Re: [FRIAM] [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are not.

[Russell Standish]

I did a calculation based on a steady growth rate followed by
extinction and anthropic reasoning (aka as the "doomsday argument"),
and came up with a 50% chance of population collapse by 2100. This was
based on 2005 population figures. See appendix B of my book "Theory of
Nothing". I haven't bothered publishing that study elsewhere.

Of course - the steady growth rate assumption is extreme. We know that
the population growth rate is decreasing, with the inflection point a
couple of decades ago. On current demographics, the earth's population
will peak around 2070, and then go into a bit of decline, with some
countries such as China going into reverse considerably sooner (eg I
believe 2030s is the current prediction for China to start having a
declining population).

Natural population decline due to declining fertility is much
preferable to a hard extinction extinction, of course, particular on a
century timescale. So we should live with the fact that we may not
have any grandchildren/great grandchildren whatever your stage of life
is. I'm already comfortable with that - I doubt I'll have any
grandchildren :).


On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 03:10:45PM -0700, Gillian Densmore wrote:
> WTF, how are they coming up with these numbers? I know it sucks a whales 
> **
> these days to make friends. Much less a GF (or BF).  But something aint adding
> up here. Did they ask both people in the relationship?
> 
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 3:04 PM Steve Smith  wrote:
> 
> 
> In a very limited and somewhat ad-hoc (latin hypercube of 10 samples of 5
> variables) ensemble study (100,000 samples) I did with an NREL colleague 
> in
> 2019 using the World3 Model  we found a very ad-hoc observation that among
> the various ideas of what was a "good outcome" in 2100 (like GDP/person or
> other vernacular ideas of "quality of life") that virtually *all* of them
> involved a sooner-rather-than-later population collapse.  
> 
> To the extent that Modeling (in general), SD modeling more particularly 
> and
> the World3 model in particular I wasn't very inclined to take the
> quantitative results of any of very seriously but it was an interesting
> (but unsurprising) qualitative result?
> 
> For anyone interested in an interactive web implementation to dork with
> yourself:
> 
>     https://insightmaker.com/insight/2pCL5ePy8wWgr4SN8BQ4DD/
> The-World3-Model-Classic-World-Simulation
> 
> FWIW I dorked around with it in honor of Jimmy Carter's recent admission 
> to
> a hospice program... looking at what it might have meant if we'd followed
> his lead back around 1978.   Worth noting, I (foolishly by hindsight)
> helped run him out of town to be replaced with Ronnie Raygun ...   "drill
> baby drill, burn baby burn!"
> 
> And an excerpt from a recent (2020) update synopsis of the Limits to 
> Growth
> project/idea/model/results:
> 
> 
> [cid]
> 
> Worth noting:  The population drops in BAU/BAU2 (Biznezz as Usual)
> represent increased death rates rather than reduced fertility rates.
> 
> The bigger (or smaller by another measure) question of what decisions
> anyone of us might make (for ourselves, our progeny, our friends, whatever
> policy-making is in our jurisdiction, in our imagination) is a much
> trickier one based on myriad principles/values that likely few of us share
> unless we choose a high dimension-reduction strategy (e.g. single-issue
> conception).    My parents were overtly ZPG advocates and I have one 
> sister
> which lead me to feel plenty "done" after 2 children myself.   Each of my 
> 2
> have chosen to only have 1.  Many of my friends have chosen to be
> childless.  Most of my peers who were from large sibling groups have at
> best a replacement cohort among their children and nieces/nephews which 
> are
> headed toward a NPG in the following generation.
> 
> My current heuristic is that if I want my grandchildren to reproduce, I
> need to get out of the way which means unless their other grandparents
> don't have the grace of knocking off by the time they want to do that, 
> then
> it is up to me... no open-ended life-extension unless I expect to leave 
> the
> planet (hear my pain Elon?)   I don't think the World3 has been updated to
> be a Sol model and even considering it really challenges the very 
> structure
> /concept of the World3 SD model!  
> 
> Most of the population growth models I've run into suggest that we might 
> be
> on our way to(ward) ZPG with many regions going into NPG, but not until we
> pass 10B.  I don't know that *any* of them factor in the non-linear 
> effects
> of possible/likely runaway global warming or species collapse.
> 
> [467px-World_population_]
> 
> 
> On 2/22/23 11:53 AM, Santafe wrote:
> 
> Yeah.  Bill Rees and Meghan Seibert want 90% of us to die
> 

Re: [FRIAM] Nick's Categories

[Steve Smith]

Tom -

Maybe you’re overthinking this topic.


I think that's a given!

