<BJKlein> Official Chat Begins Now
<BJKlein> Thanks for joining us..
<BJKlein> I'll post a few paragraphs and then open it up to discussion.
<BJKlein> Topic: The Future: The next 20yrs. of Pre-Singularity advancements that will most change our lives.
<BJKlein> The possibilities for the future are infinite... and boldly making predictions about the future is about as safe as driving a motorcycle off a cliff.
<BJKlein> Some past predictions…
<BJKlein> Not trying to pick on Arthur C. Clark or anything.. but in 1966 he predicted that houses would fly by 2001. He thought that entire communities would head south for the winter or more to more hospitable locations for a change of scenery.
<BJKlein> Most scholars in the 60's thought that by 2000 people would only be working a few hrs per week and that most daily tasks would be automate and computer or robots would be intelligent enough to take care of us.
<BJKlein> Couple of interesting quotes:
<BJKlein> "Despite the trend to compactness and lower costs, it is unlikely everyone will have his own computer any time soon," Reporter Stanley Penn, The Wall Street Journal, 1966
<BJKlein> "By the turn of this century, we will live in a paperless society," Roger Smith, chairman of General Motors, 1986.
<BJKlein> Alrighty....Thanks for listening. Open for discussion.
<BJKlein> so what technology will most change our lives?
<BJKlein> nanotech... biotech....
<MichaelA> I think people first started to think about the future in a technological way in 1966-ish so that gave them an unusual perspective
<MitchH> MEMS chips.
<MitchH> printed chips
<MichaelA> I don't think nanotech or biotech will *that* much
<PD> I'd say VR
<PD> But I'm working and not thinking very hard right now, so don't listen to me.
<BJKlein> I look at nano and bio as really a blanket term for many many technologies actually
<MichaelA> http://nuketesting.e.../INESAPTR1.html
<BJKlein> Eliezer take the wind out of your sails PD?
<MichaelA> Fourth-Generation Nuclear Weapons
<MichaelA> That could influence our life
<MitchH> VR, perhaps, but as a result of advances in the MEMS chips and printed (as opposed to etched) chips that allow inexpensive devices to do sensing and display work that today is very bulky and/or expensive.
<MichaelA> http://www.matrixsemi.com/
<MichaelA> 3D chips not using conventional techniques
<MichaelA> What sort of sensing and display work do you think will be done, Mitch?
<MitchH> look for sensors that rival star-trek tricorders in some respects, at least for more expensive apllications. Look for cheap VR helmets that incorporate printed displays and MEMS motion sensors.
<MitchH> look for "localizers" becoming imbedded in pretty much anything that moves (whether of it's own accord, or because people move it)
<MichaelA> Interfaces employing retinal projection, extremely powerful wearables that make everyone semi-psychic
<MichaelA> Yeah, one guy I talked to called those "personal stuff locators"
<MichaelA> PSLs
<MichaelA> Interfaces that beyond the window-y box/file metaphor?
<MitchH> retinal projection yes, but this will likely be far more costly than the everyman VR helmet or visor
<MitchH> though this is a relative comparison. It may still be affordable.
<MichaelA> Depending on what advances are powering this chain of events
<PD> Bruce, not really. He didn't say anything I hadn't already heard; just in a uniquely puzzling way
<MichaelA> I see biotech stuff impacting lots of poor people slightly more than impacting the First World in a very big way
<MitchH> I actually don't see too much change in the way of input/output habits, except that the traditional ones will be more ubiquitous. more projected keyboards and wearable displays.
<BJKlein> btw.. i'm watching a company that is doing this kind of work... PSL http://www.digitalangelcorp.com/
<MichaelA> Lots of laboratories-on-a-chip accelerating biochemistry and related areas
<BJKlein> Thermo Life is a miniaturized, thermoelectric generator powered by body heat.
<MichaelA> Digital Angel used to be entirely about medical monitoring, right?
<BJKlein> . The Company believes Thermo Life technology has a wide variety of potential uses, including the powering of various electronic devices, wristwatches, medical devices, smoke detectors and other heat-related sensors.
<BJKlein> yes
<MichaelA> It doesn't look like they've branched out that far yet but they did change their website a bit
<MichaelA> Lots of this stuff is too cumbersome/expensive to catch on as "commonplace" like cell phones have, although this sort of stuff may be built into future cell phones.
<BJKlein> I don't know if you remember the media blitz about a yrs ago...
<MichaelA> I think I do
<BJKlein> a family in florida had the divide implanted under the skin of the son
<BJKlein> device
<MichaelA> Hm, doesn't it just monitor the child?
<BJKlein> first alert sort of thing....
<MichaelA> A lot of that stuff is just for show
<MichaelA> Conventional electronics, just underneath the skin
<BJKlein> actually I believe it had information about the child
<MichaelA> hm
<MitchH> like a medic alert bracelet
<BJKlein> it did nothing to help in terms medical, but yes like a medic alert b.
<MitchH> the information kind (allergies and such) more so than the alarm kind
<MichaelA> But my question is, "is the design really that much different than what you wear on top of your skin for the same purpose?"
<MitchH> exactly
<MitchH> just harder to lose and harder to read
<MichaelA> Hm, I know another class of technologies which could bring widespread social benefits; perfect contraceptives
<MichaelA> I like to keep my eyes open for qualitatively new developments rather than old ideas rehashed in new ways, which is what a lot of stuff is, unfortunately
<BJKlein> well, not really, but that was just a first step...
<MichaelA> Well it shows an ideological boldness
<BJKlein> it's called VeriChip, btw...
<BJKlein> basically, it's an actual company that is pushing the envelope..
<MitchH> well "affordable" is a rehash for many technologies, but when the price drop is great enough, the technologies end up being used in new ways
<MichaelA> this is from Ziana's last newsletter:
<MichaelA> dreamingamoeba
<MichaelA> whoops
<MichaelA> http://www.nytimes.c...ogy/10SLAS.html
<MichaelA> "Voice in Your Head? Better Check That Chip in Your Arm"
<BJKlein> needs a subscription for that link
<MichaelA> It funnels in more venture capital, Mitch
<MichaelA> True, apologies
<MichaelA> It needs a registration
<MichaelA> I'm interested in how far neurosurgery can be taken in the next decade or so and who will be involved in it
<BJKlein> do you guys think we'll have a global or national database for goverermental anti-terror
<MichaelA> Probably
<MichaelA> Depends partially on whether Bush gets a second term, I'd wager
<nrv8> if poindexter gets his way, yes
<MitchH> a "virtual" database, perhaps. A system with tight links to all kinds of systems that have information on people.
<PD> Do you think we'll have a a deadly incident of "bioterror or bioerror"?
<PD> <- ever the cynic
<MichaelA> Hm, possibly, I don't really know how hard it is to engineer killer viruses
<BJKlein> we already have, with the anthrax letters
<MichaelA> A "virtual" database could be nearly as effective as a real one but not create the same privacy headlines
<MitchH> depends on how you define deadly. We will have more alarming incidents like the anthrax that killl small numbers
<MitchH> I'm not really expecting anything bigger in the next 10 years
<MichaelA> I think there's a chance but I think nanotech will be a far bigger issue if it reaches any reasonable degree of sophistication
<MichaelA> (chance for bioterror, that is)
<MitchH> pulling off a big catastrophe with biotech takes either a very special bug or an outstanding, sophisticated delivery system
<PD> Davies, I think, has a wager to that effect at longbets
<PD> That it *will* happen
<MichaelA> Or brute force nanocomputing to solve the problems of creating viruses/diseases/delivery mechanisms
<MichaelA> When, PD?
<PD> In the next couple of decades
<MichaelA> How large
<PD> Millions
<BJKlein> So, for the future.. I'd expect our society is forced to be more open because of some other terrorist attacks
<MichaelA> Paul Davies?
<PD> I could be wrong, I haven't been there in a while
<PD> Either him or that Reeves guy..
<PD> One of those Anthropic Principle people
<MichaelA> Martin Rees
<MitchH> Look for a huge database or virtual database that the public tolerates because a search warrant is required to access it.
<PD> Yes
<PD> Right
<BJKlein> By 2020, bioterror or bioerror will lead to one million casualties in a single event
<PD> Whose is it?
<BJKlein> actually that's an open bet.. sorry
<PD> Yeah, it is open
<PD> Because no one's taken it yet
<PD> Kinda makes you think
<MichaelA> Bioterror seems a bit more likely than bioerror due to the deliberate effort it would likely require to create anything capable of killing that many people
<MichaelA> And how much harder would it be to create a virus that killed a billion people instead of just a million?
<MitchH> a lot, I suspect. The right delivery system could expose millions in a metropolitan area
<MitchH> but simple precautions might make it tough for it to spread to many cities
<MichaelA> How about an orbital delivery system?
<BJKlein> A computer - or "machine intelligence" - will pass the Turing Test by 2029. bet by Ray K. and Mitchel Kapor 20k
<MichaelA> I suppose that's the only thing which could kill many many people
<MitchH> a very special bug could kill that many. But it would have be much more special than one that could kill a city due primarily to delivery method
<MichaelA> Hey, I can think of something which almost certainly *won't* happen in the near future, btw
<MichaelA> Alien contact
<BJKlein> yeh.. there is talk of Small Poxs being a problem again..
<MichaelA> Mitch, I guess it depends on the relative intelligence and resources needed to take precautions against a bug compared to the intelligence and resources required to create an deliver a given strain
<MitchH> yeah, alien contact is unlikely to occur in a 20-30 year window if it hasn't occurred already.
<nrv8> MichaelA: why do you say that
<BJKlein> is that because you are an alien MichaelA?
<nrv8> haha
* MichaelA laughs
<MichaelA> I say it because I saw the bet on longbets.org and it caught my eye for being funny
<MitchH> michaela: sure. A coordinated delivery effort over hundreds of major cities would certainly be catastrophic with any reasonably deadly bug.
<MichaelA> I say that for the same reason that Mitch did, and others
<nrv8> 12 monkeys
<BJKlein> aliens: is this because of the speed of light thing?
<Gordon> Bruce, Jay: you don't know how close to the truth about Ani you are :-P
<MichaelA> I think new layers of technology will not only present their own threats but will make it easier to use older 'layers' to create a whole new class of threats (and possibly benefits)
<BJKlein>
<MichaelA> BJ, because they should be obvious, for one thing
<Gordon> hey, isn't that convenient: Bruce + Jay == BJ
<BJKlein> quite
<Gordon> we are all BJK8Minion
<BJKlein> So, Gordon.. what's your prediction?
<MichaelA> That by 2020 a wearable device will be available that will use voice recognition capability and high-volume storage to monitor and index conversations you have or conversations which occur in your vicinity for later searching as supplemental memory.
<BJKlein> and you can be a BJK8minion also
<MichaelA> (from longbets.org)
<Gordon> next 20 years: we code seed AI and transcend into the unknown
<BJKlein> pre Singularity
<BJKlein> what technology will be most important in changing our lives (good/bad)
<Gordon> *personal* computing
<Gordon> everyone who can afford it (and even those who can't) will be using computers on their person
<BJKlein> yeh!
<Gordon> terrorist threats will increase, but actual attacks will continue to happen outside the US so long as the CIA and FBI get funding and do their job
<BJKlein> does anyone see our boarders as a problem.. in terms or being to open?
<Eliezer> a small cadre of transhumanists will discover how to use Slack to manipulate the Luck Plane and will win the lottery
<Gordon> but Americans will continue to loose their rights until about 2015 when the lack of actual attacks reminds them that they have civil liberties and it will be 1976 all over again
<BJKlein> hehe.. I thought they were doing that already with the online horse racing
<Eliezer> other wildcard possibilities include collaborative filtering really taking off, and the existence of reliable lie detectors
<Gordon> only if TKE is now an official part of the Transhumanist movement
<ChrisRovner> Collaborative filtering is a *very* promising field
<BJKlein> reliable lie detectors... have you read the Truth Ring Eliezer?
<Eliezer> Truth Machine? no
<BJKlein> yeh.. Truth Machine
<BJKlein> everyone wearing a portable ring lie detector...
<BJKlein> would make terrorist a thing of the past I would think?
<Gordon> from a realistic standpoint, US citizens have to give up the 4th amendment or it has to become a big fad like mood rings
<MitchH> no, just certain kinds of terrorism
<Gordon> no, it just means we'll all get to be better liers
<Eliezer> you know what'd be even more impressive than a truth machine?
<Eliezer> a rationalization/self-deception detector
<MichaelA> good BCI
<Eliezer> now *that* would be a revolution
<BJKlein> heh.. a personal morality tweaker
<MichaelA> That could happen thanks to the falling cost of scanning
<Gordon> well, if I'm not too different from other people, you have a built in one, you just aren't very good at making use of it (acting on what it tells you rather than doing the human thing anyway)
<Eliezer> you don't have a built-in detector for that
<Eliezer> oh, wait, you meant for other people
<Eliezer> no, I meant a little ring that detects rationalizations and self-deception *in you*
<Eliezer> gives you a little tingle or whatever when it catches you doing it
<BJKlein> a shock .. lol
<Gordon> I get a feeling when I do it
<BJKlein> turn up the juice... for more effectivness
<Eliezer> that's a subjective feeling, that's not a detector
<MichaelA> What if it detected thoughts that were subconscious and not introspectively salient, and the ding threw you off on what you were actually thinking about?
<Gordon> well, that may be, but it catches 90% or so of rationalization
<Eliezer> get better control of your subconscious
<MichaelA> Or does the ding only go off when it reaches a threshold which is indisputably introspectively salient
<Eliezer> I'd set the threshold as sensitive as it got, and try for perfection
<BJKlein> how would it decide on perfection...
<MichaelA> What about the same stuff for probabilistic mistakes in reasoning, deviations from normative reasoning, and the like?
<Gordon> of course, the military will only give us the consumer grade version
<Gordon> so it'll be at least 30 seconds off from the actual thought that was rationalized
<MichaelA> And by then it could be too late :\
<MichaelA> You're already eating that chocolate brownie or whatever :D
<Gordon> actually, better make it 10 minutes
<Gordon> just to be sure the Eli's of the world can't get too much more rational too fast; that could be dangerous to national interest
<MichaelA> Then you could watch your brain in slow motion lose to the rationalization
<MichaelA> It would be dangerous to preestablished cultural norms, that's for sure
<Gordon> conversations with me would get even weirder ;-)
<BJKlein> you know.. About 80% or our current morality problem probably stem from gluttonous pursuits... like eating and sex...
<Gordon> now I'll be doing way more backtracking than I already do now (which confuses other people to no end)
<Gordon> the sex one is easy: get everyone masturbating
<MichaelA> Mmm, I'd say it can stem from ignorance or natural self-deception almost as easily
<BJKlein> and it's likely that these activites will be eliminated as important in the near future
<MichaelA> Masturbation encourages people to think about sex more and that still creates some of the same behavioral problems as sex without masturbation could, just to a lesser degree
<Gordon> near future? I don't see that happening until after the Singularity
<MichaelA> Only though transcension of biology
<PD> Eliminate sex? That is so not cool.
* BJKlein thinks masterbation is healthy
<BJKlein> sort term anyway... a necessaty for good health
<Gordon> Michael: rather than thinking about it more, they'll just be acting on their sexual desires in a way that doesn't involve other people
<Gordon> your body isn't smart enough to figure out that you're masturbating rather than having real sex: that's why masturbation is even possible
<MichaelA> But that doesn't free up as much mindspace as trying to eschew that completely
<MichaelA> I know
<MichaelA> PD, I think it's cool
<MichaelA> It can be
<PD> MA, surely that is only because you're very deprived.
<BJKlein> Sex is such a waist of time, imo
<MitchH> if you eliminated your sex drive, there would be no concern for deprivation or lack thereof
<Eliezer> FYI, MA, I'm not backing you up on this one. You're on your own.
<ChrisRovner> It would be cool to feel an orgasm every time you understand a theorem proof or something
<BJKlein> but it's necessary for good health
<MichaelA> Oh my, the very fact that this subject can elicit this reaction shows the problem
<PD> Nothing that is fun is a waste of time.
<MichaelA> Eliezer: ok
* Eliezer says to ChrisRovner: "Philosophically unacceptable. Sex is *multiplayer* fun. Take over the taste buds or whatever."
<Gordon> Michael: is 15 minutes every 72 hours or so that much time?
<ChrisRovner> Eliezer: What about multiplayer math?
<PD> 15 minutes? :(
<ChrisRovner> Collaborative theorem proving
<ChrisRovner> Or something
<Gordon> well, being very utilitarian here
<MichaelA> Gordon: no, it's not, and that's much better than yielding 5 hrs or whatever the average is
<Gordon> for Michael's sake
<Eliezer> I'm actually with PD. Things that are fun may not be wise *investments* of time to produce moral worth, but they still have *intrinsic* moral worth.
<PD> Exactedly.
<MichaelA> I think all action has intrinsic moral worth
* Eliezer snaps his fingers
<Eliezer> that was a complete waste of time
<Gordon> Michael: if a woman I know came to me and said "let's have sex" and I knew that it would be safe, I wouldn't say no
<PD> I don't think my expelling bodily wastes has moral worth.
<Eliezer> intrinsically, that is
<MichaelA> Gordon; how attractive/smart would she have to be?
<Gordon> probably not relevant
<MichaelA> Oh my
<Gordon> sex deprived so low standards: just safe and friends
<MichaelA> Well, if you were really really attractive, that could substract and complicate your life a lot
* BJKlein remembers to use the word "sex" carefully in future chats
<Gordon> what? You don't think I'm a rival for the romance novel cover models?
<MichaelA> Or if your friends became more desperate in turn
* MichaelA sighs
<MichaelA> That's why I said "really really" ;p
<BJKlein> what every happend to nuclear power?
<MitchH> you don't need to be more attractive than the novel cover models ... just more attractive than the novels themselves
<MichaelA> PD: that's only due to your cultural programming
* MichaelA claps for Mitch
<Gordon> Michael: some of us, myself included, are romantics: the main thing we're interested in isn't sex
<MichaelA> Actually most of the time you need to be physically attractive :\
<PD> What is due my cultural programming?
<MichaelA> I agree
<MichaelA> I am completely romantic
<MichaelA> PD: you're afraid of feces.
<MichaelA> Feces is your friend.
* MichaelA laughs
<PD> No, I just don't see how they're supposed to be intrinsically worthwhile.
<MichaelA> I don't see how an endorphin surge is necessarily intrinsically worthwhile either
<ChrisRovner> Things that are fun have intrinsic moral worth?
* Gordon throws said feces in Michael's direction as a show of silly chimp behavior
<PD> MA, because it's fun.
* MichaelA wears a bee suit
<PD> Fun things are intrinsically worthwhile.
<ChrisRovner> I don't get it
<MichaelA> Ecstacy is fun, that's not instrinsically worthwhile
<PD> Like sex, and warcraft.
<MichaelA> Those are just rationalizations
<ChrisRovner> War is fun
<Gordon> fun is subjective
<ChrisRovner> War is not intrinsically moral
<PD> Not really, that's a pretty key component of my value system.
<MichaelA> Well, PD, if you could behold directly the cost of chosing those actions over others, you might consider their philosophical value (example: Bostrom's "Astronomical Waste" paper.)
<PD> Unless you're looking for something that is externally objectively morally worthwhile... But you know where I stand on that.
<Gordon> what is fun is subjective, having fun is moral
<MichaelA> reconsider*
<MichaelA> You can alter what you perceive as fun
<MichaelA> And I believe it should be pushed in a certain direction
<PD> MA, I don't trust utilitarian cost-benefit analyses very much.
* Gordon defiantly humps the couch
<MichaelA> No?
<PD> No
<MichaelA> Anything else is touchy-feely, imo
<PD> I have a very strong intuition that something's wrong about them
<PD> That's fine. Nothing wrong with touchy-feely.
<MichaelA> That's because they are orthogonal to your emotional systems
<PD> Probably
<Gordon> PD: most such analyses do not include all factors, only the ones assumed that `rational' players would care about
<PD> Yes well, it's still a matter of dispute what a rational player would be.
<PD> Or what rationality is, or even whether it is always desirable. lol
<Gordon> me in 20 years or less
<Eliezer> searching on Google for "Eliezer Yudkowsky girlfriend" turns up some very strange pages
<MichaelA> I'm arguing that as intelligence grows and the surface expression of deeply rooted moral shapers becomes more arbitrary and interchangable, there is a definite moral trajectory that people fly down and I'd like to be as far down on that as possible
<Utnapishtim> .
*Utnapishtim* You seen Mind lately?
<MichaelA> None of them are related to "Eliezer Yudkowsky's girlfriend", sadly
<MichaelA> I have exes with sites, good thing my last name ain't on 'em.
<BJKlein> heh
<Gordon> ah, you are disillusioned with sex
<MichaelA> No
<MichaelA> I know what sex is
<Gordon> right right
<MichaelA> The other thing is; teenage girls are the most ancestrally attractive
<Gordon> hate to disappoint you, but so does everyone over the age of about 8
<BJKlein> MichaelA is a rationalist with exceptional standards in the opposite sex
<MichaelA> Anything else is "settling for less"
<MichaelA> Heh
<MitchH> Gordon, on the other hand...
<MichaelA> Gordon, I'm not disillusioned with sex, really, although I'm not sure exactly what you mean
<PD> MA, I'd have to argue against that. :(
<Eliezer> someday there will come into existence one girl who finally meets the kind of standards Singularitarians tend to set
* MichaelA agrees with Eliezer
<BJKlein> thus there are probably two, maybe three women up to his standards... and two live in China
<Eliezer> and the Singularitarians will get together and talk it over quietly and rationally
<MichaelA> Then, we will all start acting weird :\
<Eliezer> and then the duels will begin
<BJKlein> Welcome Back Utnapishtim
* nrv8 sharpens his spear
* MitchH assumes a confusion-invokig posture
<Gordon> sadly, being passive by nature, I'll have to hope that there's a girl out there as broken as I am and goes for pathetic :-)
<MichaelA> Gordon: I'm sure there will be
<MichaelA> I've never once asked someone out, I always have been asked out too, heh
<Gordon> the problem with us passive people: we never get together :-)
<MitchH> Yes, we all know MichaelA is the "hearthrob" of the Singulritarian gang
<Utnapishtim> lol
<Eliezer> the obligatory bishounen
<Utnapishtim> Broke up recently
<Eliezer> there's always one
<MichaelA> I hate when people call me a "pretty boy" :\
<nrv8> Each atom of SPAM
<nrv8> Born in supernova's heart
<nrv8> A STAR DIED FOR THIS?
<MichaelA> Hah!
<PD> lol
<nrv8> eliezer haiku's whoa!!
<MichaelA> Nina wrote a whole bunch to go with his!
<Utnapishtim> Have absolutely no idea what you look like so I'm not about to tstart
<PD> He looks dark and brooding.
<Gordon> I have a picture
<MichaelA> I recently took a bunch of pictures of myself, actually
<Eliezer> Michael, that's the point at which imitation becomes blind
<Gordon> I think all Ani's got going for him are those blue eyes
<MichaelA> Eliezer: probably true
<Gordon> from some picture I saw he looked like he'd been out riding sand worms ;-)
<PD> *crickets chirping*
<MitchH> rofl at Gordon
<MichaelA> heh
* BJKlein chokes up
* MitchH thinks he knows the picture Gordon was referring to
<PD> What happened to all the solid, valuable discussion about the intrinsic moral value of my shit?
<MichaelA> Some shit isn't so solid :\
<PD> No, but that's beside the point.
<MitchH> eat more bananas
<PD> lol
<Gordon> we threw it around, decided that who should be alpha male is better decided by who can actual do some shit rather than throw it
<Eliezer> no, you have to go on teasing Anissimov
<MichaelA> Gordon, I think you should raise your romantic standards at some point
<Eliezer> I've been waiting the past seven years to see some Singularitarian other than myself get teased about his sex life
<PD> lol
<Gordon> oh, I have higher standards in my mind
<PD> But MA has no sex life to be teased about.
<MichaelA> PD; how do you know?
<MitchH> male sex standards are inherently low. It is the mate standards that are higher.
<PD> You don't sound like the type.
<MichaelA> Don't make me go into social-thingy mode
<Gordon> but in real life I'm willing to settle for less if it's just for sex
<MichaelA> Ohhh, is that so?
<PD> It is.
<MichaelA> After the Singularity, we can compare our past mates
<Eliezer> PD, if you think that's any kind of protection from teasing, you should try being a virgin sometime
<PD> lol
<Utnapishtim> The trouble is that I like most human beingscan't help but apply criteria that would be more useful in picking a hunter gatherer mate on the savanna
<PD> MA, I don't think we'll care very much, after the Singularity.
<MichaelA> Truth
<MichaelA> But you apparently care now...
<PD> So we might as well make the best of it while we can.
<PD> :D
* Gordon keeps very quite about the virgin thing around his meatspace friends
<Eliezer> he said "can" not "will"
<PD> Pfft, same difference in context.
<Gordon> a college campus is not exactly the easiest place to be a virgin
<MitchH> people always trying to have sex with you?
<Gordon> (especially with all the neo pagans crawling around the CS department)
<PD> lol
<PD> Yeah Gordon
<Gordon> note: I am still a virgin
<Shadow> I hate it when that happens! ;-)
<Gordon> I think that answers the question
<MichaelA> It's not called "being a virgin", it's called "being semi-celibate"
<PD> How did you manage that?
* MitchH imagines Gordon running across campus swinging his arms. Get them off! Get them off!
<MichaelA> Gordon, I see
<MichaelA> Then I can see the reason for your attitude, maybe :\
<PD> Burn :(
<PD> So...
<PD> Did you read any of that weird crap I told you to read, MA?
<PD> :D
<Gordon> you know, the thing is the neo pagans are just as likely to try to fuck me as sacrifice me
<MitchH> ew
<Gordon> actually, they wouldn't sacrifice me
<MichaelA> A bit, PD, the first 4 pages I'd say
<PD> Gordon, I'm sure the two aren't mutually exclusive.
<PD> Of what?
<MichaelA> You're correct that it does take attention to understand
<MichaelA> The Quine
<PD> Tow Dogmas?
<Gordon> or at least I hope so!
<Eliezer> I don't know what college you go to, Gordon, but it sounds like one hell of a mixed blessing.
<PD> Yeah
<PD> *two
<Gordon> University of Central Florida
<MichaelA> I'd say that it describes to me a way of thinking I've sort of had all along, not ever being strictly taught the dogmas in the first place
*Utnapishtim* WHAT THE HELL? what topic did you choose???
<PD> Heh
<MichaelA> From reading the first paragraph, his conclusions about metaphysics look dubious, but I haven't read that far yet.
<MichaelA> I'm printing it out now though
* Gordon cuts down Michael for killing trees
* MichaelA sets the park across the street on fire
<MichaelA> More will pay for your insolence :|
<Eliezer> Would we cut down trees if they could scream? We might, if they screamed all the time, for no good reason.
<Eliezer> Pave the Earth! Chrome the Moon!
<ChrisRovner> lol
<Gordon> well, I like the plants that I keep around
<Gordon> I like my rooms to be alive :-)
<Eliezer> yes, but someday they'll wither and die, and you'll be sad
<Gordon> actually, I don't get sad when plants die
<Gordon> I just get new ones
<Eliezer> you might as well set fire to them now, and dance around the flames, laughing
<MichaelA> or pour Drain-O on them and see how they fare
<Eliezer> if you *don't* feel sad when plants die, then why *not* kill the ones you have?
<Eliezer> I don't understand your so-called logic
<Gordon> because I like to look at them
<Eliezer> look at dead plants
<Eliezer> get a picture of a plant
<Gordon> living plants change
<Gordon> they are always different every day
<MitchH> (At the risk of reverting to the topic, I just noticed the slashdot mention of this, Gillette's order for 500 million RFID chips. http://www.rfidjourn...tte111502.html)
<Eliezer> screensavers change faster
<Eliezer> they are always different every second
<Gordon> well, it's just something I do for fun
<Eliezer> oh, *fun*
<MichaelA> Mitch: I heard John Smart is a big enthusiast of Alien Technology's, I think he may have bought some of their stock
<Gordon> or maybe you've forgotten, but I'm a bit psycopathic
<Gordon> psychopathic
<MichaelA> Gordon: Homestar Runner doesn't soothe you?
<Gordon> HRS is funny funny
<Gordon> I mostly only register emotion when it's large
<Gordon> the rest of the time it doesn't seem to be happening
<PD> What conclusions about metaphysics?
<MichaelA> One effect of abandoning them is, as we shall see, a blurring of the supposed boundary between speculative metaphysics and natural science.
<PD> oh
<PD> yeah you probably have to read further
<MichaelA> There are thousands of supposed boundaries in science which are counterproductive, and this looks like a relatively narrow example
<MichaelA> I will
<MichaelA> Oh, PD
<PD> What?
<MichaelA> aw...
<MichaelA> buildfreedom.com is down
<PD> What's there?
<MichaelA> I wanted to give you the link to the "The Breeding Instinct" article
<PD> lol
<PD> Well, it sounds very informative
<MichaelA> "What would you do if you woke up and found out a mad scientist altered your brain so that you had to do something all the time or you were never happy? Would you be angry?"
<MichaelA> Hehe
<PD> Probably not.
<PD>
<Gordon> MA: I've already got that condition; you're not angry about it at all; in fact, you'd rather not give it up
<Eliezer> I'd start looking for the mad scientist, because it sounds like such an incredibly interesting discovery.
<PD> Yep
<MichaelA> Gordon: true, but it depends on how philosophically valid the condition is
<PD> *wonders if lesbians have the breeding instinct, too
<MichaelA> Or "the imperative"
<Eliezer> If the mad scientist wasn't willing to cooperate, I'd study her methods until I had understood them and improved on them, then strike out on my own
<MichaelA> Eliezer: exactly
<PD> *wonders also what the ideally rational set of desiderata for "philosophically valid" is.
<Eliezer> PD: gut instinct
<PD> Yep
<MichaelA> "Philosophically valid" has a lot of stigma because it and related terms are often just used as memetic tools to further selfish goals
<PD> I haven't really heard of goals described as "philosophically valid" until I got into these circles.
<PD> it just seems a fancy way of calling some goals interesting and others boring. :(
<MichaelA> It is
<MichaelA> But that doesn't make the term any less philosophically valid
<MichaelA> :D
<PD> ^^
<BJKlein> heh
<BJKlein> facinating insight
<BJKlein> fascinating*
<MichaelA> PD: it's because it's hard to notice that some goals are genuinely more philosophically valid than others until you can consider the wider scheme of goals and their impacts
<BJKlein> any suggestions for a chat topic for next week?
<Eliezer> maybe instead of "philosophically valid", you should use the term Quality
<Eliezer> just a quiet suggestion
<MichaelA> I like "philosophically valid", capital words freak people out
<BJKlein> maybe, "Sex After The Singularity ?"
<MichaelA> You can imagine other words that don't exist, and imagine those words are actually being said
<MichaelA> Oh, I dunno BJK
<Gordon> no no, Sex in the Singy
<MichaelA> That seems a bit silly
<Eliezer> words like "fleem", and "snocker"
<MichaelA> Yes
<PD> I don't think any topic about things "after the singularity" would be a philosophically valid topic.
<BJKlein> it was a jokeyy
<MichaelA> whoops
<MichaelA> With Ray K. actually talking about this stuff, you have to watch out
<PD> lol
<BJKlein> it's the best way to get attention
<BJKlein> heh
<PD> Well, I still say the best way to get attention is through big flashy movies.
<BJKlein> I'd have to agree with ya there PD
<MichaelA> how about a mirror? :\
<PD> Lame.
<Eliezer> y'know, you can say all this stuff all you want, but look at this way: who are the people who have memetically reproduced?
<MichaelA> "Lame" is just a fancy word for "philosophically invalid"
<Eliezer> Vinge and Eliezer
<Eliezer> Vinge has me and many other Singularity writers
<Eliezer> I have Mitch Howe, Michael Anissimov, and others trying to learn
<BJKlein> let me go through the topics we've discussed thus far in order...
<BJKlein> 1. Cancer
<Eliezer> Kurzweil and Goertzel don't have anyone trying to write for them
<PD> Kurzwiel has memetically reproduced quite a bit.
<BJKlein> 2. Ethics and physical immortality
<MichaelA> Eliezer: true, memetic prowess is important, and you sure won that game
<MichaelA> On a small scale
<BJKlein> 3. Proactive about P
<BJKlein> physical immortality
<BJKlein> 4. Singularity
<MichaelA> PD: but no one is really personally committed to Kurzweil or Goertzel's ideas
<PD> Plus Kurzweil has been getting through to business
<Eliezer> Kurzweil has gotten a lot of attention; he doesn't have reflections
<Eliezer> he's been using existing clout more than generating new clout
<BJKlein> 5. AI, Uploading vs Biological Augmentation
<PD> Well I don't know about that.
<BJKlein> 6. Intelligence: What is it?
<BJKlein> 7. Existential Risks
<BJKlein> 8. Qualia
<Eliezer> so if you want to know what makes a lasting impact, my suggestion is that it is actually talking sense, rather than trying to "get attention"
<BJKlein> 9. Future (Tonight's Chat)
<BJKlein> 10. ?
<Eliezer> Rationality
<MichaelA> That works
<BJKlein> k
<BJKlein> thanks
<PD> Lasting impact and large scale impact may be different and equally worthwhile projects.
<MitchH> Kurzweil might have a following if he actually advocated the doing of something, rather than the observing of it.
<PD> Heh
<Gordon> uh oh, next week's chat looks like another chance to embarrass myself in front of Eli
* MichaelA looks forward to it
<BJKlein> join the crowd Gordon
<PD> *is going to have to brush up on decision theory*
<Gordon> actually, I get embarrassed a little more frequently because I'm trying to learn something new rather than just being the way I am
<PD> ignorance is only embarassing when deliberate.
<BJKlein> PD do you do any atheist forums?
<BJKlein> or do you get off on that topic by any chance?
