http://m.gapminder.org/videos/200-years-that-changed-the-world/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-decline-of-violence/ Curt On Jul 6, 2015 6:02 PM, "Parks, Raymond" <rcpa...@sandia.gov> wrote: > Human behaviour is human behaviour and it has not changed in 50,000+ > years. Humans act in their own self-interest at many levels - see Maslow's > Hierarch of Needs. The purpose of civilization is to allow humans to > behave the way they will behave with as little destructive collateral > effects as possible. Sometimes, the structures of a society and government > are enough to control the behaviour - sometimes more force is necessary. > The key is to apply as little force as is necessary and to be perceived as > applying the force fairly (not necessarily equally). > > Unfortunately, society and government are made up of humans and they > will find ways to use what power is allotted to them by other humans in > ways that are advantageous to themselves. History shows that no matter how > idealistic and utopian the original goal of a society or government it will > be changed by the humans in charge to give themselves advantage. The > purpose of the US constitution is to pit these humans against each other so > that their pursuit of self-interest will be in conflict with others in > government. The intent of the writers was that each group would prevent > the others from gaining enough power to be destructive - thus the > separation of powers into three branches of government. > > Humans also tend to form groups and place the survival of the group as > more important than the survival of other groups. When the group rises to > the status of a nation-state or boundary-crossing movement (usually > religious), the groups can get into conflict. This is a fact of the human > condition. The best prepared group will survive these conflicts. War > games are one of the methods of preparing. I understand your plea and I > sympathize - but history proves that we can't all just get along. > > Ray Parks > > > On Jul 6, 2015, at 1:31 PM, Gary Schiltz wrote: > > It’s such a shame that we still “can’t all just get along”, and > instead keep developing more and more advanced ways of subjugating > each other, killing and terrorizing. The liberal vs. conservative > noise in the USA got me thinking a lot about this. When I moved to EC, > the previous 8 years of BushCo had moved my politics pretty far left, > to the point that I was quite happy with Correa’s victory. Now, after > seeing the extent to which the past corruption has been merely > legitimized (pushed upward), I’m not so sure where I stand. It seems > to me that a lot of human history is some variation of the theme of > "you have more than I have, that’s not fair, so I’m going to take some > (all in some cases) from you.” There’s a lot to be said for that. If > we didn’t have such strong strucutres in place (governments, social > norms), we would each have just about what we could defend against our > neighbors. The problem is that governments, especially in conjunction > with philosophies and religions, can legitimize quite a range of > behaviors, and our war games (real and otherwise) just enforce this. > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Parks, Raymond <rcpa...@sandia.gov> > wrote: > > You are venturing into the world of serious games. Humans have always > > played games to sharpen intellect, gain skills, refine tactics, understand > > the ramifications of strategy, and entertain themselves. I'm currently > > helping to author a paper about the security requirements of serious games, > > so this subject is fresh in my mind. > > > As hunter-gatherers, humans allowed their children to play hide and seek, > > use child-sized weapons, and hunt small game. These were practice games > for > > adulthood. > > > This concept of transforming necessary military skills and learning them > by > > games, either as children or later as adults, has continued throughout > human > > history. In the 1800s, the Prussians added to the physical games with > > tabletop (or sandtable top) intellectual games that abstracted military > > units and allowed future officers to play without having to use real > people, > > animals, and supplies. That game was called Kriegspiel and has continued > to > > evolve to this day. > > > Chess is sometimes considered the original Kriegspiel. Most historians > > agree it is derived from Chaturanga, invented in the Gupta Empire somewhere > > between 280 and 550 CE. Modern chess was formalized from the derivative of > > shatranj (Muslim version from the original) in about 900-1000 CE in > southern > > Europe. As a game, chess trains the player to think ahead, understand the > > consequences of their actions, and generally improves the mind. > > > In the age of Industrial Warfare new weapons, new logistics, new > > transportation, new communication methods, and the sheer size of armies > > required games to understand the bitter lessons learned in wars. These > > games were physical games to learn how all of these factors interact in the > > physical world before they could be abstracted to the tabletop as > > Kriegspiel. As late as the buildup to the US entry into WWII, the Army > held > > huge maneuver exercises in the South to practice and understand how war was > > already being fought in Europe. > > > Those large, physical games still take place, but as computers have > become > > more and more important parts of the military, the games have added > > computers. These computers have themselves effectively created a fifth > > domain for military conflict (after Land, Sea, Air, and Space) which most > > authorities call Cyberspace. The interesting aspect of this is that, > > increasingly, the other domains are being abstracted into Cyberspace. A > > pilot might either fly a physical airplane as part of an exercise or they > > may fly a simulator. Either way, their actions are translated to a > > scorekeeping mechanism that is automated. > > > There is an interesting trend within the videogame community where > players > > create modifications of the game they love playing. I get Amazon Local > > emails because of my Prime membership, and one offer I have seen a lot, > > recently, is a course to teach a child how to create mods for Minecraft. > > Modding Minecraft involves learning Java, understanding the data storage > > scheme of the game, and understanding the "physics engine" of Minecraft. > > This all translates to skills useful in programming and software systems > > engineering. Mods for other games are similiar in nature. > > > The bottom line here is that games have been one of mankind's way of > > learning and researching for a very long time. Some games are more > valuable > > for learning specific things while others are more entertaining. Just as > > not everybody needs and wants to do "productive" work, not everybody needs > > and wants to play strictly serious games like agent-based simulation (yes, > I > > am saying that many of the folks on this list are playing games in their > > work and research). There is a spectrum of entertainment that describes > > games - some games are strictly business and some games are a little > > business with lots of entertainment. Entertainment can be necessary to > > entice players to the game to learn. Sometimes, the entertainment becomes > > the primary goal of the players and any learning is purely happenstance. > > > Personally, I like games because they help me hone my bad guy skills. > In a > > very few cases, I learn new real-world attacks from the game content, > > usually from seeing other people try things that I assumed would not work. > > More often, I figure out how to use the game functions to win more easily - > > something that equates directly to using a system with computers to attack > > itself. Occasionally, I learn how to break the computer program behind the > > game in a way that works for non-game computer programs. > > > Ray Parks > > Consilient Heuristician/IDART Old-Timer > > V: 505-844-4024 M: 505-238-9359 P: 505-951-6084 > > NIPR: rcpa...@sandia.gov > > SIPR: rcpar...@sandia.doe.sgov.gov (send NIPR reminder) > > JWICS: dopa...@doe.ic.gov (send NIPR reminder) > > > > > On Jul 5, 2015, at 9:44 PM, cody dooderson wrote: > > > This is a very interesting subject. I often wonder if Im doing anything > > useful for society and/or the universe. I think the answer is probably no, > > but the future is notoriously hard to predict. It seems like most useful > > inventions are born from silly fascinations. For instance, fire was > probably > > once thought of as a frivolous and sometimes dangerous magic trick. Same > > with music, microscopes, gun powder, and quantum physics. As for video > > games, I wonder if they will ever become useful, for anything other than > > training drone pilots. I hope so. > > Any way, I hope you all figure out whats useful before my mid-life crisis. > > > > > Cody Smith > > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net > > > > wrote: > > > But Gary! How do you make that distinction ... the difference between > the > > innocent useless and the harmful useless? I took a whack at that in the > > article I sent, but I never felt I nailed it. > > > Nick > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology > > Clark University > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Gary Schiltz > > Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2015 10:06 PM > > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] DOH! > > > Well, you’re in good company here :-) > > > Actually, I also distinguish between “the useful stuff” that we do and > the > > less useful, but I suspect that both are necessary. We're complex > creatures > > that become bored doing only the useful stuff, and our brains need for > us to > > do “the fun stuff” too. Maybe it’s somehow like sleep, nothing obviously > > productive is occuring, but it appears to perform some necessary > > physiological functions (cleanup of waste products, other?) as well as > > leading to various conceptual leaps that don’t seem to come as much in > > conscious thought. > > > Now, the *real* bullshit of constantly new stuff just to get us to buy > it, > > I’m more dubious about that. Maybe in the same way that the arms race and > > SDI led us to create new useful stuff, creating endless new crap has some > > useful function. I don’t know. > > > “Give us bread, but give us roses" > > > > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Nick Thompson < > nickthomp...