- Steve


To quote Bucky Fuller:

“Today the world is my backyard. ‘Where do you live?’ and ‘What are 
you?’ are progressively less sensible questions. I live on earth at 
present, and I don’t know what I am. I know that I am not a category. 
I am not a thing—a noun. I seem to be a verb, an evolutionary 
process—an integral function of the universe.”

TJ

On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 11:23 AM Steve Smith  wrote:

Might I offer some terminology reframing, or at least ask for some
additional explication?

 1. I think "behaviours" would be all Nick's Martians *could*
observe?  They would be inferring "experiences" from observed
behaviours?
 2. When we talk about "categories" here, are we talking about
"categories of being"?  Ontologies, as it were?

Regarding ErisS' reflections...   I *do* think that animals behave
*as if* they "have categories", though I don't know what it even
means to say that they "have categories" in the way Aristotle and
his legacy-followers (e.g. us) do...   I would suggest/suspect
that dogs and squirrels are in no way aware of these "categories"
and that to say that they do is a  projection by (us) humans who
have fabricated the (useful in myriad contexts) of a
category/Category/ontology.   So in that sense they do NOT *have*
categories...   I think in this conception/thought-experiment we
assume that Martians *would* and would be looking to map their own
ontologies onto the behaviour (and inferred  experiences and
judgements?) of Terran animals?

If I were to invert the subject/object relation, I would suggest
that it is "affordances" not "experiences" (or animals'
behaviours) we want to categorize into ontologies?  It is what
things are "good for" that make them interesting/similar/different
to living beings. And "good for" is conditionally
contextualized.   My dog and cat both find squirrels "good for"
chasing, but so too for baby rabbits and skunks (once).

Or am I barking up the wrong set of reserved lexicons?

To segue (as I am wont to do), it feels like this discussion
parallels the one about LLMs where we train the hell out of
variations on learning classifier systems until they are as good
as (or better than) we (humans) are at predicting the next token
in a string of human-generated tokens (or synthesizing a string of
tokens which humans cannot distinguish from a string generated by
another human, in particular one with the proverbial 10,000 hours
of specialized training).   The fact that or "ologies" tend to be
recorded and organized as knowledge structures and in fact usually
*propogated* (taught/learnt) by the same makes us want to believe
(some of us) that hidden inside these LLMs are precisely the same
"ologies" we encode in our myriad textbooks and professional
journal articles?

I think one of the questions that remains present within this
group's continued 'gurgitations is whether the organizations we
have conjured are particularly special, or just one of an
infinitude of superposed alternative formulations?   And whether
some of those formulations are acutely occult and/or abstract and
whether the existing (accepted) formulations (e.g. Western
Philosophy and Science, etc) are uniquely (and exclusively or at
least optimally) capable of capturing/describing what is "really
real" (nod to George Berkeley).

Some here (self included) may often suggest that such formulation
is at best a coincidence of history and as well as it "covers" a
description of "reality", it is by circumstance and probably by
abstract conception ("all models are wrong...") incomplete and in
error.  But nevertheless still useful...

Maybe another way of reframing Nick's question (on a tangent) is
to ask whether the Barsoomians had their own Aristotle to conceive
of Categories?   Or did they train their telescopes on ancient
Greece and learn Latin Lip Reading and adopt one or more the
Greek's philosophical traditions?  And then, did the gas-balloon
creatures floating in the atmosphere-substance of Jupiter observe
the Martians' who had observed the Greeks and thereby come up with
their own Categories.   Maybe it was those creatures who beamed
these abstractions straight into the neural tissue of the
Aristotelians and Platonists? Do gas-balloon creatures even have
solids to be conceived of as Platonic?  And are they missing out
if they don't?  Do they have their own Edwin Abbot Abbot? And what
would the Cheela  say?

My dog and the rock squirrels he chases want to know... so do the
cholla cactus fruits/segments they hoard in their nests!

Mumble,

 - Steve

On 2/16/23 5:37 AM, Santafe wrote:

  

Re: [FRIAM] Nick's Categories

[Eric Charles]

I would have assumed it was an abstraction that could be found in many
systems, with no explicit limitations regarding what that system is made
of, but lots of limitations regarding where we happen to find it in the
world he happen to inhabit... or something like that... recognizing that
where-we-happen-to-find-it *might* indicate something about the challenges
of getting it to occur in various substances.

Is that the same a calling it "an equivalence class" or talking about its
generalizability?




