Re: [FRIAM] ill-conceived question

[Prof David West]

The lesson might be if you are willing to lose the old people who are somewhat 
poor and already warehoused in overcrowded care facilities you don't have to 
lock down.



On Sun, May 3, 2020, at 11:24 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> Sounds like the lesson is that if you're willing to lose old people you don't 
> have to lock down. As an old person I have my doubts about that approach. In 
> the last three days one of my highschool classmates died of covid related 
> causes and a first cousin died of a heart attack with no known covid 
> involvement.
> 
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
> 
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
> 
> On Sun, May 3, 2020, 10:55 AM Merle Lefkoff  wrote:
>> Nick, the only mainstream news program I watch is Fareed Zakaria on Sunday 
>> morning. Below is part of this morning's report. Not surprisingly (for those 
>> of us who have had the privilege recently of spending time in Sweden), the 
>> answer to how it's working, is just about like the countries that are locked 
>> down, with one exception. More deaths (mostly among the elderly who 
>> primarily live together in retirement).
>> 
>> As world governments employ different policies to fight Covid-19, Sweden’s 
>> relaxed approach stands out: Eschewing lockdowns, the country has left its 
>> schools, gyms, cafes, bars and restaurants open throughout the spread of the 
>> pandemic. Fareed interviews the man behind that strategy, *Anders Tegnell*, 
>> the Swedish government’s top epidemiologist, about how it’s working and 
>> whether his country can offer any lessons to the rest of the world.
>> 
>> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 10:34 AM  wrote:
>>> Colleagues, 

>>> __ __

>>> I have asked this question before and nobody has responded (for clear and 
>>> good reasons, no doubt) but I thought I would ask it again. What exactly is 
>>> this economy we are bent on reviving? What exactly is the difference in 
>>> human activity between our present state and a revived economy. We can go 
>>> to bars and concerts and football games? Is that the economy we are 
>>> reviving? It seems to me that the difference between a “healty” economy and 
>>> our present status consists possibly in nothing more than a lot of people 
>>> frantically rushing about doing things they don’t really need to do? 

>>> __ __

>>> You recall that I invoked as a model that experiment in which 24 rats were 
>>> put in a quarter acre enclosure in Baltimore and fed and watered and 
>>> protected to see how the population would develop. They never got above two 
>>> hundred. Infant mortality, etc., was appalling. Carnage. In the same space, 
>>> a competent lab breeding organization could have kept a population of tens 
>>> of thousands. 

>>> __ __

>>> Don’t yell at me. What fundamental proposition about economics do I not 
>>> understand? 

>>> __ __

>>> Nick 

>>> __ __

>>> Nicholas Thompson

>>> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

>>> Clark University

>>> ThompNickSon2@gmail.com

>>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

>>> 

>>> __ __

>>> __ __

>>> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... 
>>>  . ...
>>>  FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>  Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>>  unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>>  archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>>  FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
>> President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
>> emergentdiplomacy.org
>> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
>> 
>> merlelefk...@gmail.com 
>> mobile: (303) 859-5609
>> skype: merle.lelfkoff2
>> twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
>> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... 
>>  . ...
>>  FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>  Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>  unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>  archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>  FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... 
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
> 
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Population regulation by mayhem

[Prof David West]

Nick,

Last I looked, head was still on shoulders. I took your comment as just another 
caution with regard my tendency to make casual generalizations / over 
simplifications. (But now that I think about it, maybe I was a bee and you were 
a Murder Wasp? But no, we aren't in Washington state or Canada.)

But I would point out a flaw in generalizing from one kind of animal species to 
another — the male human animal encounters all kinds of constraints that 
inhibit (not prevent, just inhibit) the insemination of multiple women that 
males of other animal species usually do not.

davew


On Sun, May 3, 2020, at 1:38 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:
> Dave,

> 

> Didn’t mean to bite your head off. You touched an old sore. There was a huge 
> literature leading up to the sixties (Wynne-edwards, 1962, *Animal dispersion 
> in relation to Social Behavior*, *inter* *alia*) which argued that population 
> regulation was the function of social arrangements and that selection was at 
> the level of the species. This was all abruptly ended in 1966 by George C. 
> Williams’s scathing screed, *Adaptation and Natural Selection: A critique of 
> some current evolutionary thought. *Williams argued that most of our recent 
> thinking about evolutionary causation at that time had been tainted by a 
> confusion between consequences of behavior and its function, and that just 
> because population regulation was a consequence of much social behavior was 
> no reason to believe that that was its function.* * The species itself is NOT 
> an object of selection, but its consequence. Consequences to the species, as 
> such, are not an evolutionary cause. Williams’s book led to an appalling over 
> correction which continues today and may be reflected in some of the 
> libertarian-ish themes in FRIAM -- the idea that selection occurs ONLY at the 
> gene or the individual level . Trying to claw out some middle ground between 
> these two absurd extremes has been one of the stories of my life. See this 
> brief commentary. 
> 

> 

> One of the points that Williams made is that in a species such as humans, 
> killing off males cannot be seriously considered as a method for regulating 
> population since, more or less, it takes a only single male to inseminate a 
> virtually infinite number of females. Yeh, I know. “In my wildest dreams.” 
> But still.

> 

> Nick

> Nicholas Thompson

> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

> Clark University

> thompnicks...@gmail.com

> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

> 

> 

> 


> *From:* Friam  *On Behalf Of *Prof David West
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 3, 2020 7:43 AM
> *To:* friam@redfish.com
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] ill-conceived question

> 

> Nick,

> 

> No one made any claim about effectiveness. Just an observation that if you do 
> year-by-year plot of birthrate in a given population you will see an annual 
> increase leading to the onset of a war, an obvious decrease during the war, 
> and a surge immediately after the war ends. The surge more than compensates 
> for the drop during the war years, so effectiveness is out the window.

> 

> I think — haven't checked recently — that there was a gradual increase in 
> birth rate between WWI and the onset of WWII, a 2-4 percent decrease during 
> the war years, and a huge baby boom immediately after. Father Smith had 
> similar statistical measures for dozens of other conflicts.

> 

> Population pressure / "birth control" are but one of a multitude of factors 
> that lead to war. All kinds of arguments can be made about the "validity" of 
> Father Smith's statistics — few pre-modern peoples kept comprehensive public 
> health records, ...

> 

> davew

> 

> 

> On Sat, May 2, 2020, at 11:21 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote:

> David,

> 

> Basic fact of demography. Killing men is not a particularly effective means 
> of population control. 

> 

> You want war to serve in that capacity, you have to get women in the 
> military. 

> 

> Nick

> 

> Nicholas Thompson

> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

> Clark University

> thompnicks...@gmail.com

> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

> 

> 

> 

> *From:* Friam  *On Behalf Of *Steven A Smith

> *Sent:* Saturday, May 2, 2020 8:00 PM

> *To:* friam@redfish.com

> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] ill-conceived question

> 

> Dave -

> I once taught an honors course, with Father Smith at St. Thomas on the 
> Anthropology and Theology of War. One of the prime forces behind war — since 
> prehistory — had been nothing more than birth control.

> Do you meant literally *birth* and *control*, or rather *population* and 
> *reduction*?

