Re: [FRIAM] How can the memory of a dream be inaccurate; L WAS/ Unix Nightmare

[Eric Charles]

Nick,
Recall that the "Kitchen Group" at Clark University put together a book on
"Recursively" in psychology. I contributed a chapter on William James's
Radical Empiricism and the befuddling notion of "pure experience". In it,
I illustrate how this "radical" approach to psychology is largely just a
dog headed application and reapplication of first-principles reasoning (a
thing is what you experience when you experience that thing). The
following section is relevant, I think, to the discussion you want to have
about how to deal with dreams:


I will start with a quick episode, presented as a standard,
first-person narrative. Next I will analyze the story from both a
traditional perspective and a radical empiricist perspective. The
traditional perspective will take dualism for granted, as well as the
rightness or wrongness of any judgment about the world. The radical
empiricist perspective will simply examine the experiences themselves.

*The Episode*

It is dark, but I slowly become able to make out a form. It is a man. I
call out, but get no reply. I approach, and squint. It is not a man, it is
statue, a very good statue, maybe wax. I thought I saw a man, but I was
wrong, it was only a man in my mind, the statue is real. Wait, now my eyes
are opening again. It was all a dream. There was never anything there at
all.

*Traditional Dualistic Translation*

This story is about a person doubly tricked. At first they
think they are seeing a man, then that is replaced by thinking they are
seeing a statue. In fact, there never was any such form anywhere.
Everything that supposedly ‘happened’ was merely in their head. Mid-dream,
they were correct in asserting there was no man, but wrong in asserting
there was a statue. They are correct only at the end, when they judge both
objects to have never existed.

*Radical Empiricist Translation*

This story is about a person’s transforming experiences. The form is
experienced first as not having a clear shape, but then quickly comes to be
distinguished as a man. Then the form is experienced as a statue. After the
form is experienced as a statue, the original experience is re-experienced
as wrong. After it is experienced as wrong, it is also experienced as
having been mental. Then the person experiences all of those happenings as
‘mental’ and the room he finds himself in as real. More specifically, the
prior things are re-experienced as having been ‘dreamt’ *and* as having
been ‘mental’, whereas the current surroundings are experienced as
physical.

*Elaboration of Radical Empiricist Translation*

There are crucial differences between the radical empiricist translation
and the traditional translation that are easy to miss. To highlight but a
few: 1) In the traditional translation, the original experience of the man
is declared to have been purely mental. In the radical empiricist
translation, it is emphasized that no such distinction originally existed –
there was nothing about the original experience to suggest that it was
‘wrong’ or ‘mental.’ Those are aspects of new experiences, not the original
experiences. 2) In the traditional translation, there is no *thing* being
experienced. Part of what the dualist asserts by declaring something to be
‘mental’ is that it is ‘not real.’ Even were we to somehow force the
dualist to accept the dreamt form as “a thing”, they would still insist
that the experienced man was distinct from the experienced statue, i.e.,
that there was one some-thing originally and a different some-thing later.
The radical empiricist, on the other hand accepts both the experienced form
as a thing, and as the same thing despite the transformation. It is
necessary to refer to the form as a stable thing, because a stable
‘sameness’ was part of the dreamer’s experience. 3) In the traditional
translation, once everything is revealed to be a dream, this retroactively
dictates our treatment of the original experiences as composed of ‘dream
stuff’ (be it ideas, misfiring neurons, illusion, or some other substance).
In the radical empiricist translation, we stay true to the obvious fact
that such is a *post hoc* judgment. Unless the original experience was
somehow ‘dreamy’ as, for example in the case of a lucid dream, it is a
gross violation to treat the original experience as somehow having been of
‘dream stuff’. The *last* experience is of the previous experiences *as*
dreams, i.e., the last experience only.

To focus on the final point: If we want to understand the difference
between ‘dream’ and ‘real’ we need to look at the difference between the
original experience (of the statue as ‘real statue’) and the last
experience (of the statue as ‘dream statue’). Whatever is different between
those two concrete experiences is the meaning of ‘dream’. It does no good
to simply declare that the *first* experience was of ‘dream statue’; in
fact, to do so completely undercuts our ability to investigate the
phenomenon of interest.

The radical empiricist st

Re: [FRIAM] THREAD BENDING ALERT: Was "Is Bezos a Bozo?" IS NOW"Reading Email exchanges chronologically"

[Eric Charles]

Not to burst bubbles
Isn't this one of the challenges that Google Wave
was intended to solve?
Admittedly, Wave isn't a way to fix old email threads, but if "turning
email threads into documents" was a common desire, Wave would have been
more popular.