On Tue, Feb 21, 2023, 1:05 PM Marcus Daniels  wrote:

> Just there are computer codes that can only run on some architectures,
> there are physical phenomena that can only be realized on certain
> substrates.   What evidence is there that something other than differing
> substrates are needed to explain mental things?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Feb 21, 2023, at 9:49 AM, glen  wrote:
> >
> > If, as EricS has argued, "mental stuff" is an equivalence class, then
> it may not be very different from "generalized across different
> architectures". But if "mental stuff" is disjoint from "architecture
> stuff", then it cannot be "generalized across different architectures"
> because a) that implies there exist architectures across which it is NOT
> generalized and b) "generalized" is a function of, dependent upon,
> explicitly in reference to, different architectures.
> >
> >> On 2/21/23 09:30, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> >> Sorry, I probably glossed over something.   How is the "mental" any
> different from a computer program or a set of neural net edge weights
> generalized to different (analog) architectures.
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Friam  On Behalf Of glen
> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 9:26 AM
> >> To: friam@redfish.com
> >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Nick's Categories
> >> Excellent! I appreciate your clarification as to why it might be useful
> to explore. I will do so. I'm still a bit confused as to why you mentioned
> it in the context of me claiming that "the bot" (e.g. ChatGPT) has a body.
> Or the context of claiming some forms of panpsychism are monist. Maybe I'll
> figure out why Deacon's relevant to one or both of those comments as I read
> through Rączaszek‑Leonardi's essay.
> >> Thanks.
> >>> On 2/21/23 09:13, Steve Smith wrote:
> >>> Glen -
> >>>
> >>> Attempting a balance between succinctness and
> completeness/contextualization/relevance I offer the following excerpt from
> Rączaszek‑Leonardi's essay about 3 pages into the 7-page work:
> >>>
> >>> /One important implication of the proposed scenario for the
> >>> emergence of autogen is that in the process of transferring a complex
> >>> set of constraints from substrate to substrate, the “message”, never
> >>> becomes an abstract and immaterial “thing” – or a set of abstract
> >>> symbols, which seem to be a staple substance of mind in a dualistic
> >>> Cartesian picture. On the contrary: the process can be viewed, in some
> >>> sense, as an opposition to what is usually meant by abstraction: it
> >>> embodies, in a concrete physi- cal structure, the complex dynamical
> >>> and relational constraints that maintain an organism far from
> >>> thermodynamic equilibrium. /
> >>>
> >>> This quotation is my attempt to acknowledge/identify  a possible
> resolution (or at least explication) of the tension between the duals of
> the Cartesian Duality we bandy about here.
> >>>
> >>> Another correspondent offline offered the correlation between Deacon's
> homeo/morpho/teleo-dynamics and Kauffman's reflections on living systems in
> his 2000 Investigations:
> >>>
> >>> - detect gradients
> >>> - construct constraints to extract work from gradients
> >>> - do work to maintain those constraints
> >>>
> >>> may be relevant (or interesting or both).
> >>>
> >>> On 2/21/23 8:23 AM, Steve Smith wrote:
> 
>  Glen -
> 
>  FWIW,  I'm still chewing on your assertions of 5 months ago which
> referenced Christian List's "Levels" <
> http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/21103/>  and the points he made (and you
> reinforced) on Indexicality and first/third person descriptions  *because*
> they tie in to my own twisty turny journey of trying to understand the
> paradoxes of mind/body   substance/form duality (illusions?).
> 
>  To give a nod to the Ninja's website (or more to the point, your
> reference to it and comparison to teleodynamics.org) I assume your
> criticism is that the website(s) is more rhetorical than informational?
> 
>  The relevance of Deacon's Teleodynamics in my thinking/noodling has
> to do with the tension between supervenience and entailment.   Deacon's
> style *does* depend a bit on saying the same thing over and over again,
> louder and louder which can be convincing for all the wrong reasons.  But
> that alone does not make what he's saying wrong, or even wrong-headed.
> Perhaps I am guilty of courting confirmation bias insomuch as Deacon's
> constructions of homeo-morpho-teleo 

Re: [FRIAM] [EXT] Fwd: [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are not.

[John Kennison]

I would like to hear more about these strange numbers. They could arise from a 
huge number of lesbian attachments as compared to gay male attachments. 
Alternatively, there might be a much larger number of males as compared to 
females, despite the fact that men are more likely to commit suicide, or Nick's 
suggestion of women who feel attached to men who do not reciprocate that 
feeling (or to males to whom many women feel attached). . I don't see any other 
possibilities.

--John

From: Friam  on behalf of Nicholas Thompson 

Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 12:02 PM
To: friam@redfish.com 
Subject: [EXT] [FRIAM] Fwd: [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most 
young women are not.

Last time I checked, the average number of attached males has to equal the 
average number of attached females, unless, of course, females, feel attached 
to men who don’t feel attached.