> The more literal usage works well too. Controlling Births. I think much 
> warfare culminates (or did before modernish times) in the victors killing the 
> men and raping/impregnat

Re: [FRIAM] ill-conceived question

[Frank Wimberly]

Dave

Maybe I lack adequate knowledge of the variety of care centers but the ones
I know charge something like $200,000 admission and $6000 per month.  Maybe
you mean "somewhat poor OR already warehoused..."

Frank

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

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Mon, May 4, 2020, 5:31 AM Prof David West  wrote:

> The lesson might be if you are willing to lose the old people who are
> somewhat poor and already warehoused in overcrowded care facilities you
> don't have to lock down.
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2020, at 11:24 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>
> Sounds like the lesson is that if you're willing to lose old people you
> don't have to lock down.  As an old person I have my doubts about that
> approach.  In the last three days one of my highschool classmates died of
> covid related causes and a first cousin died of a heart attack with no
> known covid involvement.
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2020, 10:55 AM Merle Lefkoff 
> wrote:
>
> Nick, the only mainstream news program I watch is Fareed Zakaria on Sunday
> morning.  Below is part of this morning's report.  Not surprisingly (for
> those of us who have had the privilege recently of spending time in
> Sweden), the answer to how it's working, is just about like the countries
> that are locked down, with one exception.  More deaths (mostly among the
> elderly who primarily live together in retirement).
>
> As world governments employ different policies to fight Covid-19, Sweden’s
> relaxed approach stands out: Eschewing lockdowns, the country has left its
> schools, gyms, cafes, bars and restaurants open throughout the spread of
> the pandemic. Fareed interviews the man behind that strategy, *Anders
> Tegnell*, the Swedish government’s top epidemiologist, about how it’s
> working and whether his country can offer any lessons to the rest of the
> world.
>
> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 10:34 AM  wrote:
>
> Colleagues,
>
>
>
> I have asked this question before and nobody has responded (for clear and
> good reasons, no doubt) but I thought I would ask it again.  What exactly
> is this economy we are bent on reviving?  What exactly is the difference in
> human activity between our present state and a revived economy.  We can go
> to bars and concerts and football games?  Is that the economy we are
> reviving?  It seems to me that the difference between a “healty” economy
> and our present status consists possibly in nothing more than a lot of
> people frantically rushing about doing things they don’t really need to
> do?
>
>
>
> You recall that I invoked as a model that experiment in which 24 rats were
> put in a quarter acre enclosure in Baltimore and fed and watered and
> protected to see how the population would develop.  They never got above
> two hundred.  Infant mortality, etc., was appalling.  Carnage.  In the same
> space, a competent lab breeding organization could have kept a population
> of tens of thousands.
>
>
>
> Don’t yell at me.  What fundamental proposition about economics do I not
> understand?
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> Nicholas Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
>
> Clark University
>
> thompnicks...@gmail.com
>
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
>
>
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> --
> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
> President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
> emergentdiplomacy.org
> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
>
> merlelefk...@gmail.com 
> mobile:  (303) 859-5609
> skype:  merle.lelfkoff2
> twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
>
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -

Re: [FRIAM] ill-conceived question

[Prof David West]

Frank,

When looking for a facility for my mother, I found a lot of the 200K / 6K per 
month facilities, but more than 3/4 of the facilities that exist are subsidized 
and they simply take between 40 and 80% of the patient's social security and 
retirement income.

I am pretty certain that the ones with intense outbreaks were the latter type.

When all the shouting is over and all the data is available, I would bet a 
significant amount of money that the single largest comorbidity factor will be 
poverty / lower economic status.

davew

On Mon, May 4, 2020, at 6:12 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> Dave
> 
> Maybe I lack adequate knowledge of the variety of care centers but the ones I 
> know charge something like $200,000 admission and $6000 per month. Maybe you 
> mean "somewhat poor OR already warehoused..."
> 
> Frank
> 
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
> 
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
> 
> On Mon, May 4, 2020, 5:31 AM Prof David West  wrote:
>> __
>> The lesson might be if you are willing to lose the old people who are 
>> somewhat poor and already warehoused in overcrowded care facilities you 
>> don't have to lock down.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, May 3, 2020, at 11:24 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>>> Sounds like the lesson is that if you're willing to lose old people you 
>>> don't have to lock down. As an old person I have my doubts about that 
>>> approach. In the last three days one of my highschool classmates died of 
>>> covid related causes and a first cousin died of a heart attack with no 
>>> known covid involvement.
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> Frank C. Wimberly
>>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
>>> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>>> 
>>> 505 670-9918
>>> Santa Fe, NM
>>> 
>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020, 10:55 AM Merle Lefkoff  wrote:
 Nick, the only mainstream news program I watch is Fareed Zakaria on Sunday 
 morning. Below is part of this morning's report. Not surprisingly (for 
 those of us who have had the privilege recently of spending time in 
 Sweden), the answer to how it's working, is just about like the countries 
 that are locked down, with one exception. More deaths (mostly among the 
 elderly who primarily live together in retirement).
 
 As world governments employ different policies to fight Covid-19, Sweden’s 
 relaxed approach stands out: Eschewing lockdowns, the country has left its 
 schools, gyms, cafes, bars and restaurants open throughout the spread of 
 the pandemic. Fareed interviews the man behind that strategy, *Anders 
 Tegnell*, the Swedish government’s top epidemiologist, about how it’s 
 working and whether his country can offer any lessons to the rest of the 
 world.
 
 On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 10:34 AM  wrote:
> Colleagues, 

> __ __

> I have asked this question before and nobody has responded (for clear and 
> good reasons, no doubt) but I thought I would ask it again. What exactly 
> is this economy we are bent on reviving? What exactly is the difference 
> in human activity between our present state and a revived economy. We can 
> go to bars and concerts and football games? Is that the economy we are 
> reviving? It seems to me that the difference between a “healty” economy 
> and our present status consists possibly in nothing more than a lot of 
> people frantically rushing about doing things they don’t really need to 
> do? 

> __ __

> You recall that I invoked as a model that experiment in which 24 rats 
> were put in a quarter acre enclosure in Baltimore and fed and watered and 
> protected to see how the population would develop. They never got above 
> two hundred. Infant mortality, etc., was appalling. Carnage. In the same 
> space, a competent lab breeding organization could have kept a population 
> of tens of thousands. 

> __ __

> Don’t yell at me. What fundamental proposition about economics do I not 
> understand? 

> __ __

> Nick 

> __ __

> Nicholas Thompson

> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

> Clark University

> ThompNickSon2@gmail.com

> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

> 

> __ __

> __ __

> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... 
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
 
 
 -- 
 Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
 President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
 emergentdiplomacy.org
 Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
 
 merlelefk...@gmail.com 
 mobile: (303) 859-5609
 skype: merle.lelfkoff2
 twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
 .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -..

Re: [FRIAM] ill-conceived question

[thompnickson2]

…and being on a ventilator.  

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

  thompnicks...@gmail.com

  
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

From: Friam  On Behalf Of Prof David West
Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 8:25 AM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] ill-conceived question

 

Frank,

 

When looking for a facility for my mother, I found a lot of the 200K / 6K per 
month facilities, but more than 3/4 of the facilities that exist are subsidized 
and they simply take between 40 and 80% of the patient's social security and 
retirement income.

 

I am pretty certain that the ones with intense outbreaks were the latter type.

