis; just those least likely to vote (and most likely to be rabidly anti-Shia). If Iraq becomes Taliban-like it will NOT be the result of these elections, but due to violence. On the other hand, early results show the biggest winner, and possibly a super-majority in its own right, to be the Shia party most closely tied to the Ayatollahs. Iran (and even more the Iranian model) has considerable influence with this group. Ayatollah Khomeini was a brilliant thinker and was instrumental in comming up with the idea of Wallayit al-Faqih [spelling guaranteed wrong], government by religious jurists. Iran's constitution and regime are one experiment in instantiating this innovative theory of theocratic government. One condition for implementing a wallayit al-faqih is that the overwhelming majority of the population be at least nominally Shia. Thus, the mullahs and ayatollahs imposed wallayit al-faqih on Iran, but Hizbollah did not do so in Lebanon despite their millitary and propagandistic strength. In Iraq about two-thirds of the population are Shia, so even if your caucus supports jurisprudential republican theocracy in the abstract, it might oppose it as an impractical and unjust imposition on a large minority. I am expecting the Iraqi Constitutional Covention to produce something like Iran-Lite, either a watered down Jurisprudential Theocratic Republic with a mixed bench of Shia and Sunni judges and a troika presidency or a liberal republic with lots of theocratic constraints enforced by Islamic jurists. The interesting question will be how ShrubCo reacts to a constitutional document that produces either a theocratic republic (albeit weaker than in Iran), or a federal democratic republic with a strong theocratic judicial branch. The other problem will be how paranoid the virulently anti-Shia principalities in the Gulf react to having a second strong Shia polity as a neighbor. Back around the start of the 20th century, Wahhabi Ikhwan committed massacres of Shia. Wahhabi-Deobandi groups often have hatred of Shia as an article of dogma. This is even more durable than hatred of Americans or Jews, because those hatereds only surface with contact and conflict. With Americans and Jews W-D's could agree to live and let live. Shia are hated as corrupt crypto-polytheist Muslims. Theoretically, Shia must be sought out and purged. So no worries about electing Taliban, worry instead about electing an Ayatollah. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SpamAdaption
On Sunday 2005-02-06 22:17, Nick Arnett wrote: Robert G. Seeberger wrote: And that comes right after AOL claimed that spam was going down and that everybody was saying that spammers had given up It seems that spammers have adapted. How can they use the ISP's infrastructure and why can't the ISPs prevent them from doing it? And in case anyone is wondering what the answer is to that last question... it's that the spammers are hijacking computers via malware and exploits and then using the victim's ISPs to send spam. Nick Nick, is this what you are saying? Spammer compromises customer's computer (actually many customers' computers, preferably through a Trojan EULA that makes the whole thing legal). Compromised computers are used to send spam (via their own ISP, naturally). It follows that: -- A careful spammer with many compromised computers can effectively force ISPs to inspect the *contents* of all traffic since NOTHING can trusted. --More aggressive spammers will cause even more headaches for ISPs because the ISP will identify masses of traffic from customers with compromised nodes. The ISP will quarantine compromised accounts. If ISPs quarantine an account repeatedly, then customers will get upset and move. If they do not quarantine compromised accounts, the ISP itself will start to get quarantined by other ISPs.. I really do not get that angry with spammers. They are just rational entrepreneurs. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SpamAdaption
On Sunday 2005-02-06 23:09, David Land wrote: Trent Shipley wrote: I really do not get that angry with spammers. They are just rational entrepreneurs. I take from this it that you are some kind of extreme libertarian that rejects both property and privacy. It would not be incorrect to label me an extreme libertarian. I do not believe that privacy can be protected by legal means. Like the entrepreneur said, Privacy: it doesn't exist. Get over it. I do not, however, reject property. (For one thing, if I did that would mean I was more of an anarcho-socialist than a libertarian.) What would you say to the overt act of stealing a speaker truck (with the intention of returning it after using it for your entrepreneurial purposes) and driving around neighborhoods hawking sexual enhancements at all hours? Would that, too, be rational entrepreneurship? Assuming that one obtained the truck by legal means (like an obscure clause in the bill of sale or lease), and one could make a profit driving around hawking whatever, then yes, by definition that would be rational entrepreneurship. Spam -- especially this adaptation -- is theft and harrassment. Spam is harassment and might be theft. So what? If someone can make a buck with spam they are going to do it ... and more power to them. Nevertheless, radical libertarianism isn't why I have trouble getting angry at spammers. I have trouble getting angry at my cat for scratching the furniture. I have trouble getting angry at my dog for barking. Likewise, I have trouble getting angry at developers for converting beaches to high rent developments or at spammers for distributing junk mail. It is the nature of the human species, they are greedy. Getting angry with spammers makes as much sense as getting angry with waves or the wind. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