Sent from my Dumb Phone

Begin forwarded message:

From: The Hill 
Date: February 22, 2023 at 7:01:34 AM MST
To: nthomp...@clarku.edu
Subject: [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are not.
Reply-To: emailt...@thehill.com


Click in for the latest news from The Hill.
[https://nxslink.thehill.com/img/6230d9d5b246d1049531e425i8dkh.26a0/4ea82909.gif]
 View 
Online
[I'm an image]
 
News Alert
News Alert
 
 
[Facebook]
   [Twitter] 

[LinkedIn] 

Re: [FRIAM] Nick's Categories

[Tom Johnson]

Maybe you’re overthinking this topic. To quote Bucky Fuller:

“Today the world is my backyard. ‘Where do you live?’ and ‘What are you?’
are progressively less sensible questions. I live on earth at present, and
I don’t know what I am. I know that I am not a category. I am not a thing—a
noun. I seem to be a verb, an evolutionary process—an integral function of
the universe.”
TJ

On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 11:23 AM Steve Smith  wrote:

> Might I offer some terminology reframing, or at least ask for some
> additional explication?
>
>1. I think "behaviours" would be all Nick's Martians *could* observe?
>They would be inferring "experiences" from observed behaviours?
>2. When we talk about "categories" here, are we talking about
>"categories of being"?  Ontologies, as it were?
>
> Regarding ErisS' reflections...   I *do* think that animals behave *as if*
> they "have categories", though I don't know what it even means to say that
> they "have categories" in the way Aristotle and his legacy-followers (e.g.
> us) do...   I would suggest/suspect that dogs and squirrels are in no way
> aware of these "categories" and that to say that they do is a  projection
> by (us) humans who have fabricated the (useful in myriad contexts) of a
> category/Category/ontology.   So in that sense they do NOT *have*
> categories...   I think in this conception/thought-experiment we assume
> that Martians *would* and would be looking to map their own ontologies onto
> the behaviour (and inferred  experiences and judgements?) of Terran animals?
>
> If I were to invert the subject/object relation, I would suggest that it
> is "affordances" not "experiences" (or animals' behaviours) we want to
> categorize into ontologies?  It is what things are "good for" that make
> them interesting/similar/different to living beings.   And "good for" is
> conditionally contextualized.   My dog and cat both find squirrels "good
> for" chasing, but so too for baby rabbits and skunks (once).
>
> Or am I barking up the wrong set of reserved lexicons?
>
> To segue (as I am wont to do), it feels like this discussion parallels the
> one about LLMs where we train the hell out of variations on learning
> classifier systems until they are as good as (or better than) we (humans)
> are at predicting the next token in a string of human-generated tokens (or
> synthesizing a string of tokens which humans cannot distinguish from a
> string generated by another human, in particular one with the proverbial
> 10,000 hours of specialized training).   The fact that or "ologies" tend to
> be recorded and organized as knowledge structures and in fact usually
> *propogated* (taught/learnt) by the same makes us want to believe (some of
> us) that hidden inside these LLMs are precisely the same "ologies" we
> encode in our myriad textbooks and professional journal articles?
>
> I think one of the questions that remains present within this group's
> continued 'gurgitations is whether the organizations we have conjured are
> particularly special, or just one of an infinitude of superposed
> alternative formulations?   And whether some of those formulations are
> acutely occult and/or abstract and whether the existing (accepted)
> formulations (e.g. Western Philosophy and Science, etc) are uniquely (and
> exclusively or at least optimally) capable of capturing/describing what is
> "really real" (nod to George Berkeley).
>
> Some here (self included) may often suggest that such formulation is at
> best a coincidence of history and as well as it "covers" a description of
> "reality", it is by circumstance and probably by abstract conception ("all
> models are wrong...") incomplete and in error.  But nevertheless still
> useful...
>
> Maybe another way of reframing Nick's question (on a tangent) is to ask
> whether the Barsoomians had their own Aristotle to conceive of
> Categories?   Or did they train their telescopes on ancient Greece and
> learn Latin Lip Reading and adopt one or more the Greek's philosophical
> traditions?  And then, did the gas-balloon creatures floating in the
> atmosphere-substance of Jupiter observe the Martians' who had observed the
> Greeks and thereby come up with their own Categories.   Maybe it was those
> creatures who beamed these abstractions straight into the neural tissue of
> the Aristotelians and Platonists?   Do gas-balloon creatures even have
> solids to be conceived of as Platonic?  And are they missing out if they
> don't?  Do they have their own Edwin Abbot Abbot?   And what would the
> Cheela  say?
>
> My dog and the rock squirrels he chases want to know... so do the cholla
> cactus fruits/segments they hoard in their nests!
>
> Mumble,
>
>  - Steve
> On 2/16/23 5:37 AM, Santafe wrote:
>
> It’s the tiniest and most idiosyncratic take on this question, but FWIW, 
> here:https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1520752113
>
> I actually think that all of what Nick says below is a 

Re: [FRIAM] [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are not.