 

When all the shouting is over and all the data is available, I would bet a 
significant amount of money that the single largest comorbidity factor will be 
poverty / lower economic status.

 

davew

 

On Mon, May 4, 2020, at 6:12 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:

Dave

 

Maybe I lack adequate knowledge of the variety of care centers but the ones I 
know charge something like $200,000 admission and $6000 per month.  Maybe you 
mean "somewhat poor OR already warehoused..."

 

Frank

 

---

Frank C. Wimberly

140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 

Santa Fe, NM 87505

 

505 670-9918

Santa Fe, NM

 

On Mon, May 4, 2020, 5:31 AM Prof David West mailto:profw...@fastmail.fm> > wrote:

 

The lesson might be if you are willing to lose the old people who are somewhat 
poor and already warehoused in overcrowded care facilities you don't have to 
lock down.

 

 

 

On Sun, May 3, 2020, at 11:24 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:

Sounds like the lesson is that if you're willing to lose old people you don't 
have to lock down.  As an old person I have my doubts about that approach.  In 
the last three days one of my highschool classmates died of covid related 
causes and a first cousin died of a heart attack with no known covid 
involvement.

 

---

Frank C. Wimberly

140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 

Santa Fe, NM 87505

 

505 670-9918

Santa Fe, NM

 

On Sun, May 3, 2020, 10:55 AM Merle Lefkoff mailto:merlelefk...@gmail.com> > wrote:

Nick, the only mainstream news program I watch is Fareed Zakaria on Sunday 
morning.  Below is part of this morning's report.  Not surprisingly (for those 
of us who have had the privilege recently of spending time in Sweden), the 
answer to how it's working, is just about like the countries that are locked 
down, with one exception.  More deaths (mostly among the elderly who primarily 
live together in retirement).

 

As world governments employ different policies to fight Covid-19, Sweden’s 
relaxed approach stands out: Eschewing lockdowns, the country has left its 
schools, gyms, cafes, bars and restaurants open throughout the spread of the 
pandemic. Fareed interviews the man behind that strategy, Anders Tegnell, the 
Swedish government’s top epidemiologist, about how it’s working and whether his 
country can offer any lessons to the rest of the world.

 

On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 10:34 AM mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com> > wrote:

Colleagues, 

 

I have asked this question before and nobody has responded (for clear and good 
reasons, no doubt) but I thought I would ask it again.  What exactly is this 
economy we are bent on reviving?  What exactly is the difference in human 
activity between our present state and a revived economy.  We can go to bars 
and concerts and football games?  Is that the economy we are reviving?  It 
seems to me that the difference between a “healty” economy and our present 
status consists possibly in nothing more than a lot of people frantically 
rushing about doing things they don’t really need to do?  

 

You recall that I invoked as a model that experiment in which 24 rats were put 
in a quarter acre enclosure in Baltimore and fed and watered and protected to 
see how the population would develop.  They never got above two hundred.  
Infant mortality, etc., was appalling.  Carnage.  In the same space, a 
competent lab breeding organization could have kept a population of tens of 
thousands.  

 

Don’t yell at me.  What fundamental proposition about economics do I not 
understand? 

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

thompnicks...@gmail.com  

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

 

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
 

unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

 

 

-- 

Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.

President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy

emergentdiplomacy.org  

Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA

 

merlelefk...@gmail.

[FRIAM] Ranked Choice Voting app

[uǝlƃ ☣]

https://rankit.vote/

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Ranked Choice Voting app

[Steven A Smith]

glen -

> https://rankit.vote/
>
thanks for bringing the topic up again.   I know you have made (mildly?
obliquely?) disparaging comments about ranked-choice voting before.  
Rather than my trying to summarize (or impute) your real intention,
maybe you could comment on how you think ranked choice voting fits into
the bigger picture?

- steve


.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] ill-conceived question

[Edward Angel]

Most elder facilities do not require the huge buy in. In NM there are a large 
number of smaller facilities that can house up to ten people and are much less 
expensive. There are also larger ones that are pretty good that don’t have a 
buy in and charge less than 6K/month although are still out of reach for most 
New Mexicans.

The largest outbreak in ABQ is at La Vida Llena which has the big buy in and 
high monthly charge. It is generally regarded as the best facility in ABQ. It 
is run as a nonprofit by some the large mainstream churches. I have three 
friends there. The outbreak there that affected over 50 residents and staff was 
in the skilled nursing part of the facility and thus far has not affected 
independent living residents like my friends who are however under a pretty 
strict quarantine. I think the main point here is that wherever people put 
together in a small space there is grave danger. 

Ed
___

Ed Angel

Founding Director, Art, Research, Technology and Science Laboratory (ARTS Lab)
Professor Emeritus of Computer Science, University of New Mexico

1017 Sierra Pinon
Santa Fe, NM 87501
505-984-0136 (home) an...@cs.unm.edu 

505-453-4944 (cell) http://www.cs.unm.edu/~angel 


> On May 4, 2020, at 8:25 AM, Prof David West  wrote:
> 
> Frank,
> 
> When looking for a facility for my mother, I found a lot of the 200K / 6K per 
> month facilities, but more than 3/4 of the facilities that exist are 
> subsidized and they simply take between 40 and 80% of the patient's social 
> security and retirement income.
> 
> I am pretty certain that the ones with intense outbreaks were the latter type.
> 
> When all the shouting is over and all the data is available, I would bet a 
> significant amount of money that the single largest comorbidity factor will 
> be poverty / lower economic status.
> 
> davew
> 
> On Mon, May 4, 2020, at 6:12 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>> Dave
>> 
>> Maybe I lack adequate knowledge of the variety of care centers but the ones 
>> I know charge something like $200,000 admission and $6000 per month.  Maybe 
>> you mean "somewhat poor OR already warehoused..."
>> 
>> Frank
>> 
>> ---
>> Frank C. Wimberly
>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
>> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>> 
>> 505 670-9918
>> Santa Fe, NM
>> 
>> On Mon, May 4, 2020, 5:31 AM Prof David West > > wrote:
>> 
>> The lesson might be if you are willing to lose the old people who are 
>> somewhat poor and already warehoused in overcrowded care facilities you 
>> don't have to lock down.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, May 3, 2020, at 11:24 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>>> Sounds like the lesson is that if you're willing to lose old people you 
>>> don't have to lock down.  As an old person I have my doubts about that 
>>> approach.  In the last three days one of my highschool classmates died of 
>>> covid related causes and a first cousin died of a heart attack with no 
>>> known covid involvement.
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> Frank C. Wimberly
>>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
>>> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>>> 
>>> 505 670-9918
>>> Santa Fe, NM
>>> 
>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020, 10:55 AM Merle Lefkoff >> > wrote:
>>> Nick, the only mainstream news program I watch is Fareed Zakaria on Sunday 
>>> morning.  Below is part of this morning's report.  Not surprisingly (for 
>>> those of us who have had the privilege recently of spending time in 
>>> Sweden), the answer to how it's working, is just about like the countries 
>>> that are locked down, with one exception.  More deaths (mostly among the 
>>> elderly who primarily live together in retirement).
>>> 
>>> As world governments employ different policies to fight Covid-19, Sweden’s 
>>> relaxed approach stands out: Eschewing lockdowns, the country has left its 
>>> schools, gyms, cafes, bars and restaurants open throughout the spread of 
>>> the pandemic. Fareed interviews the man behind that strategy, Anders 
>>> Tegnell, the Swedish government’s top epidemiologist, about how it’s 
>>> working and whether his country can offer any lessons to the rest of the 
>>> world.
>>> 
>>> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 10:34 AM >> > wrote:
>>> Colleagues, 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> I have asked this question before and nobody has responded (for clear and 
>>> good reasons, no doubt) but I thought I would ask it again.  What exactly 
>>> is this economy we are bent on reviving?  What exactly is the difference in 
>>> human activity between our present state and a revived economy.  We can go 
>>> to bars and concerts and football games?  Is that the economy we are 
>>> reviving?  It seems to me that the difference between a “healty” economy 
>>> and our present status consists possibly in nothing more than a lot of 
>>> people frantically rushing about doing things they don’t really need to do? 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> You recall that I invoked