For those not familiar: Wave basically started with an email/online doc,
and then allowed you to write as if you were adding to a thread, along
with infinite larding and responding to larded comments, and simply
displayed them all as a tracked-changes multi-authored document (where you
could go back in time to see edits). I managed to muscle Nick into
co-authoring a publication using Wave, after goading him with chunks of
text cut and pasted from earlier FRIAM email threads. I am, frankly,
surprised that some of the associated abilities haven't been integrated
into Gmail. A few of the capabilities were taken into Google docs, but
those capabilities are painfully limited compared what was available
in Wave. At this point, Wave lays peacefully in the Google Graveyard, as
the Apache Foundation sort of picked it up, but, from what I can tell,
hasn't done much with it for the past 6 years.






---
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician
U.S. Marine Corps


On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 8:02 PM, glen ep ropella 
wrote:

>
>
> On October 28, 2016 7:28:22 PM PDT, Owen Densmore 
> wrote:
> >Sorry to be pedestrian, but how about the OP's desire to convert
> >thread(s)
> >into posts/correspondence?
>
> But that was my point in mentioning a tree threaded mail reader,
> especially an open source one. It should be a matter of straightforward
> engineering to extract the part of tbird that makes a tree out of a thread.
> That code could be the launch point for a tool to do what we want.
>
> Determining whether a line prefixed with the quote char is intentionally
> quoted or detritus should be easy enough. If all remaining text after the
> nonquoted part is quoted, then it can be tossed. But if there is a quoted
> part followed by a nonquoted part, it should remain.
>
> I really think 80 to 90 % of what Nick wants exists.  But there's no
> incentive to do that work. And the amount of work to go from 80% to 100% is
> always large.
>
> --
> glen
>
> 
> 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

Re: [FRIAM] How can the memory of a dream be inaccurate; L WAS/ Unix Nightmare

[Nick Thompson]

Thanks, Eric,

 

I like this passage a lot!  It expresses the impulse of “experience monism” 
very clearly – “let us say only what we can say.” The only thing missing from 
the passage from my point of view is that you don’t call it a “monism”.  But I 
am probably the only person left on Friam that takes much interest in calling 
something an “-ism”.  

 

Thanks for sending it. 

 

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 Eric Charles
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 6:16 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] How can the memory of a dream be inaccurate; L WAS/ Unix 
Nightmare

 

Nick, 

Recall that the "Kitchen Group" at Clark University put together a book on 
"Recursively" in psychology. I contributed a chapter on William James's Radical 
Empiricism and the befuddling notion of "pure experience". In it, I illustrate 
how this "radical" approach to psychology is largely just a dog headed 
application and reapplication of first-principles reasoning (a thing is what 
you experience when you experience that thing). The following section is 
relevant, I think, to the discussion you want to have about how to deal with 
dreams: 

 

 

I will start with a quick episode, presented as a standard, 
first-person narrative. Next I will analyze the story from both a traditional 
perspective and a radical empiricist perspective. The traditional perspective 
will take dualism for granted, as well as the rightness or wrongness of any 
judgment about the world. The radical empiricist perspective will simply 
examine the experiences themselves.

The Episode

It is dark, but I slowly become able to make out a form. It is a man. I call 
out, but get no reply. I approach, and squint. It is not a man, it is statue, a 
very good statue, maybe wax. I thought I saw a man, but I was wrong, it was 
only a man in my mind, the statue is real. Wait, now my eyes are opening again. 
It was all a dream. There was never anything there at all. 

Traditional Dualistic Translation

This story is about a person doubly tricked. At first they think 
they are seeing a man, then that is replaced by thinking they are seeing a 
statue. In fact, there never was any such form anywhere. Everything that 
supposedly ‘happened’ was merely in their head. Mid-dream, they were correct in 
asserting there was no man, but wrong in asserting there was a statue. They are 
correct only at the end, when they judge both objects to have never existed. 

Radical Empiricist Translation

This story is about a person’s transforming experiences. The form is 
experienced first as not having a clear shape, but then quickly comes to be 
distinguished as a man. Then the form is experienced as a statue. After the 
form is experienced as a statue, the original experience is re-experienced as 
wrong. After it is experienced as wrong, it is also experienced as having been 
mental. Then the person experiences all of those happenings as ‘mental’ and the 
room he finds himself in as real. More specifically, the prior things are 
re-experienced as having been ‘dreamt’ and as having been ‘mental’, whereas the 
current surroundings are experienced as physical. 