[Santafe]

Yeah.  Bill Rees and Meghan Seibert want 90% of us to die
https://www.realgnd.org/people
(or a position paper somewhere in their writings).

On their people page, you can see what happy ecologists they are, and BIll is a 
friendly old grandfather with a beard.

I shouldn’t be snotty.  I think they are actually very tortured about their 
dictum that 90% of us should die.  And I think in some sense they are 
committed, good people.

But I put them up here, because somehow people collapsing under decades of 
frustration seem to develop a misanthropy that causes them to forget It’s Not 
All About You (and how tortured you are, being the only truth-teller in a 
lonely world).  If you really care about the thing you say, then it should 
eclipse your own self-importance enough that you just stay focused on the task.

I don’t know in how far their positions turn out to represent solid numbers.  
Maybe some part of it.  But I have said that before.

Eric


> On Feb 22, 2023, at 1:06 PM, Gary Schiltz  wrote:
> 
> A few really do want our species to go extinct, but many believe that we are 
> already overpopulated and need to level off or reduce population. I lean only 
> slightly toward the latter. 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 12:51 PM Frank Wimberly  wrote:
> Agreed.  But if we don't construct any new ones and the existing ones all die 
> (they will) we will run out.  Is that a reasonable goal?
> 
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 10:20 AM glen  wrote:
> We do not need more people. We have plenty of people. Please stop 
> constructing people. >8^D
> 
> On 2/22/23 09:16, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> > I am worried however.  I have two grandsons in their 20s.  Each has a 
> > girlfriend.  Those young women want nothing to do with babies.  I assume 
> > they have younger siblings.  I hope that as they enter their 30s their 
> > attitudes will change because of the realization that they are running out 
> > of time.
> > 
> > ---
> > Frank C. Wimberly
> > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> > Santa Fe, NM 87505
> > 
> > 505 670-9918
> > Santa Fe, NM
> > 
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2023, 10:08 AM Santafe  > > wrote:
> > 
> > I think the keyword was young.
> > 
> > You can do that if the old men are all married to young women.
> > 
> >  > On Feb 22, 2023, at 12:02 PM, Nicholas Thompson 
> > mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >  >
> >  > Last time I checked, the average number of attached males has to 
> > equal the average number of attached females, unless, of course, females, 
> > feel attached to men who don’t feel attached.
> >  >
> >  > Sent from my Dumb Phone
> >  >
> >  > Begin forwarded message:
> >  >
> >  > From: The Hill  > >
> >  > Date: February 22, 2023 at 7:01:34 AM MST
> >  > To: nthomp...@clarku.edu 
> >  > Subject: [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young 
> > women are not.
> >  > Reply-To: emailt...@thehill.com 
> >  >
> >  > 
> >  > View Online
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > Most young men are single. Most young women are not.
> >  > More than 60 percent of young men are single, nearly twice the rate 
> > of unattached young women, signaling a larger breakdown in the social, 
> > romantic and sexual life of the American male.
> >  >
> >  > Read the full story here.
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > Manage Subscriptions | Sign Up for Other Newsletters | Unsubscribe
> >  >
> >  > 1625 K Street NW, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20006
> >  >
> >  > Copyright © 1998 - 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. | Privacy Policy | Terms 
> > of Use
> >  >
> >  > To ensure you receive these emails in the future, please add
> >  > theh...@email.thehill.com  to your 
> > address book, contacts or safe senders list.
> >  > If you believe this has been sent to you in error, please safely 
> > unsubscribe.
> 
> -- 
> ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ
> 
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives:  5/2017 thru present 
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>   1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
> 
> 
> -- 
> Frank Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
> 505 670-9918
> 
> Research:  https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe 

Re: [FRIAM] [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are not.

[Gary Schiltz]

A few really do want our species to go extinct, but many believe that we
are already overpopulated and need to level off or reduce population. I
lean only slightly toward the latter.