Re: [FRIAM] Ranked Choice Voting app

[uǝlƃ ☣]

Well, the usual caveats apply. I really have no idea what I'm talking about. 
But that's never stopped me before.

My intuition is given unlimited campaign funding (as free speech), really 
really long campaign seasons, and influence ops (ala Russia), 1st past the post 
2 party systems foment false dichotomy and hyper-partisanship. I'm a big fan of 
dialectic (which I regard as installing false dichotomies -- or falsely 
disjoint sets for more than 2 positions -- for the sake of argument). But 
everything in moderation. When a (false) dichotomy is taken seriously, it loses 
its rhetorical power.

IRV and RCV seem to push people toward mediocrity. Of course, I'm no fan of 
popular music (or popular novels, or popular TV shows, etc.). But if every time 
I turned on the radio they were playing extreme noise, Yanni, or black metal, 
I'd be similarly Disturbed (ha! get it?).

So, I see IRV and RCV as a potential solution to finding compromise in our 
elections instead of electing people by hyper-partisan elections, then 
expecting them to do all the compromising after they're in the new position. My 
criticisms of it would obtain after a few political cycles when *all* we get 
are the Bidens/Clintons/Bushes and the AOCs/Yangs/Bernies have no chance. It 
disgusts me to think a reasonable political strategy is "play to the middle". 
But at this point, I think we need a little of it. How can we mitigate against 
it later, though? I have no idea.

Maybe there's some efficacy in slicing out types of elections (which I've 
already tried to do by saying "IRV and RCV", recognizing they're not quite 
synonymous). Maybe Congress needs IRV, whereas the Executive needs 1st past the 
post? Or maybe the House needs 1st-past but the Senate needs IRV and the 
Executive needs RCV (and the top 2 get P and VP)? I don't know. But sometimes, 
a little mediocrity helps us identify where our tastes really do and don't 
diverge.

On 5/4/20 9:00 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
>> https://rankit.vote/
>>
> thanks for bringing the topic up again.   I know you have made (mildly?
> obliquely?) disparaging comments about ranked-choice voting before.  
> Rather than my trying to summarize (or impute) your real intention,
> maybe you could comment on how you think ranked choice voting fits into
> the bigger picture?


-- 
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

[uǝlƃ ☣]

Hm. I can't quite parse this, but don't want to ignore it.

I'm not convinced that Chalmers' naturalistic dualism is at all different from 
Peirce's real/extant distinction. From that perspective, Chalmers' dualism and 
Nick's monism are irrelevant to whether or not Nick understands the hard 
problem. What one thinks is actually the case can be unrelated to one's 
taxonomy of possible cases. ("There are many like it, but this one is mine.")

I can admit, however, that any one formulation of the hard problem may *seem* 
very different from another formulation. But the mere rejection of a lexicon 
(e.g. "Chalmers-esque") is not a rejection of the problem being outlined. If 
category theory has taught us anything, it's that problems can seem quite 
different, but really be about the same thing. The very fact that we can have 
the discussion we're having is an indication that there is a "hard problem" and 
that it can act as a foil for choosing one's rifle.

On 5/2/20 6:12 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> To paraphrase Nick's answer:
> Yes, of course we /can /build such a machine, so long as you agree to treat 
> "enjoy" and "think" and "feel" in the way that I do, and NOT as Chalmers or 
> the other dualists would. My approach does not contain a Chalmers-esque hard 
> problem.

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

[Frank Wimberly]

Choosing one's rifle is so concrete.  It makes me want to run out and blow
away a few cacti.  Oh, it's a metaphor!

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

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Mon, May 4, 2020, 11:44 AM uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:

> Hm. I can't quite parse this, but don't want to ignore it.
>
> I'm not convinced that Chalmers' naturalistic dualism is at all different
> from Peirce's real/extant distinction. From that perspective, Chalmers'
> dualism and Nick's monism are irrelevant to whether or not Nick understands
> the hard problem. What one thinks is actually the case can be unrelated to
> one's taxonomy of possible cases. ("There are many like it, but this one is
> mine.")
>
> I can admit, however, that any one formulation of the hard problem may
> *seem* very different from another formulation. But the mere rejection of a
> lexicon (e.g. "Chalmers-esque") is not a rejection of the problem being
> outlined. If category theory has taught us anything, it's that problems can
> seem quite different, but really be about the same thing. The very fact
> that we can have the discussion we're having is an indication that there is
> a "hard problem" and that it can act as a foil for choosing one's rifle.
>
> On 5/2/20 6:12 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> > To paraphrase Nick's answer:
> > Yes, of course we /can /build such a machine, so long as you agree to
> treat "enjoy" and "think" and "feel" in the way that I do, and NOT as
> Chalmers or the other dualists would. My approach does not contain a
> Chalmers-esque hard problem.
>
> --
> ☣ uǝlƃ
>
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC 
> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

[uǝlƃ ☣]

Is it? You people can't help yourselves. It's compulsive. You might want to get 
some help for that.

On 5/4/20 10:47 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> Choosing one's rifle is so concrete.  It makes me want to run out and blow 
> away a few cacti.  Oh, it's a metaphor!

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Ranked Choice Voting app

[cody dooderson]

I think that ranked choice is the best bet to escape from the horrible two
party system. That being said there is not much insentive for the GOP or
the DNC to adopt what could be enable competition.  My friend Greg once
said both parties are basically just advertising firms, and I still believe
it.
Also the idea of voting from a personal computer or phone really interests
me. If someone could figure out how to overcome it's flaws it would be
awesome. From what I understand the issues are, correct me if I'm wrong,
* Anonymity while still providing some sort of record so one can verify
that the vote was cast correctly. Equivalent to a paper ballot. There must
be some math/ encryption trick for this.
* How to verify that the person voting is who they say they are.