Elaboration of Radical Empiricist Translation

There are crucial differences between the radical empiricist translation and 
the traditional translation that are easy to miss. To highlight but a few: 1) 
In the traditional translation, the original experience of the man is declared 
to have been purely mental. In the radical empiricist translation, it is 
emphasized that no such distinction originally existed – there was nothing 
about the original experience to suggest that it was ‘wrong’ or ‘mental.’ Those 
are aspects of new experiences, not the original experiences. 2) In the 
traditional translation, there is no thing being experienced. Part of what the 
dualist asserts by declaring something to be ‘mental’ is that it is ‘not real.’ 
Even were we to somehow force the dualist to accept the dreamt form as “a 
thing”, they would still insist that the experienced man was distinct from the 
experienced statue, i.e., that there was one some-thing originally and a 
different some-thing later. The radical empiricist, on the other hand accepts 
both the experienced form as a thing, and as the same thing despite the 
transformation. It is necessary to refer to the form as a stable thing, because 
a stable ‘sameness’ was part of the dreamer’s experience. 3) In the traditional 
translation, once everything is revealed to be a dream, this retroactively 
dictates our treatment of the original experiences as composed of ‘dream stuff’ 
(be it ideas, misfiring neurons, illusion, or some other substance). In the 
radical empiricist translation, 

Re: [FRIAM] THREAD BENDING ALERT: Was "Is Bezos a Bozo?" IS NOW"Reading Email exchanges chronologically"

[Nick Thompson]

Eric, 

 

I never knew we were working in WAVE. I just knew I was grateful for the help 
you were giving me ordering my thoughts.   I will look into it.  Is it capable 
of reconstructing a thread after the fact, or is it a system for creating 
threads that can be reconstructed? 

 

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 Eric Charles
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 6:37 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] THREAD BENDING ALERT: Was "Is Bezos a Bozo?" IS 
NOW"Reading Email exchanges chronologically"

 

Not to burst bubbles 

Isn't this one of the challenges that Google Wave  
 was intended to solve? Admittedly, 
Wave isn't a way to fix old email threads, but if "turning email threads into 
documents" was a common desire, Wave would have been more popular. 

 

For those not familiar: Wave basically started with an email/online doc, and 
then allowed you to write as if you were adding to a thread, along with 
infinite larding and responding to larded comments, and simply displayed them 
all as a tracked-changes multi-authored document (where you could go back in 
time to see edits). I managed to muscle Nick into co-authoring a publication 
using Wave, after goading him with chunks of text cut and pasted from earlier 
FRIAM email threads. I am, frankly, surprised that some of the associated 
abilities haven't been integrated into Gmail. A few of the capabilities were 
taken into Google docs, but those capabilities are painfully limited compared 
what was available in Wave. At this point, Wave lays peacefully in the Google 
Graveyard, as the Apache Foundation sort of picked it up, but, from what I can 
tell, hasn't done much with it for the past 6 years. 

 

 

 

 





---
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician

U.S. Marine Corps

 

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 8:02 PM, glen ep ropella mailto:geprope...@gmail.com> > wrote:



On October 28, 2016 7:28:22 PM PDT, Owen Densmore mailto:o...@backspaces.net> > wrote:
>Sorry to be pedestrian, but how about the OP's desire to convert
>thread(s)
>into posts/correspondence?

But that was my point in mentioning a tree threaded mail reader, especially an 
open source one. It should be a matter of straightforward engineering to 
extract the part of tbird that makes a tree out of a thread. That code could be 
the launch point for a tool to do what we want.

Determining whether a line prefixed with the quote char is intentionally quoted 
or detritus should be easy enough. If all remaining text after the nonquoted 
part is quoted, then it can be tossed. But if there is a quoted part followed 
by a nonquoted part, it should remain.

I really think 80 to 90 % of what Nick wants exists.  But there's no incentive 
to do that work. And the amount of work to go from 80% to 100% is always large.