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 12:51 PM Frank Wimberly  wrote:

> Agreed.  But if we don't construct any new ones and the existing ones
> all die (they will) we will run out.  Is that a reasonable goal?
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 10:20 AM glen  wrote:
>
>> We do not need more people. We have plenty of people. Please stop
>> constructing people. >8^D
>>
>> On 2/22/23 09:16, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>> > I am worried however.  I have two grandsons in their 20s.  Each has a
>> girlfriend.  Those young women want nothing to do with babies.  I assume
>> they have younger siblings.  I hope that as they enter their 30s their
>> attitudes will change because of the realization that they are running out
>> of time.
>> >
>> > ---
>> > Frank C. Wimberly
>> > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
>> 
>>
>> >
>> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>> 
>> >
>> > 505 670-9918
>> > Santa Fe, NM
>> >
>> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2023, 10:08 AM Santafe > desm...@santafe.edu>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I think the keyword was young.
>> >
>> > You can do that if the old men are all married to young women.
>> >
>> >  > On Feb 22, 2023, at 12:02 PM, Nicholas Thompson <
>> thompnicks...@gmail.com > wrote:
>> >  >
>> >  > Last time I checked, the average number of attached males has to
>> equal the average number of attached females, unless, of course, females,
>> feel attached to men who don’t feel attached.
>> >  >
>> >  > Sent from my Dumb Phone
>> >  >
>> >  > Begin forwarded message:
>> >  >
>> >  > From: The Hill > theh...@email.thehill.com>>
>> >  > Date: February 22, 2023 at 7:01:34 AM MST
>> >  > To: nthomp...@clarku.edu 
>> >  > Subject: [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young
>> women are not.
>> >  > Reply-To: emailt...@thehill.com 
>> >  >
>> >  > 
>> >  > View Online
>> >  >
>> >  >
>> >  >
>> >  >
>> >  >
>> >  > Most young men are single. Most young women are not.
>> >  > More than 60 percent of young men are single, nearly twice the
>> rate of unattached young women, signaling a larger breakdown in the social,
>> romantic and sexual life of the American male.
>> >  >
>> >  > Read the full story here.
>> >  >
>> >  >
>> >  >
>> >  >
>> >  >
>> >  >
>> >  > Manage Subscriptions | Sign Up for Other Newsletters |
>> Unsubscribe
>> >  >
>> >  > 1625 K Street NW, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20006
>> 
>> >  >
>> >  > Copyright © 1998 - 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. | Privacy Policy |
>> Terms of Use
>> >  >
>> >  > To ensure you receive these emails in the future, please add
>> >  > theh...@email.thehill.com  to
>> your address book, contacts or safe senders list.
>> >  > If you believe this has been sent to you in error, please safely
>> unsubscribe.
>>
>> --
>> ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ
>>
>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> archives:  5/2017 thru present
>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>>   1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>
>
>
> --
> Frank Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz
> 
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
> 
> 505 670-9918
>
> Research:  https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives:  5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>   1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   

Re: [FRIAM] [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are not.

[Frank Wimberly]

Agreed.  But if we don't construct any new ones and the existing ones
all die (they will) we will run out.  Is that a reasonable goal?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 10:20 AM glen  wrote:

> We do not need more people. We have plenty of people. Please stop
> constructing people. >8^D
>
> On 2/22/23 09:16, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> > I am worried however.  I have two grandsons in their 20s.  Each has a
> girlfriend.  Those young women want nothing to do with babies.  I assume
> they have younger siblings.  I hope that as they enter their 30s their
> attitudes will change because of the realization that they are running out
> of time.
> >
> > ---
> > Frank C. Wimberly
> > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> > Santa Fe, NM 87505
> >
> > 505 670-9918
> > Santa Fe, NM
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2023, 10:08 AM Santafe  desm...@santafe.edu>> wrote:
> >
> > I think the keyword was young.
> >
> > You can do that if the old men are all married to young women.
> >
> >  > On Feb 22, 2023, at 12:02 PM, Nicholas Thompson <
> thompnicks...@gmail.com > wrote:
> >  >
> >  > Last time I checked, the average number of attached males has to
> equal the average number of attached females, unless, of course, females,
> feel attached to men who don’t feel attached.
> >  >
> >  > Sent from my Dumb Phone
> >  >
> >  > Begin forwarded message:
> >  >
> >  > From: The Hill  theh...@email.thehill.com>>
> >  > Date: February 22, 2023 at 7:01:34 AM MST
> >  > To: nthomp...@clarku.edu 
> >  > Subject: [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young
> women are not.
> >  > Reply-To: emailt...@thehill.com 
> >  >
> >  > 
> >  > View Online
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > Most young men are single. Most young women are not.
> >  > More than 60 percent of young men are single, nearly twice the
> rate of unattached young women, signaling a larger breakdown in the social,
> romantic and sexual life of the American male.
> >  >
> >  > Read the full story here.
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > Manage Subscriptions | Sign Up for Other Newsletters | Unsubscribe
> >  >
> >  > 1625 K Street NW, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20006
> >  >
> >  > Copyright © 1998 - 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. | Privacy Policy |
> Terms of Use
> >  >
> >  > To ensure you receive these emails in the future, please add
> >  > theh...@email.thehill.com  to
> your address book, contacts or safe senders list.
> >  > If you believe this has been sent to you in error, please safely
> unsubscribe.
>
> --
> ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ
>
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives:  5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>   1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>


-- 
Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

Research:  https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Re: [FRIAM] [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are not.