@earthlink.net> > > wrote: > > So's my wife! And I love her dearly! And after all, I made my living > > studying the behavior of crows. I enjoy bull shit and bullshitters. > > > But still, Gary, are you committed to the notion that there is no > useful > > distinction to be made between bullshit and productive labor? And is > there > > nothing queer about the idea that some people get to earn their living > doing > > bullshit, while others have to do productive labor? > > > Nick > > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Gary > > Schiltz > > Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2015 9:36 PM > > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] DOH! > > > My god, it’s full of…. BULLSHIT! > > > Well, making things and growing food are great, but it would be a lot > > less interesting world if that’s all we did. Certainly Santa Fe would > be. > > > Gary [husband of an artist] > > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 8:29 PM, Nick Thompson > > <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > Dear Friammers, > > > > > I am late to this conversation but it has just impinged on something > > I have been thinking about a LOT. I used to be sure that there was a > > firm distinction between productive labor and … to use the technical > > term … bullshit. Growing food and making automobile engines were > > examples of productive labor; designing this year’s fashions in > > automobiles and clothing, that was an example of bull shit. It truly > > disgusts me that the automobile industry designs a pretty good car > > every decade or so, and then, stops making them because, because, > > after all, there always must be something new. (Oh what has Subaru > > done the Forrester and Volvo to the Volvo Wagon? Once they comfortable > > boxes in which to carry people around. > > Now they both look like outsized running shoes with gun slits for > > windows. > > That’s the essence of bullshit. LL Beans had a pretty good winter > > coat a > > decade back; can’t get it any more. More bullshit. > > > > > Now gambling and gaming in any form (e.g., investment banking) seem > > to me to lean pretty heavily on the side of bullshit. But I have > > begun to worry that, one of these days, I am going to wake up having > > realized in a dream that EVERYTHING is bullshit. Certainly that’s > > the direction that complexity thinking leads us. Or, at least, to > > the realization that because there is nowhere near enough productive > > labor to go around, most of us have to paid to do bullshit to keep us > > from doing real harm. Anyway, Penny and I published something about > > that > > 35 years back. Perhaps some of you like to look at it. It’s called, > > “A Utopian Perspective on Ecology and > > Development.” For all I know, you might its first readers! The > > authors > > would love to hear from you. > > > > > Nick > > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology > > > Clark University > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ > > > > > From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Marcus > > Daniels > > Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2015 6:21 PM > > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] DOH! > > > > > Arlo writes: > > > > > “It is not some secret mystical human experience, nor does it have to > > be some weird pop-culture cult, but just another way to spend some free > > time.” > > > > > I suppose the distinction I’m making is between open vs. closed or > > leading > > vs. following. With so much unknown in the world, why use hours of > > wakefulness to enumerate the states of a finite state machine? In > > what way > > is there anything to discover from a game? I appreciate there is a > > craft > > to making a storyline and a craft to in designing the graphics and > > physics engines, and of course the graphic arts in designing the visual > > appearance > > of characters. But I appreciate the story like I’d appreciate > > literature > > or art – I am not an expert in those things, and so I am not a > > participant – > > I am merely a consumer. On the technology side, I can acknowledge > > that > > gaming software is sometimes impressive. But why _bother_ writing it > > _except_ to sell it? Another way to ask the question is how is it > > more > > significant to be a gamer than, say, a reader of fiction or even a > > moviegoer? How is being a gamer a Thing? > > > > > Marcus > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at > > cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe > > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe > > at St. John's College to unsubscribe > > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe > > at St. John's College to unsubscribe > > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe > > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