--
glen



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

Re: [FRIAM] Memo To Jeff Bezos: The Most Productive Workers Are Team Players, Not Selfish Individualists | The Evolution Institute

[Nick Thompson]

Everybody, 

One point of clarification.  Altruistic (i.e. group fitness-enhancing behavior 
that diminishes the actor's fitness) does not have to be "nice" behavior.  One 
of my favorite candidates for altruistic behavior in humans is road rage.  A 
road rager risks his own safety to enforce a norm of driving behavior on 
somebody who has violated that norm.  It doesn't feel like altruism when one is 
doing it, but it is.  

Of course there are other potential explanations of this sort of behavior ... 
reputation enhancement, etc.  

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 ?glen?
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 8:59 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Memo To Jeff Bezos: The Most Productive Workers Are Team 
Players, Not Selfish Individualists | The Evolution Institute


But you're assuming that being a member of a team, prevents you from operating 
as an independent agent.  That's just not true.  Team membership doesn't 
redesign the individual from the genes up.  It simply changes the context in 
which the individual behaves.  And most team contexts are not as zero-sum 
constraining as you assume.  In fact, most team contexts are enabling, not 
restrictive.  For example, because my team has done things like pave 1000 mile 
long roads, built airplanes, deliver mail, etc, my individually driven agency 
is way more powerful than it would have otherwise been.

Or, to go back to the article, a forward can be, individually, a much better 
overall soccer player _because_ of the full backs, not in spite of them.

On 10/27/2016 07:46 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> And there are even more occult paths to success without the team, if a larger 
> solution space is considered to be better, and the same set of people follow 
> their noses as independent agents.   Looking around in a solution space isn't 
> free.  Each experiment takes some time and energy.   


--
␦glen?


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

Re: [FRIAM] Memo To Jeff Bezos: The Most Productive Workers Are Team Players, Not Selfish Individualists | The Evolution Institute

[glen ☣]

My favorite example of this is the curmudgeonly tech lead in any significant 
organization.  Such a tech lead ends up splattering all the young'uns with 
spittle as she rails against all manner of neophyte mistakes and useless new 
acronyms (that don't do anything new except rename things she's been doing her 
entire career).  Maybe call it code rage.  All the while, the curmudgeon drives 
her career further and further into the ditch as the young'uns move on to new 
gigs within competitors and sibling organizations, to which the curmudgeon will 
soon be applying for a job because the apparent value of her produce drops 
below the apparent value of her salary, despite the vital role she plays on the 
team.

(I scoured my experience and did, actually, remember a female that fit the pattern ... only one, 
mind you, but extant.  So, I don't feel entirely disingenuous using "she" and 
"her" above.  But my guess, based on stereotypes, is that most use cases will see a male 
-- perhaps with a spittle-flecked gray[ing] beard -- in the role.)

On 10/31/2016 12:43 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

One point of clarification.  Altruistic (i.e. group fitness-enhancing behavior that 
diminishes the actor's fitness) does not have to be "nice" behavior.  One of my 
favorite candidates for altruistic behavior in humans is road rage.  A road rager risks 
his own safety to enforce a norm of driving behavior on somebody who has violated that 
norm.  It doesn't feel like altruism when one is doing it, but it is.


--
☣ glen


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

Re: [FRIAM] Memo To Jeff Bezos: The Most Productive Workers Are Team Players, Not Selfish Individualists | The Evolution Institute

[Steven A Smith]

Glen -
(I scoured my experience and did, actually, remember a female that fit 
the pattern ... only one, mind you, but extant. So, I don't feel 
entirely disingenuous using "she" and "her" above.  But my guess, 
based on stereotypes, is that most use cases will see a male -- 
perhaps with a spittle-flecked gray[ing] beard -- in the role.)
but I don't know you to sport a beard?   The rest is something I can 
feature though!


I miss your ur-signature: " get off my lawn ! "

This whole line of observation seems somewhat like a simple 
point-example of the broader idea that nothing (and no-one) exists in 
isolation, everything is part of a larger ecology, and every role, no 
matter how absurd nor humble contributes to the milieu.


I suspect even the lowly dung-beetle imagines him(her)self to be a 
(ig?)noble apex predator!


- Steve
PS.  I DO have a gray beard and it is more often flecked with my lunch 
than spittle, but I do recognize the image you paint in the mirror... 
now "get off my lawn!"



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

Re: [FRIAM] Memo To Jeff Bezos: The Most Productive Workers Are Team Players, Not Selfish Individualists | The Evolution Institute

[Marcus Daniels]

It casts doubt on the value of the expertise if the words change every few 
years but the meaning remains the same.   Better to have some enthusiastic 
puppies that find it all new every so often?   Or better yet, just solve the 
problem once and for all and move on.