[glen]

We do not need more people. We have plenty of people. Please stop constructing 
people. >8^D

On 2/22/23 09:16, Frank Wimberly wrote:

I am worried however.  I have two grandsons in their 20s.  Each has a 
girlfriend.  Those young women want nothing to do with babies.  I assume they 
have younger siblings.  I hope that as they enter their 30s their attitudes 
will change because of the realization that they are running out of time.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023, 10:08 AM Santafe mailto:desm...@santafe.edu>> wrote:

I think the keyword was young.

You can do that if the old men are all married to young women.

 > On Feb 22, 2023, at 12:02 PM, Nicholas Thompson mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com>> wrote:
 >
 > Last time I checked, the average number of attached males has to equal 
the average number of attached females, unless, of course, females, feel attached 
to men who don’t feel attached.
 >
 > Sent from my Dumb Phone
 >
 > Begin forwarded message:
 >
 > From: The Hill mailto:theh...@email.thehill.com>>
 > Date: February 22, 2023 at 7:01:34 AM MST
 > To: nthomp...@clarku.edu 
 > Subject: [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women 
are not.
 > Reply-To: emailt...@thehill.com 
 >
 > 
 > View Online
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > Most young men are single. Most young women are not.
 > More than 60 percent of young men are single, nearly twice the rate of 
unattached young women, signaling a larger breakdown in the social, romantic and 
sexual life of the American male.
 >
 > Read the full story here.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > Manage Subscriptions | Sign Up for Other Newsletters | Unsubscribe
 >
 > 1625 K Street NW, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20006
 >
 > Copyright © 1998 - 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. | Privacy Policy | Terms of 
Use
 >
 > To ensure you receive these emails in the future, please add
 > theh...@email.thehill.com  to your 
address book, contacts or safe senders list.
 > If you believe this has been sent to you in error, please safely 
unsubscribe.


--
ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ

-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Re: [FRIAM] [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are not.

[Frank Wimberly]

I am worried however.  I have two grandsons in their 20s.  Each has a
girlfriend.  Those young women want nothing to do with babies.  I assume
they have younger siblings.  I hope that as they enter their 30s their
attitudes will change because of the realization that they are running out
of time.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023, 10:08 AM Santafe  wrote:

> I think the keyword was young.
>
> You can do that if the old men are all married to young women.
>
> > On Feb 22, 2023, at 12:02 PM, Nicholas Thompson 
> wrote:
> >
> > Last time I checked, the average number of attached males has to equal
> the average number of attached females, unless, of course, females, feel
> attached to men who don’t feel attached.
> >
> > Sent from my Dumb Phone
> >
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: The Hill 
> > Date: February 22, 2023 at 7:01:34 AM MST
> > To: nthomp...@clarku.edu
> > Subject: [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women
> are not.
> > Reply-To: emailt...@thehill.com
> >
> > 
> > View Online
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Most young men are single. Most young women are not.
> > More than 60 percent of young men are single, nearly twice the rate of
> unattached young women, signaling a larger breakdown in the social,
> romantic and sexual life of the American male.
> >
> > Read the full story here.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Manage Subscriptions | Sign Up for Other Newsletters | Unsubscribe
> >
> > 1625 K Street NW, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20006
> >
> > Copyright © 1998 - 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. | Privacy Policy | Terms of
> Use
> >
> > To ensure you receive these emails in the future, please add
> > theh...@email.thehill.com to your address book, contacts or safe
> senders list.
> > If you believe this has been sent to you in error, please safely
> unsubscribe.
> >
> > -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam=E,1,ffC0Dfd7MZdPX_W6LzkN9KZ_quA-qBiJt_gWCzCogm1234wYXo2-crRVOoAchhkFjWuEAawUtk4LXQ8O7QO3De1g2cQSyM4l-5fJZSnkm1HMg3UFBWOTHSQ,=1
> > to (un)subscribe
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com=E,1,Kn67mLSA550ZZjRKhacs778e-hABd5XVgR0JmardZhqPWx8ewaxWOOmTF6J2BcWvIypoSuB4VUV07eoa5reFPIs2rzuK9Bxx8pxVPMbTKeVFvwll_xQVOyfCgA,,=1
> > FRIAM-COMIC
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f=E,1,bhBGEn77cTwUsIPDUMPonRwldGeq4sy61oSO0jgY0Hp9qC_2Gsdp3t0SIQv8Sr4ZahZTyPPTGLfR_HQNMZLF-8gkg0cyRScRbvy2qNzCrCI,=1
> > archives:  5/2017 thru present
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f=E,1,3xi5aMOcmYpd2PuRNA84IFZqOrZITgtfEXsMY9q3V5z08sZvoOmQFjopO5pFtYZk17Kvsc_qCzhPTnhx9lXbwg1psN12VsfrDlYyerEF03DV7XqzG7av1H9Q=1
> > 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
>
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives:  5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>   1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Re: [FRIAM] [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are not.

[Santafe]

I think the keyword was young.

You can do that if the old men are all married to young women.

> On Feb 22, 2023, at 12:02 PM, Nicholas Thompson  
> wrote:
> 
> Last time I checked, the average number of attached males has to equal the 
> average number of attached females, unless, of course, females, feel attached 
> to men who don’t feel attached.
> 
> Sent from my Dumb Phone
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: The Hill 
> Date: February 22, 2023 at 7:01:34 AM MST
> To: nthomp...@clarku.edu
> Subject: [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are 
> not.
> Reply-To: emailt...@thehill.com
> 
> 
> View Online 
> 
>  
>  
>  
>
> Most young men are single. Most young women are not.
> More than 60 percent of young men are single, nearly twice the rate of 
> unattached young women, signaling a larger breakdown in the social, romantic 
> and sexual life of the American male. 
> 
> Read the full story here.
>  
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Manage Subscriptions | Sign Up for Other Newsletters | Unsubscribe  
> 
> 1625 K Street NW, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20006
> 
> Copyright © 1998 - 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
> 
> To ensure you receive these emails in the future, please add 
> theh...@email.thehill.com to your address book, contacts or safe senders list.
> If you believe this has been sent to you in error, please safely unsubscribe.
> 
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam=E,1,ffC0Dfd7MZdPX_W6LzkN9KZ_quA-qBiJt_gWCzCogm1234wYXo2-crRVOoAchhkFjWuEAawUtk4LXQ8O7QO3De1g2cQSyM4l-5fJZSnkm1HMg3UFBWOTHSQ,=1
> to (un)subscribe 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com=E,1,Kn67mLSA550ZZjRKhacs778e-hABd5XVgR0JmardZhqPWx8ewaxWOOmTF6J2BcWvIypoSuB4VUV07eoa5reFPIs2rzuK9Bxx8pxVPMbTKeVFvwll_xQVOyfCgA,,=1
> FRIAM-COMIC 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f=E,1,bhBGEn77cTwUsIPDUMPonRwldGeq4sy61oSO0jgY0Hp9qC_2Gsdp3t0SIQv8Sr4ZahZTyPPTGLfR_HQNMZLF-8gkg0cyRScRbvy2qNzCrCI,=1
> archives:  5/2017 thru present 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f=E,1,3xi5aMOcmYpd2PuRNA84IFZqOrZITgtfEXsMY9q3V5z08sZvoOmQFjopO5pFtYZk17Kvsc_qCzhPTnhx9lXbwg1psN12VsfrDlYyerEF03DV7XqzG7av1H9Q=1
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/


-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

[FRIAM] Fwd: [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are not.

[Nicholas Thompson]

Last time I checked, the average number of attached males has to equal the average number of attached females, unless, of course, females, feel attached to men who don’t feel attached.Sent from my Dumb PhoneBegin forwarded message:From: The Hill Date: February 22, 2023 at 7:01:34 AM MSTTo: nthomp...@clarku.eduSubject: [EXT] News Alert: Most young men are single. Most young women are not.Reply-To: emailt...@thehill.comClick in for the latest news from The Hill. View Online 
 News AlertNews Alert  


Most young men are single. Most young women are not.More than 60 percent of young men are single, nearly twice the rate of unattached young women, signaling a larger breakdown in the social, romantic and sexual life of the American male.  Read the full story here. 













 










 
Manage Subscriptions | Sign Up for Other Newsletters | Unsubscribe   1625 K Street NW, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 
Copyright © 1998 - 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use 
To ensure you receive these emails in the future, please add theh...@email.thehill.com to your address book, contacts or safe senders list.
If you believe this has been sent to you in error, please safely unsubscribe.
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/