On Mon, May 4, 2020, 10:31 AM uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:

> Well, the usual caveats apply. I really have no idea what I'm talking
> about. But that's never stopped me before.
>
> My intuition is given unlimited campaign funding (as free speech), really
> really long campaign seasons, and influence ops (ala Russia), 1st past the
> post 2 party systems foment false dichotomy and hyper-partisanship. I'm a
> big fan of dialectic (which I regard as installing false dichotomies -- or
> falsely disjoint sets for more than 2 positions -- for the sake of
> argument). But everything in moderation. When a (false) dichotomy is taken
> seriously, it loses its rhetorical power.
>
> IRV and RCV seem to push people toward mediocrity. Of course, I'm no fan
> of popular music (or popular novels, or popular TV shows, etc.). But if
> every time I turned on the radio they were playing extreme noise, Yanni, or
> black metal, I'd be similarly Disturbed (ha! get it?).
>
> So, I see IRV and RCV as a potential solution to finding compromise in our
> elections instead of electing people by hyper-partisan elections, then
> expecting them to do all the compromising after they're in the new
> position. My criticisms of it would obtain after a few political cycles
> when *all* we get are the Bidens/Clintons/Bushes and the AOCs/Yangs/Bernies
> have no chance. It disgusts me to think a reasonable political strategy is
> "play to the middle". But at this point, I think we need a little of it.
> How can we mitigate against it later, though? I have no idea.
>
> Maybe there's some efficacy in slicing out types of elections (which I've
> already tried to do by saying "IRV and RCV", recognizing they're not quite
> synonymous). Maybe Congress needs IRV, whereas the Executive needs 1st past
> the post? Or maybe the House needs 1st-past but the Senate needs IRV and
> the Executive needs RCV (and the top 2 get P and VP)? I don't know. But
> sometimes, a little mediocrity helps us identify where our tastes really do
> and don't diverge.
>
> On 5/4/20 9:00 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> >> https://rankit.vote/
> >>
> > thanks for bringing the topic up again.   I know you have made (mildly?
> > obliquely?) disparaging comments about ranked-choice voting before.
> > Rather than my trying to summarize (or impute) your real intention,
> > maybe you could comment on how you think ranked choice voting fits into
> > the bigger picture?
>
>
> --
> ☣ uǝlƃ
>
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC 
> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

[Frank Wimberly]

LOL

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:50 AM uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:

> Is it? You people can't help yourselves. It's compulsive. You might want
> to get some help for that.
>
> On 5/4/20 10:47 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> > Choosing one's rifle is so concrete.  It makes me want to run out and
> blow away a few cacti.  Oh, it's a metaphor!
>
> --
> ☣ uǝlƃ
>
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC 
> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>


-- 
Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Ranked Choice Voting app

[Gillian Densmore]

Me and a friend were talking about a topic like this the other day. Their
are a lot of issues with washington. One is it's gotten really stuck on
point fingers.
We came up with a rough geeky parallel  to StarWars. lol people can
probably guess where things are heading:
Washing has decided to invest some book of bad writing. Along the way
basically a at first small rebellious hungry to hang on to ideals of what
it thinks to be like good BFF, that you listen to all the time saying:
that's a really bad idea! They basically become a mixture of the republic
and some jedi.  A much more extremist group comes then says: but we can't
get anything done! So we'll just up and do it.  They basically falling to
the dark side
The Repblic and Jedi are a mix of people saying  to hell with party
polotics: they're a mixture of gop, jedi, and average citizens just wanting
balanc.
The extremmesist of everyone (Gop citicens, Dems, etc) are Going to the
dark side, some have the potential to be Sith.

It's my opinion this is the problem now. Two groups of extremists. Neither
able or willing to here other side.  Ranked voting might help that.  I'm
not sure now is a good idea to entirely get rid of both parties with a need
for stability. But someway where it's a little less of this either GOP OR
Dems.  A 3rd or 4th viable working party could help with that.

It's my understanding Engand has several parties, and they work out to some
degree, Adding more parties that'd work. We have a lot small "parties" that
are their to basically troll. In my opinion.
Where as a few more legit parties potentially would help. The other side is
actually following the rules everyone agreed to. The Sith have pretty much
decided they'll just do what they want. regardless of what the rules
actually say. While that's certainly one way to get things unstuck, but
it's left a total mess in the process!




On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:56 AM cody dooderson  wrote:

> I think that ranked choice is the best bet to escape from the horrible two
> party system. That being said there is not much insentive for the GOP or
> the DNC to adopt what could be enable competition.  My friend Greg once
> said both parties are basically just advertising firms, and I still believe
> it.
> Also the idea of voting from a personal computer or phone really interests
> me. If someone could figure out how to overcome it's flaws it would be
> awesome. From what I understand the issues are, correct me if I'm wrong,
> * Anonymity while still providing some sort of record so one can verify
> that the vote was cast correctly. Equivalent to a paper ballot. There must
> be some math/ encryption trick for this.
> * How to verify that the person voting is who they say they are.
>
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020, 10:31 AM uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:
>
>> Well, the usual caveats apply. I really have no idea what I'm talking
>> about. But that's never stopped me before.
>>
>> My intuition is given unlimited campaign funding (as free speech), really
>> really long campaign seasons, and influence ops (ala Russia), 1st past the
>> post 2 party systems foment false dichotomy and hyper-partisanship. I'm a
>> big fan of dialectic (which I regard as installing false dichotomies -- or
>> falsely disjoint sets for more than 2 positions -- for the sake of
>> argument). But everything in moderation. When a (false) dichotomy is taken
>> seriously, it loses its rhetorical power.
>>
>> IRV and RCV seem to push people toward mediocrity. Of course, I'm no fan
>> of popular music (or popular novels, or popular TV shows, etc.). But if
>> every time I turned on the radio they were playing extreme noise, Yanni, or
>> black metal, I'd be similarly Disturbed (ha! get it?).
>>
>> So, I see IRV and RCV as a potential solution to finding compromise in
>> our elections instead of electing people by hyper-partisan elections, then
>> expecting them to do all the compromising after they're in the new
>> position. My criticisms of it would obtain after a few political cycles
>> when *all* we get are the Bidens/Clintons/Bushes and the AOCs/Yangs/Bernies
>> have no chance. It disgusts me to think a reasonable political strategy is
>> "play to the middle". But at this point, I think we need a little of it.
>> How can we mitigate against it later, though? I have no idea.
>>
>> Maybe there's some efficacy in slicing out types of elections (which I've
>> already tried to do by saying "IRV and RCV", recognizing they're not quite
>> synonymous). Maybe Congress needs IRV, whereas the Executive needs 1st past
>> the post? Or maybe the House needs 1st-past but the Senate needs IRV and
>> the Executive needs RCV (and the top 2 get P and VP)? I don't know. But
>> sometimes, a little mediocrity helps us identify where our tastes really do
>> and don't diverge.
>>
>> On 5/4/20 9:00 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
>> >> https://rankit.vote/
>> >>
>> > thanks for bringing the topic up again.   I know you have made (mildly?
>> > obliquely?) disparaging comments about ran

[FRIAM] Fwd: Thesis Proposal - Dylan Fitzpatrick - Today - Monday, May 4 at 9am - via Zoom

[George Duncan]

Most appropriate topic

George Duncan
Emeritus Professor of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University
georgeduncanart.com
See posts on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
Land: (505) 983-6895
Mobile: (505) 469-4671

My art theme: Dynamic exposition of the tension between matrix order and
luminous chaos.

"Attempt what is not certain. Certainty may or may not come later. It may
then be a valuable delusion."
>From "Notes to myself on beginning a painting" by Richard Diebenkorn.

"It's that knife-edge of uncertainty where we come alive to our truest
power." Joanna Macy.




-- Forwarded message -
From: Michelle E Wirtz 
Date: Mon, May 4, 2020 at 6:29 AM
Subject: Thesis Proposal - Dylan Fitzpatrick - Today - Monday, May 4 at 9am
- via Zoom
To: heinz-facu...@lists.andrew.cmu.edu ,
heinz-...@lists.andrew.cmu.edu , Daniel
Neill , Roni Rosenfeld 
Cc: Diane L Stidle 


*Friendly reminder – *



Hi all,

Please join us today, Monday, May 4, 2020 via Zoom at 9am when Dylan
Fitzpatrick will be presenting his thesis proposal.

*Title:* Predicting Health and Safety: Essays in Machine Learning for
Decision Support in the Public Sector

*Thesis committee: *Daniel Neill, Rayid Ghani, Wilpen Gorr, Roni Rosenfeld



*Zoom Link:*

https://cmu.zoom.us/j/95758239810?pwd=RmhFL1hDY3pYUzJTWC9GMzBCdndnUT09

*Meeting ID:* 957 5823 9810
*Password:* 032643

*Abstract:  *Public service agencies are increasingly turning to machine
learning techniques for support in settings where accurate predictions or
characterization of patterns in spatiotemporal data can improve
social conditions. This thesis presents three case studies in which we
propose novel methods to inform operational decisions in the domains of
public health and safety.

First, we present a subset scan approach for detecting localized and
irregularly shaped anomalous patterns in spatial data. The proposed method
iterates between a penalized fast subset scan and a kernel support vector
machine classifier to accurately detect spatial clusters without imposing
hard constraints on the shape or size of the anomalous pattern. We
demonstrate the performance of this approach in simulated experiments and
on the real-world applications of disease outbreak detection, crime
hot-spot detection, and pothole cluster detection.

Second, we leverage prescription drug monitoring data to assess risk of
opioid misuse based on individual-level opioid timelines. We introduce a
shape-based clustering framework to evaluate risk of misuse in new
individuals when patient outcomes are unknown. We also develop a new method
for semi-supervised learning with recurrent generative adversarial
networks, designed to assess risk of opioid misuse in new patients when
labeled instances of unsafe drug use are available but sparse.

Last, we discuss the design, implementation, and evaluation of a
hot-spot-based predictive policing program in Pittsburgh, PA, highlighting
results from a randomized field trial. We find statistically and
practically significant reductions in violent crime counts within treated
hot spots, and find minimal evidence of crime displacement to other areas
resulting from increased patrols to treated areas.



*Link to paper: *
https://www.dropbox.com/s/h6l151fs7k8uzf5/Fitzpatrick_proposal.pdf?dl=0
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: Thesis Proposal - Dylan Fitzpatrick - Today - Monday, May 4 at 9am - via Zoom

[uǝlƃ ☣]

I would hope, in the proposal, something was said about unintended feature 
detection, e.g.
https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/2020/04/how-biased-algorithms-perpetuate-inequality


On 5/4/20 1:19 PM, George Duncan wrote:
> Most appropriate topic 
> 
> 
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: *Michelle E Wirtz*  >
> Date: Mon, May 4, 2020 at 6:29 AM
> Subject: Thesis Proposal - Dylan Fitzpatrick - Today - Monday, May 4 at 9am - 
> via Zoom
> 
> 
> /Friendly reminder – /
> 
> __ __
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Please join us today, Monday, May 4, 2020 via Zoom at 9am when Dylan 
> Fitzpatrick will be presenting his thesis proposal.
> 
> *Title:* Predicting Health and Safety: Essays in Machine Learning for 
> Decision Support in the Public Sector**
> 
> *Thesis committee: *Daniel Neill, Rayid Ghani, Wilpen Gorr, Roni Rosenfeld
> 
> *__ __*
> 
> *Zoom Link:*
> 
> https://cmu.zoom.us/j/95758239810?pwd=RmhFL1hDY3pYUzJTWC9GMzBCdndnUT09
> 
> *Meeting ID:* 957 5823 9810
> *Password:* 032643
> 
> *Abstract:  *Public service agencies are increasingly turning to machine 
> learning techniques for support in settings where accurate predictions or 
> characterization of patterns in spatiotemporal data can improve social 
> conditions. This thesis presents three case studies in which we propose novel 
> methods to inform operational decisions in the domains of public health and 
> safety.
> 
> First, we present a subset scan approach for detecting localized and 
> irregularly shaped anomalous patterns in spatial data. The proposed method 
> iterates between a penalized fast subset scan and a kernel support vector 
> machine classifier to accurately detect spatial clusters without imposing 
> hard constraints on the shape or size of the anomalous pattern. We 
> demonstrate the performance of this approach in simulated experiments and on 
> the real-world applications of disease outbreak detection, crime hot-spot 
> detection, and pothole cluster detection.
> 
> Second, we leverage prescription drug monitoring data to assess risk of 
> opioid misuse based on individual-level opioid timelines. We introduce a 
> shape-based clustering framework to evaluate risk of misuse in new 
> individuals when patient outcomes are unknown. We also develop a new method 
> for semi-supervised learning with recurrent generative adversarial networks, 
> designed to assess risk of opioid misuse in new patients when labeled 
> instances of unsafe drug use are available but sparse. 
> 
> Last, we discuss the design, implementation, and evaluation of a 
> hot-spot-based predictive policing program in Pittsburgh, PA, highlighting 
> results from a randomized field trial. We find statistically and practically 
> significant reductions in violent crime counts within treated hot spots, and 
> find minimal evidence of crime displacement to other areas resulting from 
> increased patrols to treated areas. 
> 
> __ __
> 
> *Link to paper: 
> *https://www.dropbox.com/s/h6l151fs7k8uzf5/Fitzpatrick_proposal.pdf?dl=0


-- 
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] ill-conceived question

[Frank Wimberly]

Dave and Ed

Thanks for making me aware of the options. My plan is to stay in my present
house until the end.  This should be possible if I don't have a contagious
final illness.

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

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Mon, May 4, 2020, 10:26 AM Edward Angel  wrote:

> Most elder facilities do not require the huge buy in. In NM there are a
> large number of smaller facilities that can house up to ten people and are
> much less expensive. There are also larger ones that are pretty good that
> don’t have a buy in and charge less than 6K/month although are still out of
> reach for most New Mexicans.
>
> The largest outbreak in ABQ is at La Vida Llena which has the big buy in
> and high monthly charge. It is generally regarded as the best facility in
> ABQ. It is run as a nonprofit by some the large mainstream churches. I have
> three friends there. The outbreak there that affected over 50 residents and
> staff was in the skilled nursing part of the facility and thus far has not
> affected independent living residents like my friends who are however under
> a pretty strict quarantine. I think the main point here is that wherever
> people put together in a small space there is grave danger.
>
> Ed
> ___
>
> Ed Angel
>
> Founding Director, Art, Research, Technology and Science Laboratory
> (ARTS Lab)
> Professor Emeritus of Computer Science, University of New Mexico
>
> 1017 Sierra Pinon
> Santa Fe, NM 87501
> 505-984-0136 (home)   an...@cs.unm.edu
> 505-453-4944 (cell)  http://www.cs.unm.edu/~angel
>
> On May 4, 2020, at 8:25 AM, Prof David West  wrote:
>
> Frank,
>
> When looking for a facility for my mother, I found a lot of the 200K / 6K
> per month facilities, but more than 3/4 of the facilities that exist are
> subsidized and they simply take between 40 and 80% of the patient's social
> security and retirement income.
>
> I am pretty certain that the ones with intense outbreaks were the latter
> type.
>
> When all the shouting is over and all the data is available, I would bet a
> significant amount of money that the single largest comorbidity factor will
> be poverty / lower economic status.
>
> davew
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020, at 6:12 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>
> Dave
>
> Maybe I lack adequate knowledge of the variety of care centers but the
> ones I know charge something like $200,000 admission and $6000 per month.
> Maybe you mean "somewhat poor OR already warehoused..."
>
> Frank
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020, 5:31 AM Prof David West  wrote:
>
>
> The lesson might be if you are willing to lose the old people who are
> somewhat poor and already warehoused in overcrowded care facilities you
> don't have to lock down.
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2020, at 11:24 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>
> Sounds like the lesson is that if you're willing to lose old people you
> don't have to lock down.  As an old person I have my doubts about that
> approach.  In the last three days one of my highschool classmates died of
> covid related causes and a first cousin died of a heart attack with no
> known covid involvement.
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2020, 10:55 AM Merle Lefkoff 
> wrote:
>
> Nick, the only mainstream news program I watch is Fareed Zakaria on Sunday
> morning.  Below is part of this morning's report.  Not surprisingly (for
> those of us who have had the privilege recently of spending time in
> Sweden), the answer to how it's working, is just about like the countries
> that are locked down, with one exception.  More deaths (mostly among the
> elderly who primarily live together in retirement).
>
> As world governments employ different policies to fight Covid-19, Sweden’s
> relaxed approach stands out: Eschewing lockdowns, the country has left its
> schools, gyms, cafes, bars and restaurants open throughout the spread of
> the pandemic. Fareed interviews the man behind that strategy, *Anders
> Tegnell*, the Swedish government’s top epidemiologist, about how it’s
> working and whether his country can offer any lessons to the rest of the
> world.
>
> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 10:34 AM  wrote:
>
> Colleagues,
>
>
>
> I have asked this question before and nobody has responded (for clear and
> good reasons, no doubt) but I thought I would ask it again.  What exactly
> is this economy we are bent on reviving?  What exactly is the difference in
> human activity between our present state and a revived economy.  We can go
> to bars and concerts and football games?  Is that the economy we are
> reviving?  It seems to me that the difference between a “healty” economy
> and our present status consists possibly in nothing more than a lot of
> people frantically rushing about doing things they don’t really need to do?
>
>
>
>
> You recall that I invoked as a mode

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

[Eric Charles]

Glen,
I'm running out of ideas where to go with this. I believe that I do
understand the so-called "hard problem", but I reject it as based on faulty
premises. Nick has routinely, over the two decades or so that I have known
him, demonstrated a hard-headed inability to hold nimbly and work with
premises that he believes to be deeply faulty. On rare occasions I have
seen him do it, but it is rare, and never with this particular subject
matter. Based on other conversations around similar subject matter, I
suspect that Nick ultimately thinks it is immoral to believe in the hard
problem, and that is part of his inability to hold it nimbly.

At any rate: Nick and I deeply believes that there are no valid questions
about psychology that are not properly understood as empirical questions
about behavior. So either Chalmers has asked an invalid question, or he
doesn't understand his own question's researchable implications. There is
no third option.

William James was the only philosopher on Wittgenstein's book shelf when
the latter died. The former anticipated the latter, and both cut this
challenge off at the pass: Chalmers is talking about something that we can
talk about, or he should be quiet. There is no third option. If it is a
thing we *can *talk about, then we can go about the business of science
with regards to it.

Now, you *do *have an opportunity to use Peirce against us here. When
Peirce got around to categorizing types-of-inquiry / types-of-science, he
divided up what I would call psychology into several different categories,
spread throughout his schema, and I suspect that in doing so he leaves room
for a "hard problem." It is annoying, and I believe it is inconsistent with
the direction he was headed in his earlier philosophical works. My guess is
that he still harbored too strong a loyalty to Kant, and followed Kant in
the long-standing philosophical tradition of frantically throwing
scientific psychology under the nearest bus in an effort to pretend that
certain challenges inherent in all scientific endeavors are solely problems
for psychology. but that is either the heart of the matter or a
complete tangent... and as I can't tell which I'm going to stop for
now.

Does any of that get us anywhere?

Best,
Eric

---
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Department of Justice - Personnel Psychologist
American University - Adjunct Instructor



On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:44 PM uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:

> Hm. I can't quite parse this, but don't want to ignore it.
>
> I'm not convinced that Chalmers' naturalistic dualism is at all different
> from Peirce's real/extant distinction. From that perspective, Chalmers'
> dualism and Nick's monism are irrelevant to whether or not Nick understands
> the hard problem. What one thinks is actually the case can be unrelated to
> one's taxonomy of possible cases. ("There are many like it, but this one is
> mine.")
>
> I can admit, however, that any one formulation of the hard problem may
> *seem* very different from another formulation. But the mere rejection of a
> lexicon (e.g. "Chalmers-esque") is not a rejection of the problem being
> outlined. If category theory has taught us anything, it's that problems can
> seem quite different, but really be about the same thing. The very fact
> that we can have the discussion we're having is an indication that there is
> a "hard problem" and that it can act as a foil for choosing one's rifle.
>
> On 5/2/20 6:12 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> > To paraphrase Nick's answer:
> > Yes, of course we /can /build such a machine, so long as you agree to
> treat "enjoy" and "think" and "feel" in the way that I do, and NOT as
> Chalmers or the other dualists would. My approach does not contain a
> Chalmers-esque hard problem.
>
> --
> ☣ uǝlƃ
>
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC 
> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

[uǝlƃ ☣]

I don't think this gets us anywhere. My claim is that whatever motivates Nick's 
insistence that metaphor is important to thought *is* a member of the class 
represented by the hard problem.  If you *also* insist that metaphor is 
important to thought, yet you reject the hard problem, then I would need, from 
you, some explanation of why we need metaphor.

But I'm also happy to let the thread rest in peace, as Nick and I have come to 
some agreement. We can formulate something very much like the hard problem 
using parallax. And the problem comes down to one of how hard is it, actually 
... and that's a great question.

On 5/4/20 5:20 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
> At any rate: Nick and I deeply believes that there are no valid questions 
> about psychology that are not properly understood as empirical questions 
> about behavior. So either Chalmers has asked an invalid question, or he 
> doesn't understand his own question's researchable implications. There is no 
> third option. 


-- 
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

[Steven A Smith]

I thought this was a support group for recovering (or just
self-indulgent) metaphorists... you mean it's not?   Why do I feel like
I'm in a scene from "Fight Club"?   I guess that would make me more of
an allegorist?

> Is it? You people can't help yourselves. It's compulsive. You might want to 
> get some help for that.
>
> On 5/4/20 10:47 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>> Choosing one's rifle is so concrete.  It makes me want to run out and blow 
>> away a few cacti.  Oh, it's a metaphor!

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Ranked Choice Voting app

[Jon Zingale]

Cody,

I'm inspired to contribute some thoughts to yours.  I feel that
whatever *fix* is imagined for voting, we should be prepared to
adopt it for a long time. The process of testing out new voting
schemes may take a few administrative cycles and may become
vulnerable to manipulation or degradation as the *concrete dries*.
I can see value in putting time limits on the experiment and taking
measures to protect this experiment from tampering by any given
administration. Precedence set by changing something as foundational
as voting demands careful thought. If voting systems be allowed to
change with fashion there will be vulnerabilities introduced, perhaps
similar or worse than the exploitations we are seeing in almost every
other aspect of government. To be fair, the present voting scheme already
appears corrupt or out-of-spec from my point of view. I do think it is our
responsibility to think about this problem.

Secondly, I would like to contribute some thoughts on the topic of
remote voting. Perhaps rather than solving the app based voting
issue perfectly, we could aim at having certainty for validating
votes that is better than already exists. It may be the case that
under a *phone app* voting system, we still end up with voters in
Florida that have been known dead for a decade. If we can assess
what the present error bars are then we can have a goal in mind.

There are certainly many truly good thoughts on cryptography
and as Neal Koblitz has pointed out in a bold non-paper paper
,
one of the functions of the NSA is to act as consultants on cryptographic
practice. For our entertainment, let's imagine a collaboration between the
NSA and some large gaming company, Blizzard perhaps, where the goal is
to develop a *critical application* voting app. While I anticipate
aggressive
objections from some friam readers, there is something worth thinking about.
A friend of mine pointed out that when classic World of Warcraft was
recently
released, Blizzard was prepared to have over 500,000 simultaneous users.
These users are not making 15 one-time choices but rather orders of
magnitude
more choices. These choices are handled fairly consistently, with few
dropped
packets and with little lag (each of which is demanded by the online gaming
community). This suggests to me that there *are *industries, like the
gaming industry,
that have thought very carefully and for a long time about the problems of
large
scale concurrent user bases and verification of its user base. Surely the
tech is
out there, but I am unsure what the next careful steps ought to be.

Cheers,
Jonathan Zingale
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Ranked Choice Voting app

[Steven A Smith]

Cody -
> I think that ranked choice is the best bet to escape from the horrible
> two party system. That being said there is not much insentive for the
> GOP or the DNC to adopt what could be enable competition.  My friend
> Greg once said both parties are basically just advertising firms, and
> I still believe it.

Great line... I have a friend who is loaded with aphorisms he attributed
to his father... a man who *should have been* by some measure a
hard-line Republican who observed:

    "One party wants to take all my money and give it away to other
people...and the other party wants to take and and keep it for themselves"

Who is who is left to the reader.

- Steve



.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Ranked Choice Voting app

[Gary Schiltz]

Whatever voting technology is chosen, it needs to be open source, both
software and hardware.

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:52 PM Jon Zingale  wrote:

> Cody,
>
> I'm inspired to contribute some thoughts to yours.  I feel that
> whatever *fix* is imagined for voting, we should be prepared to
> adopt it for a long time. The process of testing out new voting
> schemes may take a few administrative cycles and may become
> vulnerable to manipulation or degradation as the *concrete dries*.
> I can see value in putting time limits on the experiment and taking
> measures to protect this experiment from tampering by any given
> administration. Precedence set by changing something as foundational
> as voting demands careful thought. If voting systems be allowed to
> change with fashion there will be vulnerabilities introduced, perhaps
> similar or worse than the exploitations we are seeing in almost every
> other aspect of government. To be fair, the present voting scheme already
> appears corrupt or out-of-spec from my point of view. I do think it is our
> responsibility to think about this problem.
>
> Secondly, I would like to contribute some thoughts on the topic of
> remote voting. Perhaps rather than solving the app based voting
> issue perfectly, we could aim at having certainty for validating
> votes that is better than already exists. It may be the case that
> under a *phone app* voting system, we still end up with voters in
> Florida that have been known dead for a decade. If we can assess
> what the present error bars are then we can have a goal in mind.
>
> There are certainly many truly good thoughts on cryptography
> and as Neal Koblitz has pointed out in a bold non-paper paper
> ,
> one of the functions of the NSA is to act as consultants on cryptographic
> practice. For our entertainment, let's imagine a collaboration between the
> NSA and some large gaming company, Blizzard perhaps, where the goal is
> to develop a *critical application* voting app. While I anticipate
> aggressive
> objections from some friam readers, there is something worth thinking
> about.
> A friend of mine pointed out that when classic World of Warcraft was
> recently
> released, Blizzard was prepared to have over 500,000 simultaneous users.
> These users are not making 15 one-time choices but rather orders of
> magnitude
> more choices. These choices are handled fairly consistently, with few
> dropped
> packets and with little lag (each of which is demanded by the online gaming
> community). This suggests to me that there *are *industries, like the
> gaming industry,
> that have thought very carefully and for a long time about the problems of
> large
> scale concurrent user bases and verification of its user base. Surely the
> tech is
> out there, but I am unsure what the next careful steps ought to be.
>
> Cheers,
> Jonathan Zingale
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

[Frank Wimberly]

Maybe I missed something that makes this redundant but if a highschool
student asked me what the *hard problem* is I would say:  There appears to
be no limit to how competent computers can be.  They seem to be able to do
just about anything that people think requires thought.  But I am persuaded
that they can't think.  What makes the difference between thinking people
and hypercompetent computers?

Nick would say if it behaves as if it thinks then it thinks.  I think.

Frank

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 7:50 PM Steven A Smith  wrote:

> I thought this was a support group for recovering (or just
> self-indulgent) metaphorists... you mean it's not?   Why do I feel like
> I'm in a scene from "Fight Club"?   I guess that would make me more of
> an allegorist?
>
> > Is it? You people can't help yourselves. It's compulsive. You might want
> to get some help for that.
> >
> > On 5/4/20 10:47 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> >> Choosing one's rifle is so concrete.  It makes me want to run out and
> blow away a few cacti.  Oh, it's a metaphor!
>
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...
>  . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC 
> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>


-- 
Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

[thompnickson2]

Yup.  That’s what he would say.  What persuades you that a super competent 
computer can’t think?  Can a dog think?  How would a Martian convince you that 
it (he, she) can think?  

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

  thompnicks...@gmail.com

  
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

From: Friam  On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 9:08 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

 

Maybe I missed something that makes this redundant but if a highschool student 
asked me what the hard problem is I would say:  There appears to be no limit to 
how competent computers can be.  They seem to be able to do just about anything 
that people think requires thought.  But I am persuaded that they can't think.  
What makes the difference between thinking people and hypercompetent computers? 

 

Nick would say if it behaves as if it thinks then it thinks.  I think.

 

Frank

 

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 7:50 PM Steven A Smith mailto:sasm...@swcp.com> > wrote:

I thought this was a support group for recovering (or just
self-indulgent) metaphorists... you mean it's not?   Why do I feel like
I'm in a scene from "Fight Club"?   I guess that would make me more of
an allegorist?

> Is it? You people can't help yourselves. It's compulsive. You might want to 
> get some help for that.
>
> On 5/4/20 10:47 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>> Choosing one's rifle is so concrete.  It makes me want to run out and blow 
>> away a few cacti.  Oh, it's a metaphor!

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
 
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ 
 
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 




 

-- 

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

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...  
. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/