-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 3:31 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Memo To Jeff Bezos: The Most Productive Workers Are Team 
Players, Not Selfish Individualists | The Evolution Institute

My favorite example of this is the curmudgeonly tech lead in any significant 
organization.  Such a tech lead ends up splattering all the young'uns with 
spittle as she rails against all manner of neophyte mistakes and useless new 
acronyms (that don't do anything new except rename things she's been doing her 
entire career).  Maybe call it code rage.  All the while, the curmudgeon drives 
her career further and further into the ditch as the young'uns move on to new 
gigs within competitors and sibling organizations, to which the curmudgeon will 
soon be applying for a job because the apparent value of her produce drops 
below the apparent value of her salary, despite the vital role she plays on the 
team.

(I scoured my experience and did, actually, remember a female that fit the 
pattern ... only one, mind you, but extant.  So, I don't feel entirely 
disingenuous using "she" and "her" above.  But my guess, based on stereotypes, 
is that most use cases will see a male -- perhaps with a spittle-flecked 
gray[ing] beard -- in the role.)

On 10/31/2016 12:43 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
> One point of clarification.  Altruistic (i.e. group fitness-enhancing 
> behavior that diminishes the actor's fitness) does not have to be "nice" 
> behavior.  One of my favorite candidates for altruistic behavior in humans is 
> road rage.  A road rager risks his own safety to enforce a norm of driving 
> behavior on somebody who has violated that norm.  It doesn't feel like 
> altruism when one is doing it, but it is.

--
☣ glen


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

Re: [FRIAM] Memo To Jeff Bezos: The Most Productive Workers Are Team Players, Not Selfish Individualists | The Evolution Institute

[glen ☣]

Heh, I don't fit the pattern very well.  I am known to be grumpy.  But my 
agnosticism is much too broad for me to engage in code rage.  I sometimes 
cut-n-paste.  I sometimes put the curly brace on the same line or the line 
after.  I sometimes use library widgets and sometimes roll my own.  Patterns 
are phantastmagoric pareidolia.  I'm incapable of playing code cop ... not 
because I don't care, but because it's all about context to me ... whatever 
gets you through to a _working_ pile of @#%!$ is fine by me.  I think this is 
because I was reared as a simulant.  At the end of the day, it doesn't matter 
what's _inside_.  What goes in or out is all that matters ... maybe I'm a 
behaviorist ... the holographic principle gone awry.

But I will defend those spittle spewing morlocks to the death, perhaps because 
of my inability to play their role.

On 10/31/2016 02:40 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:

but I don't know you to sport a beard?   The rest is something I can feature 
though!

I miss your ur-signature: " get off my lawn ! "

This whole line of observation seems somewhat like a simple point-example of 
the broader idea that nothing (and no-one) exists in isolation, everything is 
part of a larger ecology, and every role, no matter how absurd nor humble 
contributes to the milieu.

I suspect even the lowly dung-beetle imagines him(her)self to be a (ig?)noble 
apex predator!

- Steve
PS.  I DO have a gray beard and it is more often flecked with my lunch than spittle, but 
I do recognize the image you paint in the mirror... now "get off my lawn!"


--
☣ glen


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] fun with DNS

[Marcus Daniels]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/10/was_a_server_registered_to_the_trump_organization_communicating_with_russia.html

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] FBI discovers Dr. Strangelove in 2013/2014 email dump

[Stephen Guerin]

Dr. Strangelove: how he learned to stop baiting and love the FRIAM threads
  http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Will he/they strike again?

We should build a firewall and make LANL the Real Story pay for it!

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-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FBI discovers Dr. Strangelove in 2013/2014 email dump

[Steven A Smith]

this looks pretty defunct now... any reason to believe it will light 
back up?  too bad Doug has fled...   do you think he/she is still a 
lurker on the list?   reminds me of a statement you once made:  "If it 
had any more character it could run for president!"   I see YOU didn't 
get directly lampooned...  teflon Guerin?  Or is it just too hard to 
make a caricaturing cartoon of complexity babble?






On 10/31/16 8:04 PM, Stephen Guerin wrote:

Dr. Strangelove: how he learned to stop baiting and love the FRIAM threads
http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Will he/they strike again?

We should build a firewall and make LANL the Real Story pay for it!






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-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



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-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove