Re: [FRIAM] Hope?

[Steven A Smith]

no shit sherlock!


what a great phrase in an auspicious time?

On 10/3/16 5:29 PM, glen ☣ wrote:

I liked the point as made by this post:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/09/28/debate-nights-biggest-lie-was-told-by-lester-holt/ 



But even if we admit that the only purpose for the peripheral 
candidates is to influence the actual candidates, we still have an 
argument for allowing them to debate.  So, the answer to the question 
of why they're not in the debate really is because it's _bipartisan_ 
not nonpartisan.  It's just another example of how the expressivity of 
your language biases what you do/can understand.


On 10/03/2016 04:21 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:

Gary Johnson is not plausible.  Didn't 538 say his odds were 2 in 100?

On Oct 3, 2016 5:05 PM, "Robert Wall"  wrote:



This simulation ensemble conducted by *FiveThirtyEight *gives some
plausibility to New Mexico becoming the new Florida with Gary 
Johnson--not
Jill Stein--playing the part of Ralph Nader.  It also gives some 
non-zero
plausibility to Gary Johnson becoming the next POTUS.  So why isn't 
Johnson
in the debates?  Isn't plausibility the real criterion?  We need to 
find

out more about this potential next POTUS.  Yes? 🤔😁








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] Hope?

[Steven A Smith]

Glen -

I love the deep ambiguity and late binding of what you just said here!

- Steve


On 10/3/16 1:23 PM, glen ☣ wrote:
I just optimized our code so that drug moving from the heterogeneous 
lobule into the well-mixed body compartment are converted from objects 
to integer counts.  That cut execution time by several orders of 
magnitude... but each experiment still takes ~10-12 hours. 




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] Wisdom of Crowds vs Kenneth Arrow

[Steven A Smith]

Glen -



I understand that... though it IS my habit to acknowledge the things I agree on 
to more starkly expose the ones I don't (or at least I try to do that).

With a happy side-effect that more people will like you as a result.  One day, 
I'll wish I had spent more effort with the soft styles.  I know they're more 
effective.
This is an interesting discursion.  I am not sure that soft-styles lead 
more people to like you, but I do think it raises the threshold to 
knee-jerk *dislike*.  A lot of my friends in this world do NOT have 
soft-styles and they have plenty of friends/admirers/sycophants... self 
included, BUT they *RARELY* can stand one another... harsh meets harsh 
and one or both kneejerk response triggers the other kneejerk and well, 
you know the rest!

Enough With This Basic Income Bullshit
https://salon.thefamily.co/enough-with-this-basic-income-bullshit-a6bc92e8286b#.1xcadg3vf

I'm reading it now, though the rich hyperlinking to interesting side topics and references is 
causing some intellectual ablation!   I've come to recognize something like a "0th world 
problem" which are issues that are even more abstract and relatively empty than "1st 
world problems"...   That is what I'd call my experience with this rich offering you made.  
thefamily.co is all new to me BTW... thanks for that too!

I agree.  But what is the oligarchist supposed to do?  We can't leave all that 
abstract sophistry to the peasants.  They'd thoroughly mess it up. >8^)  
Seriously, though, whoever sees the problem is responsible for solving the 
problem.  So, 0th world problems must be solved by those who see them.
I don't need to solve 0th world problems, just recognize them like an 
impressive wave and catch it just right to surf it all the way in to the 
beach...



   But it's also dangerous to argue that some event/process would have happened 
regardless.  That's a typical flaw of my libertarian friends who'll claim that advances 
like artificial hearts or whatnot, despite being government funded, would have emerged 
even without government funding.  Criticalities (like "great people") probably 
do play some/much role in some/many cases.  I'm simply skeptical that we can tease out 
which cases.

I think this is an acute example of the things dual/hybrid models which include both 
discrete (particle, agent, etc) and continuous (field, patch, etc.).  I am hypothesizing 
that the individual (great person) does less in their direct role, exercising their 
personal/professional agency than they do by setting a tone, representing an ideal... and 
that doesn't just include their sycophantic followers, it includes their vitriolic 
opponents as well... those who "rise up against".  I think a good deal of our 
gridlock in the government was a reaction to Obama both as a black man and as a 
(presumed) liberal, more than anything he specifically did or did not do.

Damnit, I agree again. [sigh]  But I can disagree obliquely by carrying it 
further.  The individual is merely a phenomenon (well, set of phenomena), an 
effect of the underlying cause(s).  In that sense, we can toss out free will 
entirely and say that the individual (great or not) does no tone setting (or 
anything else) in any generative sense.  They are simply 1 observable feature 
of the great machine.  And the only reason we perceive that feature as somehow 
distinguishable from the rest is because of our limited powers of perception.

Well, that is one perspective...


Hence, Obama did nothing, at least nothing whose sole cause resides within him 
... just as neither you nor I ever do anything.  It's (we're) all just patterns 
in the ambience.
Well... yes...  on a good (or bad) day I can imagine this, right up with 
six-impossible-things before breakfast with a double helping of solopsism...

What is more puzzling to me is why/how "we the people" can continue to *pretend* we are 
unhappy with the status quo while all but *citing* the status quo as the motivation for our 
behaviour?  "I HATE our polarized two party system but I won't even LOOK at the third parties 
because THEY are not viable in our current context!"  What?  How will they ever BECOME viable 
if you won't give them any consideration?   For me, this moment of clear and extreme disaffection 
with the party in the first part and the party in the second part, is the perfect opportunity to 
make some inroads into the very change we *claim* we want.  Oh well.

But this is the same feature that allows us to think up new ideas, invent new machines, 
tell stories of unicorns and fairies with a straight face.  This is why everyone knows 
too much sugar is bad, but insists on its presence in every food anyway.  Our drive to 
have our cake and eat it, too, is what propels us to greater and greater heights.  
When/if we admit the game is zero-sum, we either give up or become ruthless sociopaths.  
I like Walt Whitman's aphorism the best: "I am large. I contain multitudes."
I *hate* to admit that you 

Re: [FRIAM] speaking of analytics

[Steven A Smith]

N -

I read this as "Glen being Glen" which I approve of...

... that doesn't mean you don't get credit for inflicting your own inner 
vocabulary (or simply the lexicon of your profession?) on us...


Some of us appreciate what might otherwise seem idiosyncratic.

I had to parse this one very carefully and seek references (especially 
for the /tu quoque /) but that is (to use a golf metaphor of all damned 
things) /par for the course/!



- S


PS.. I had three ravens fledge in the cottonwood by my house this summer 
and I thought of you!



On 9/9/16 8:18 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:


Glen,

You wrote:

*There's no doubt that any form of inference done by humans is subject 
to premature registration or even apophenia.  But the inverted claim, 
that _all_ registration is premature (or imaginary) is way too strong, 
and perhaps a case of tu quoque.*


Narcissist that I am, I assume you are punishing me for all the weird 
language I have inflicted on the list over the last 12 years.   I 
humbly acknowledge the punishment.


Now:  Could you explain what you meant? (};-)]

Thanks,

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: Friday, September 09, 2016 2:51 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] speaking of analytics

There's no doubt that any form of inference done by humans is subject 
to premature registration or even apophenia.  But the inverted claim, 
that _all_ registration is premature (or imaginary) is way too strong, 
and perhaps a case of tu quoque.


On 09/09/2016 11:42 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:

> Fine, “statistical inference” then.

>

> *From:*Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Nick

> Thompson

> *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2016 12:38 PM

> *To:* 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'

> mailto:friam@redfish.com>>

> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] speaking of analytics

>

> And data “mining” is a metaphor.

>

> Now people claim to use metaphors “metaphorically”, by which they 
mean that they mean nothing by them.  But it is my “teery”* (and it is 
all mine) that nobody uses a metaphor but that hizr thinking is 
influenced by it. The influence can be inexplicit, in which case the 
user is blind to its effects on himmr, or explicit, in which case the 
user’s imagination is enhanced by its use and less likely to be misled 
by its misuse.   I would like to explore this “teery” using “Data 
Mining” as an example.  How does thinking of data as encased in a 
non-dynamic subterranean matrix shape our (your) thinking for good or 
ill?


--

␦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



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] Wisdom of Crowds vs Kenneth Arrow

[Steven A Smith]

glen -


As usual, I ignore all the places where we agree and emphasize the 
disagreements ... because life is more fun that way. 8^)
I understand that... though it IS my habit to acknowledge the things I 
agree on to more starkly expose the ones I don't (or at least I try to 
do that).


I'm not sure when it happened.  But at some point I began to buy the 
idea that politics is deeply embedded in everything.  I think it 
started when I moved to the bay area and heard people (constantly) say 
things like "that's just politics" ... implying that whatever they 
were talking about was somehow not politics.
This is very much the Glen I know... a particular subdiscipline of 
contrarianism?

This article reinforced my position just this morning:

Enough With This Basic Income Bullshit
https://salon.thefamily.co/enough-with-this-basic-income-bullshit-a6bc92e8286b#.1xcadg3vf 

I'm reading it now, though the rich hyperlinking to interesting side 
topics and references is causing some intellectual ablation!   I've come 
to recognize something like a "0th world problem" which are issues that 
are even more abstract and relatively empty than "1st world 
problems"...   That is what I'd call my experience with this rich 
offering you made.  thefamily.co is all new to me BTW... thanks for that 
too!


As a result, I began following all the politics I could stomach as 
closely as my [in]competence would allow.


Though I think gay (LGBTQZedOmega) and reproduction rights would have 
been retarded and a few (other) conservative Xtian rights would have 
been advanced differently but...


Maybe.  I resist our "great person" 
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man_theory) tendencies wherever I 
find them, though.  It's reasonable to speculate that Obama had much 
less to do with those advances than we might think.
I agree with dismissing the GPT in first order effects, but I think 
there are many second order effects which are much more significant.  
Sure jOeBama couldn't pull us out of Iraq/Afghanistan or shutter Gitmo 
or ... and ... the way we thought he would/could/should...  and we can 
postulate reasons and excuses until the cows come home for that.   My 
point about the things that *were* achieved under his watch and the 
*different* ones to have likely been achieved under a 
Wealthy/Conservative/Mormon Romney relates to the spirit of the 
community.  An unfortunate example might be the current focus on police 
abuse, particularly in urban african-american communities.   I think the 
minimal empowerment of having our first black president may have lead 
both to the popular pushback against the abuses and possibly even 
generated more abuses?   Under our first female president, I think we 
will likely see some significant shifts in gender issues, not 
necessarily because Hillary is a "Great Woman" who would single handedly 
"lead us forward", but just because of the social tenor set by her rise 
to the top of our political game.
  But it's also dangerous to argue that some event/process would have 
happened regardless.  That's a typical flaw of my libertarian friends 
who'll claim that advances like artificial hearts or whatnot, despite 
being government funded, would have emerged even without government 
funding.  Criticalities (like "great people") probably do play 
some/much role in some/many cases.  I'm simply skeptical that we can 
tease out which cases.
I think this is an acute example of the things dual/hybrid models which 
include both discrete (particle, agent, etc) and continuous (field, 
patch, etc.).  I am hypothesizing that the individual (great person) 
does less in their direct role, exercising their personal/professional 
agency than they do by setting a tone, representing an ideal... and that 
doesn't just include their sycophantic followers, it includes their 
vitriolic opponents as well... those who "rise up against".  I think a 
good deal of our gridlock in the government was a reaction to Obama both 
as a black man and as a (presumed) liberal, more than anything he 
specifically did or did not do.



In short, this game has absolutely nothing to do with the
idealistic system(s) framing Arrow's or Condorcet's propositions.  And
that may partially explain why markets would be more robust predictors.


Excepting, I would contend that "this game" is *shaped* by the lack 
of viable paths to successful 3rd party intrusions INTO the game.


Well, good games, games that I find _fun_, anyway, are always 
co-evolutionary with implicit objective functions.  Boring games are 
those with unambiguous rules, zero-sum outcomes, etc.  Were I to run 
for a large office (or participate on the campaign of someone 
running), I'd regard the viable paths as part of the game, not 
isolable merely as the context of the game.
I am not arguing against the strategies of the two major parties or 
their candidates.  I understand why they want to keep the game defined 
for their own purposes.  I also understand why the wannabe

Re: [FRIAM] Wisdom of Crowds vs Kenneth Arrow

[Steven A Smith]

Glen -



I've found this graph the most interesting rendering of the electoral game:

   
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html#explore-paths
Interesting fault tree (I wanted to say dendogram, but I'm not sure it 
has all of the properties necessary.


I may just print this out and paste it on the wall for my election night 
fun (I rarely actually hang by the media outlet waiting for these 
things).   I wish they had included Jill and Gary, though their chances 
of winning *any* much less many states is vanishingly small.  But so 
seems a *tie* in these scenarios.  As much as I want to see theDonald 
handed his lunch, I want it to be handed to him by *other* iconoclasts, 
not by theHillary.   I have given over to planning my life in the second 
Clinton Dynasty and have less of an impulse to bolt for one border or 
another (or into one of my self created boltholes (of the mind or the 
world)), but that doesn't mean I don't want to see the most 
entertainment or hard-knocks education wrung out of the process of 
arriving there as possible.

I grew up (and still hear repeated to kids) "you can be anything you want to be".  It seems clear 
that any "outsider" has a steep learning curve w.r.t. the complex game of getting elected.  One 
could (I won't) argue that Trump would be a good candidate to game this system, given that he seems to have 
spent his entire life gaming other systems to benefit his brand.  But I suspect the game is too complex.  
He's done a great job garnering popular support in our TV-nation.  And, at this point, I'm grateful for the 
electoral college.  It pits my naive sense of majority rule against my naive sense of an intellectual 
oligarchy (or perhaps a "gamers oligarchy" -- ruled by the lawyerly -- lawyerish? -- class).

Well said.


I voted for Stein in 2012 because I didn't see all that much consequential 
difference between Obama and Romney and it seemed clear Obama would win, anyway.
In retrospect, I accept your logic.   Though I think gay (LGBTQZedOmega) 
and reproduction rights would have been retarded and a few (other) 
conservative Xtian rights would have been advanced differently but...

In the end, by failing to exercise the Republican machine (at least in any 
whole sense), Trump_is_
  helping to open the door for 3rd parties by letting the R-machine
atrophy.  But such a 3rd partier will have to avoid gaffs like
#whatisaleppo and disinfo memes like Stein's wifi, gmo, and
vaccination.
Johnson's Aleppo gaffe (could easily have been a Trumpism) definitely 
shows his lack of experience/preparation on foreign policy...  Jill and 
Ajamu were not very presidential out there with rattlecans writing on 
bulldozers  which showed me that they have (mostly?) given over to using 
the presidential race as a forum to promote their more active(ist) 
ideals.  I don't fault them for it, but it makes it harder to choose 
them as president/vice

In short, this game has absolutely nothing to do with the
idealistic system(s) framing Arrow's or Condorcet's propositions.  And
that may partially explain why markets would be more robust predictors.
Excepting, I would contend that "this game" is *shaped* by the lack of 
viable paths to successful 3rd party intrusions INTO the game.

   So, this election, I decided to check out Stein for real, to see if I could 
really vote for her, regardless of the consequences.  I went to a local meeting 
of Stein supporters and was presented with (albeit trivial, partial) evidence 
why her campaign is such a failure.  These people were flat out timid.  Their 
only strength lies in their willingness to take abuse by police and private 
security.  This perception was reinforced by this article:

   
http://www.newsweek.com/russian-green-activists-brand-us-green-party-accomplice-putin-496359?rx=us

When I compare Stein's positions on several things against the caricatures of her 
opinions made by others, I like a lot of what she says.  Her positions are 
"nuanced".  But you can't win the game solely with nuance, timidity, and facts 
any more than you can (like Trump) solely with bluster and posturing.  It requires a 
_machine_.  And Clinton seems to have such a machine.  Trump does, too, a bit Rube 
Goldberg, whereas Clinton's shows evidence of serious engineering (... though that's an 
insult to Rube Goldberg).
This is my own fundamental point, no matter how poorly made.   I'm 
looking for the mechanical changes that might be made in our system to 
*allow* third parties to be relevant.  There is a chicken and egg.  For 
all the things I like about both Jill and Gary, they are not as serious 
of candidates as I think we need in third parties. As long as third 
parties are a priori non-viable at this level, we will not see anyone 
*build* a machine and put a seasoned driver at it's helm... and of 
course, the argument many make against supporting third parties 
*because* they are not viable, or that their chosen representati

Re: [FRIAM] Wisdom of Crowds vs Kenneth Arrow

[Steven A Smith]

On 9/7/16 1:51 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:


I just returned from a trip from the UK.  I think rumors of the demise 
of their economy have been greatly exaggerated.


Brexit will hurt the people that voted for it, just like Trump would 
hurt the people that voted for him.These aren’t the people that 
keep things running; they are the rear guard for a retreat from 
globalization that won’t work and can’t happen.   Sure, Brexit will be 
an administrative nightmare, but decentralized control also has 
benefits in the long run.


I heard an interesting analysis from another LANL friend who works in 
Global Security and by my measure is a pretty well informed and deeply 
introspective wonk on the topics of international politics and it's 
practical upshot.


He also recently returned from the UK (pleasure not business) and said 
something that matches my own experience, such as it is.  He said that 
he predicts that in spite of the vote, by the time the 2 years are up 
for exercising the actual Brexit, there will not turn out to be enough 
will of the people (or bureaucrats) to actually effect it and at that 
time, it will time out and they will not have actually Brexited, as it 
were... and business will return to "normal".  I am probably hacking 
this badly, but that is how I understood what he said.


I have two young colleaugues who live in the UK (many of you know them) 
who essentially entered their careers under the (new then) EU and it 
hugely shaped them personally and professionally.   Much of who they 
have become and what they do would have been radically different if not 
for the EU and Britain's involvement.   There are huge implications for 
both of them (they work all over the EU together as freelancers 
currently, but live primarily in Wales). One will have to leave the UK 
and the other won't be (openly) welcome in the EU.  They will probably 
survive, find  a way to make it around the system as it evolves.  I hope 
for them that the above scenario is a likely one (a miscarriage of the 
Brexit in 2 years).


*From:*Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Owen 
Densmore

*Sent:* Wednesday, September 07, 2016 9:10 AM
*To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 


*Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Wisdom of Crowds vs Kenneth Arrow

Slightly OT, but: The Brexit signaled the start of truly unexpected 
events. Italy, btw, is also having a referendum.


But here's the Dallas News endorsing Hilary .. first dem endorsment in 
over 70 years!


http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20160907-we-recommend-hillary-clinton-for-u.s.-president.ece

l guess these are the years of Expect the Unexpected!

 -- Owen

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 8:39 AM, Steven A Smith <mailto:sasm...@swcp.com>> wrote:


I know we try to avoid getting into political discussions here,
and that is not what I'm trying t draw you into.  Out of my
infamous morbid fascination, I *have* been following the
presidential campaigns this past year or more and in particular
comparing the many running *polls* to the *Iowa Electronic Markets*


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

https://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/

It is most interesting to me how much the WTA vs the popular vote
prices in the IEM diverge.  It definitely supports MY (reluctant)
preferences in this context, but it IS disturbing in a democracy
that the representative factor (electoral college in this case)
seems to either magnify a small lead, or even perhaps bias it?

The polls seem to be somewhat "all over the place" which I suspect
reflects the methodology for sampling the population in each
case.   Perhaps someone here has some professional experience with
polling methodologies or theory can illuminate a little?

This has impact on the debates.  At this point, it looks like the
Libs and the Greens will be shut out of the upcoming debates, in
spite of the likely absurdity of a Trump/Clinton debate, given
their personal styles and stances.  3rd party debaters would
surely add some signal to what is likely to be nearly purely noise
otherwise?

As a side note, I am disappointed with how little traction either
Gary or Jill are getting this time around.  As UNpopular as both
of the primary candidates are, and as relatively acceptable (both
Jill and Gary seem to have serious intentions, serious campaigns
and serious platforms) candidates are, why don't we see
higher/growing polling numbers?  Is it the ominosity of the
elections themselves?  Everyone is afraid of creating a "spoiler"?

This re-invigorates my interest in Ranked Voting Systems.  Do we
have any Psephologists (pebble counters) in the house with insight
into Ranked Voting Systems?

http://www.fairvote.org/ seems to b

[FRIAM] Wisdom of Crowds vs Kenneth Arrow

[Steven A Smith]

I know we try to avoid getting into political discussions here, and that 
is not what I'm trying t draw you into.  Out of my infamous morbid 
fascination, I *have* been following the presidential campaigns this 
past year or more and in particular comparing the many running *polls* 
to the *Iowa Electronic Markets*


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

https://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/

It is most interesting to me how much the WTA vs the popular vote prices 
in the IEM diverge.  It definitely supports MY (reluctant) preferences 
in this context, but it IS disturbing in a democracy that the 
representative factor (electoral college in this case) seems to either 
magnify a small lead, or even perhaps bias it?


The polls seem to be somewhat "all over the place" which I suspect 
reflects the methodology for sampling the population in each case.   
Perhaps someone here has some professional experience with polling 
methodologies or theory can illuminate a little?


This has impact on the debates.  At this point, it looks like the Libs 
and the Greens will be shut out of the upcoming debates, in spite of the 
likely absurdity of a Trump/Clinton debate, given their personal styles 
and stances.  3rd party debaters would surely add some signal to what is 
likely to be nearly purely noise otherwise?


As a side note, I am disappointed with how little traction either Gary 
or Jill are getting this time around.  As UNpopular as both of the 
primary candidates are, and as relatively acceptable (both Jill and Gary 
seem to have serious intentions, serious campaigns and serious 
platforms) candidates are, why don't we see higher/growing polling 
numbers?  Is it the ominosity of the elections themselves?  Everyone is 
afraid of creating a "spoiler"?


This re-invigorates my interest in Ranked Voting Systems.  Do we have 
any Psephologists (pebble counters) in the house with insight into 
Ranked Voting Systems?


http://www.fairvote.org/ seems to be the main organization promoting RVS 
at the national level but I don't see a roadmap of what it would take to 
actually change our system to embrace this?






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] Court: Judges Can Consider Predictive Algorithms in Sentencing

[Steven A Smith]

Interesting development!  Slippery slope at the very least.

Seems like this is square between "profiling" and that  PK Dick story 
"Minority Report"



On 8/26/16 5:24 PM, Pamela McCorduck wrote:

So agree. We are *so* far from certain on this one.


On Aug 26, 2016, at 5:11 PM, Tom Johnson > wrote:


I think we should proceed with great caution on this one.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2016/07/13/court-judges-can-consider-predictive-algorithms-in-sentencing/ 



TJ
 




Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h)
Society of Professional Journalists  - Region 9 
 Director
*Check out It's The People's Data 
*
http://www.jtjohnson.com  
t...@jtjohnson.com 



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com





FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Re: [FRIAM] Seagate has a 60TB solid state drive now | TechCrunch

[Steven A Smith]

brings back memories from when I had the pleasure of hearing Feynman's 
"Plenty of Room at the Bottom" talk at LANL... 1983 I think... turned us 
on to Drexler's work before it was published as "Engines of Creation".


We DO live in interesting times!



On 8/13/16 4:26 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:


The `first’ bottom in sight..

http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nnano.2016.131.html

*From:*Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Tom Johnson
*Sent:* Saturday, August 13, 2016 4:23 PM
*Subject:* [FRIAM] Seagate has a 60TB solid state drive now | TechCrunch

Where is/are the limits?

https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/10/seagate/?ncid=rss&cps=gravity_1462_-8582012582464718654




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] Narcissism and Mass Shootings

[Steven A Smith]

   /... //Must be terrifying to someone like Putin.   Almost feel sorry
   for him.  Merkel and Clinton to telling him what to do all the time.
   //J/

   /Marcus/

If only we could get Stephen Colbert and Tina Fey on the ballot... and 
into the oval office... sure we'd have to fill the coveted Late Show 
slot, but then I think they would take most of the Republican Votes and 
all of the Democrat votes and a lot of the independents for a total 
landslide.


Fey could seduce Putin while in Palin drag, thus nullifying him... keep 
him busy flying around Eastern Russia hunting Siberian Wolves from a 
Soviet era gunship (take out entire packs with a single strafing run).


We'd *still* be the laughing stock of the world, but at least they would 
be laughing *with* us, not (just) *at* us!



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] Narcissism and Mass Shootings

[Steven A Smith]

Damn Nick!

That is one enormously disarming and persuasive argument!  Good luck 
with your distraction... I have a small clutch of freshly fledged Ravens 
in my trees acting up right about now... they made me think of you (and 
your interests, not your nature)!


Most if not all of you will be relieved that I just composed and deleted 
(relieved at the last part) a longwinded response to Marcus' original 
contribution.


The only thing I was motivated to rescue from that diatribe is the 
following tangent off of Marcus' own tangent:



Marcus.. who is looking forward to an introverted president and not a 
narcissist.   They are not the same thing.
I hope you aren't planning on holding your breath on this one? Neither 
of the Duopoly candidates comes close on either count as far as I can 
tell.   I give both Gary and Jill lower points on the narcissist scale 
than the first two, but that may only be because they haven't had the 
microphone or the limelight for long enough yet?   Are any of them 
introverted?   It has been suggested that Nixon and Coolidge were the 
only card carrying introverts with Jefferson and Madison being 
functionally introverted because of there extreme scholarly nature.   
Adams (senior, not JQ) also gets a nod.   The rest are pretty likely not 
particularly introverted.   It doesn't seem to fit the nature of 
becoming a candidate for and then securing the office?


Pew did their own study of the level of Narcissism in the Oval Office:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/11/14/the-most-narcissistic-u-s-presidents/

suggesting that US presidents were more narcissistic than the average 
American.  Guess where some of your favorite love-to-hate and 
love-to-love figures land on that scale?


I appreciate your distinction between Introvert and Narcissist.
In an article from Psychology Today, it is pointed out that not all 
introverts are narcissists, but when they are:


// they/"may have a way of influencing others around them to feel 
off-balance and/or insecure."
/ 
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/communication-success/201601/7-signs-covert-introvert-narcissist


Steve


On 8/1/16 4:08 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

Dear Friammers,

As often happens, this list again  throws up an interesting thread just when I 
am trying to concentrate on something else, and so cannot properly  
participate.  This thread is about communication, which I spent my career 
studying, and communication in writing, in particular, which I spent my career 
doing.  It raises for me the fascinating question about the force of talking 
about the self as a way of communicating universal understanding.  This 
technique is the hall mark of the E.B. White essay, which often begins with 
some scene observed from a sharply personal point of view, but reaches out 
rapidly to the [hypothetical] reader's experience.  The writer of an E.B.White 
essay always skates on the edge of narcissism because s/he assumes that his own 
experience is the same as that of everybody else. That error, the egocentric 
fallacy, is the deep core of narcissism.  And yet, when done well, such essays 
can be enormously disarming and persuasive.

I cannot say more at the moment, but do want to thank you for airing this, and 
hope you continue.

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 Marcus Daniels
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2016 4:29 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Narcissism and Mass Shootings

I don't think a reader should be forced to choose between (1) or (2), but I 
would prefer that the writer be aware enough to refer to context rather than 
restating it as if it were their invention.   How is this agent different than 
the environment which the reader is already equipped to assess?The 
pseudo-profound bullshit is debatable, but reasonable people know it is.  It's 
just a placeholder (in spite of the Portlandians) to get on to more interesting 
unique details -- the stuff not in the compression dictionaries that represent 
the prevailing culture.

-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2016 2:00 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Narcissism and Mass Shootings


Well, sure, competence in communication involves both abilities: 1) to compress/abstract 
out detail so as to state your point clearly and 2) to place such a point inside a use 
case, a narrative.  And although I think of abstraction as one of my skills (at least I 
tend to do it all the time, perhaps badly), I'm wary of the inscribed _bias_ that comes 
with pre-[compressed|abstracted] morals-of-the-story.  This is, I think, why that paper 
on "pseudo-profound bullshit" was interesting.  Any compression of some

Re: [FRIAM] Narcissism and Mass Shootings

[Steven A Smith]

Gil -

I second Glen's statement here.  I personally value the fact that I know 
many people from many walks of life with many modes of apprehending and 
being in the world.  This FriAM/WedTech Crowd is an important part of 
that (even though I rarely make a showing at either table in person).


For the most part, this group are comfortably in the "middle class" 
spectrum, though I know that not to be the exclusive case.   We are a 
much more eclectic group intellectually and culturally.


If I understand Glen's intention correctly, I believe that the isolation 
that comes with many aspects of modern society does feed into what the 
original post referenced as pathological narcissism.   Your own 
testimony of how being marginalized by a system and culture is very 
frustrating and only adds to the challenges you might already be 
struggling with.


I do think that those who "snap" such as the various snipers, mass 
shooters, etc. feel marginalized themselves, but among the anecdotal 
examples I know of the individuals involved, their marginalization is of 
a qualitatively different kind than that of the masses (think of the 
"Black Lives Matter" or even "Occupy" movements)...  I may be wrong but 
these individuals appear to be coming from relatively privileged 
positions... they probably didn't buy those guns and that ammo on their 
EBT cards, for example.   I think they often bought it with their 
allowances given them by mommies and daddies too busy to raise their 
children properly???


In any case, I agree with the arc of this thread, including I think your 
own testimony, that anything we can do to help reduce the 
marginalization (of all kinds) and help people avoid falling into 
various kinds of withdrawal (including the pathological narcissism 
called out by Joachin's post) will help to make the world better place 
for all.



- Steve



On 8/1/16 9:48 AM, glen ☢ wrote:

Thanks for sharing more of your story!  I believe it's our duty to share 
stories, the more personal the better.  It's how we understand our and others' 
place in the world.  Too many people are too terse and present context-less 
thoughts.  It's possible that part of the steady increase in the narcissistic 
personality index has more to do with the ease with which we can isolate 
ourselves due to modern tech.  I appreciate tools like Twitter (and [sigh] 
Facebook), streaming music, headphones, internet news, etc.  But such things 
limit our ability to tell interesting stories to one another.  This episode of 
Portlandia demonstrates this nicely:

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JLWQEuz2gA

Being on the periphery of academia much of my professional life, I run across a 
lot of people who are much more willing to talk about Other People's Ideas 
(akin to Other People's Money) than they are to talk about their own ideas.  
I've always fought this.  Yeah, read, read, read, read, read... Sure, pay 
attention to the world.  Of course, give proper credit when you can.  But for 
Yog's sake, tell the story in your own words.  Your experience is worth the 
time and effort it takes to tell it _and_ listen to it.

Anyway, thanks.

On 08/01/2016 08:23 AM, Gillian Densmore wrote:

Hmmm well I apear to be the groups simple-person-type.
Sure having some guesses as to why people are frankly snapping could be handy.

I suspect as a simple-ol'fation kind of Countery-Bumpkinish type. These people 
had some frustrations that didn't get met. It possibly sat in there head while 
doing day to day routines and they just wanted (ThisThingHere).

I think the other StarShip in the room is that America is doing a realy bad job 
of admitting that people want a rich, fun and fulling life. That we are meant 
to do things as a group and team for the most part.
That's totally cool

What is not so cool is ignoring people offering or needing ThingHere. Or just 
being Aholes. That'll get people to snap. Seems like that's happening. I hope 
things improve and hold out some hope they can and will.

I face this day to day I am on benifits. I get told quite a bit that  'your a 
freeloader ' or 'No (we the powers that be don't think) you deserve better 
benefits..'  And none of them has had to live on about 70-80USD a week. That 
kind of stress day in day out has a nasty way if instilling an eneromous 
physical and mental drain  no man woman or child should ever deel with.  It can 
 and will eat at you if you are not careful.

Hell I'm even seeing some of the physical issues to that myself. Enormous 
weight issues. Chronic discomforts. Migraines. Eetc.

A Normal healthy systems would never do that to anyone.

Then in my case there's the mentall tolls to: Self dbout, depression, anxiety,  
mental energy, Staying clear and postive about wanting to be  back to the 
happy-go-lucky me, and in my case seriusly considering moving to either a new 
state possibly countery.

People snapping meens the group didn't keep it's promise.

So they then snapped. We can guess what went 

Re: [FRIAM] Can THIS guy be coach or something

[Steven A Smith]

The problem with the piece is that it's treats Trump and Clinton as 
equally bad. That's false symmetry.

Au contraire!

There is an *implication* of that, but in fact, the rhetoric used is all 
spot on...  it is a piece NOT about the candidates, but about the voters 
reaction to them.   I didn't cross check his stats saying 52% of 
Trumpsters were voting against HIllary and 56% of HIllary's voting 
against the Donald, but it IS conceivable if the poll were worded just 
right to get those numbers.


Is it too late for Stephen Colbert to name Tina Fey as a running mate 
and get on the Independent ticket?  I believe that even the hard-core 
bigots voting for Trump would go for Colbert, mistaking him for his 
character Colbert who is the cousin of this new Colbert (and Tina Fey 
for Sarah "I can see Russia" Palin)...   And most, if not all of the 
Democrats would realize the joke of it all and pile on just for the fun 
of it.   Of course die hard HIllary fans would still vote for her, you 
have to admire their loyalty.


Colbert and Fey would probably take JIll Stein, Bernie Sanders and 
Elizabeth Warren on as inner circle advisors (for all that hard stuff he 
isn't actually a lot more prepared for than Drumpf)... They might even 
pull in Al Franken for comic relief.Tina could probably get Putin 
wrapped around her finger with a good flirt (in Palin persona of course)...


So then, even if we were the laughing stock of the world, at least it 
would be with intention, and we probably wouldn't start WWIII over a 
pissing contest!


Instead, I'm pretty confident Hillary will prevail and while she won't 
crash the country at first opportunity, but we will have missed a chance 
at seriously changing the way our elections (and presidential tenures) 
play out...


- Steve

*/Colbert/Fey 2016!/*


On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 3:39 PM Gillian Densmore 
mailto:gil.densm...@gmail.com>> wrote:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvkFkzpVYJ4

And I think ThatOtherSkunk would be amused. In mathyspeak and
Colberet I think is a man after Pa's heart (and eyes and ears)
X=Clinton
Y=Drumpf(As in WhyDidHeGetThere)

So then NP= X- Y but when X+Y=NP*(SigheWhereScrewed)  that's
basically time to move to Canada, or England Or


There's also a movement affoot: Don'TVoteAtAll. and WriteInDrax
 (From GuardiansOfTheGalaxy)

Anyway Great segment Hope you All enJoy

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com




FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Re: [FRIAM] weird malware

[Steven A Smith]

Frankly I can't wait until our systems all are as fluxed with 
symbiotic-ware (what is the benign form of malware) as our own personal 
biomes...   maybe we are already on our way down that road?


Does anyone track Stephanie Forrest's computer immune systems?

I'm betting  we have some evolutionary biologists here as well?

On 7/28/16 5:15 PM, glen ☣ wrote:


If you search on ninus.ocn.ne.jp, you get lots of spam warnings. If 
coerced, I'd guess that you have a program on your machine or in your 
network that's trying to send out those spam emails. Perhaps you're 
part of a botnet?


On 07/28/2016 03:54 PM, Russell Standish wrote:

One for the technorati:

For the past few months I've been seeing the following message appear
in my logs fairly frequently:

Jul 29 08:45:54 SamsungBlue postfix/smtpd[28632]: warning: Illegal 
address syntax from localhost[::1] in MAIL command: 

Jul 29 08:45:54 SamsungBlue postfix/smtpd[28632]: warning: Illegal 
address syntax from localhost[::1] in MAIL command: 



What is is saying is that something on my localhost (a laptop) is
attempting to send email to an invalid email address, the rather
bizarre globe.ocn.ne.jp="bello."@hpcoders.com.au

I'm guessing this is some sort of attempted mail relay, but I can't
see a rogue process on the system, and the SMTP port is blocked
externally, so its not coming from outside AFICT. Also, cannot see any
suspicious files hanging around in the postfix staging directory
/var/spool/postfix.

The problem persists through booting.

Has anyone seen anything like this before? Nothing turns up on Google.

Cheers







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] German engineers 3D-printed a camera that’s smaller than a grain of salt

[Steven A Smith]

They aren't describing the actual imaging A/D conversion... it i just a 
lense set coupled with a fiber-optic... capture and reduction is a 
project left to the student downstream.   I'm not clear (and they dont 
indicate) how they actually get the opticil fidelity from a 3D printer 
since they tend to (exclusively) be voxelated.   Perhaps a modified 
fresnel would make sense, but otherwise, the pointis to make lenses with 
spherical to parabolic cross sections, not stepped samples of same?



On 6/30/16 6:42 PM, Carl wrote:


Sort of a GoPro for flies?   Not that they need it.   That shouldn't 
stop us.



On 6/29/16 2:41 PM, Tom Johnson wrote:
FYI.  I wish, though, they would have told us how this thing is going 
to be powered.  Still, image a one or multiple of these embedded in 
the bill of a cap capturing, real time, a 180-degree vid.


http://goo.gl/ha4XhT

Also scroll down to watch the video of the robot package picker.

TJ



Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c)   505.473.9646(h)
Society of Professional Journalists    - Region 9 
 Director
*Check out It's The People's Data 
*

http://www.jtjohnson.com  t...@jtjohnson.com




Sent with MailTrack 





FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribehttp://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com





FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Re: [FRIAM] Mobile Vulgis was: Anyone from England

[Steven A Smith]

Good point...

I used to be holding out for a Stephen Colbert/Tina Fey ticket for the 
Republicans...   THEY would have swept the field on both sides for 
entirely different reasons!



On 6/27/16 4:19 PM, glen ☣ wrote:


If they'd get someone like Samantha Bee or John Oliver to moderate it, 
_then_ it might be a good thing.


On 06/27/2016 03:09 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:
That said, I'm still holding out for a 4-way debate with Bernie as 
Independent and Gary Johnson as Libertarian.  I think the Donald 
would get shredded on every one of his points by one or all three of 
the others.   I think Hillary would suffer as well, but not by a 
fraction.   I think the things Bernie and Gary differ on would 
degenerate to "agree to disagree" and all of them except the aspiring 
"Bigot in Chief" would be very strong on personal rights, splitting 
only on gun control.






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] Mobile Vulgis was: Anyone from England

[Steven A Smith]

With our own election hoopla, I find myself considering the implications 
of democracy as we practice it (and perhaps even as we imagine or 
idealize it).


While I am observing said hoopla with my usual "morbid fascination",  I 
am truly disturbed by the possibility that we ARE degenerating to a 
Mobocracy or more technically, an /Ochlocracy/. I like Wikipedia's 
definition of the term as: /"Democracy spoiled by Demagoguery/".


   /Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this
   world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or
   all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form
   of government except all those other forms that have been tried from
   time to time./ 


/Winston Churchill/

While my sympathies are much more aligned with the Left than the Right 
at this phase of my life, and while I find the Right's presumptive 
"Bigot in Chief" a dangerous clown, I'm worried that the mainstream 
element of the "other side" isn't a lot better in their methods and style.


That said, I'm still holding out for a 4-way debate with Bernie as 
Independent and Gary Johnson as Libertarian.  I think the Donald would 
get shredded on every one of his points by one or all three of the 
others.   I think Hillary would suffer as well, but not by a fraction.   
I think the things Bernie and Gary differ on would degenerate to "agree 
to disagree" and all of them except the aspiring "Bigot in Chief" would 
be very strong on personal rights, splitting only on gun control.



- Steve

On 6/27/16 1:47 PM, glen ☢ wrote:

What I don't quite understand is, if referenda are "consultative" and non-binding, why 
all the hoopla?  Why can't they simply factor the results into a more rational process?  This is 
especially curious if Cameron plans to/will resign anyway.  And also curious given the Bregret.  
Did the pre-referendum legislation dictate that the government must robotically obey the results?  
We have all sorts of ways our US government can bypass, ignore, or delay the unencumbered 
"will of the people."




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] Anyone from England

[Steven A Smith]

Our colleagues, Matt and Janire just skyped me up yesterday and were 
quite concerned about the implications for them...


Matt is from the UK, Janire from Spain, and they both attended 
University in Wales and have been doing good business throughout 
UK/EU/etc without any friction, thanks to the UK participation in the 
EU.   They are now very concerned that they will be significantly 
constrained by the new situation.


They are also very unhappy with the general right-wing knee-jerk in 
progress (from their perspective) that htey feel rivals our own "Trumped 
up" stuff.


INteresting times!

On 6/25/16 2:39 PM, Gary Schiltz wrote:
From what I've read, young people overwhelmingly voted to stay. 
Unfortunately, if the exit is indeed bad from Great Britain, those 
same young people have to live with the consequences for the longest. 
Sometimes, I think that people should be given more than one vote, the 
number of votes being inversely proportional to age. Of course, that 
devalues any wisdom that may have accumulated by living long (perhaps 
not displayed in this vote). In any case, I hope they do decide to 
have a second referendum, following an open, vigorous debate on the 
issues that divide the people.


On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Frank Wimberly > wrote:


According to Ali Velshi on CNN, people voted "leave" to express
their anger (elites, immigration, economy) without actually
understanding what they were voting for.  The London Times
published a list of the consequences and now over 2 million people
have signed a petition calling for a revote.

Frank

Frank Wimberly
Phone
(505) 670-9918

On Jun 25, 2016 1:59 PM, "Nick Thompson"
mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net>>
wrote:

Boy, Howdy, did Cameron Mess up!

So, he now loses his premiership to the right wing of his own
party.  Scotland, and perhaps N. Ireland, will now opt out of
the UK in a few years, leaving England a teensy libertarian
paradise under Boris Johnson.

Gill, here is how I think the parliamentary system works. 
Cameron resigns.  That precipitates an election for party

leader amongst the conservatives.  If that goes smoothly,
there is no election.  If that is bloody, and some faction of
the Conservatives is willing to join Labor in a vote of no
confidence, THAT will precipitate an election.

Parliament is sovereign in the UK.  So, a new parliament could
do anything it wanted, including, presumably, not leave the EU.

I think that’s how it is.  I would love to be corrected.

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 *Jochen Fromm
*Sent:* Saturday, June 25, 2016 3:47 AM
*To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
*Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Anyone from England

From what I heard David Cameron messed it up. He failed
miserably. In order to get elected and to get rid of his right
wing critics he promised the people this referendum where they
can vote for or against the EU. If people had voted to remain
in the EU it would have been a victory for him. It wasn't. He
lost.

Most of the "Brexit" voters voted against the EU because they
are against immigrants and want to make Britain great again,
much like Trump in US. Unfortunately it will not happen, the
British Pound will drop, customs will raise and the UK will
slide into a recession. EU funding for universities in the UK
will stop. It looks pretty bad for Great Britain, as you can
see in the reaction of the stock markets.

TL;DR Cameron messed it up and everyone in Europe is a bit
shocked about the result of the referendum.

Regards

Jochen

Sent from my Tricorder

 Original message 

From: Gillian Densmore mailto:gil.densm...@gmail.com>>

Date: 6/24/16 21:23 (GMT+01:00)

To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
mailto:friam@redfish.com>>

Subject: [FRIAM] Anyone from England

Care to speculate what's going on with this leave the EU thing?

I can guess but I might be wrong, I suppose I thought while
the EU comes across as a discuntional family. I didn't know
drama between England and the rest of Europe was so bad that
they'd want to leave.

places like telegraph aren't exactly helping matters:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/eu-

Re: [FRIAM] Fascinating article on how AI is driving change in SEO, categories of AI and the Law of Accelerating Returns

[Steven A Smith]

Glen -

I do believe we *will* and *have been* outdriving our headlights, and it 
is part of the "manifest destiny" of being human, maybe 
mammal/warm-blooded/vertibrate/fauna/life?   It *might be* a necessary 
property of evolved life to innovate "grandly"... where "grandly" is a 
relative term.   The question I suppose, that I feel is in the air, is 
whether we are accelerating toward an extinction event of our own making 
and whether backing off on the accelerator will help reduce the chances 
of it being total or if, as with the source domain of the metaphor,  
will backing off too fast actually *cause* a spinout?  Or perhaps the 
best strategy is to punch on through?   Kurzweil is voting for "pedal to 
the metal" (achieve transhuman transcendence in time for him to erh... 
transcend personally?) and I suppose I'm suggesting "back off on the 
pedal gently but with strong intent" with some vague loyalty and 
identity with "humans as we are"...


I also agree that Science is a sub-discipline of Engineering in the 
sense you mean it...  I think it is mostly a moot distinction.  I happen 
to have been trained in Science but practiced primarily in Engineering, 
so am familiar with the common view (at least of Scientists) of the 
reverse.   I think this point is a nice conundrum...  as a mutual friend 
of many of us uses for his tagline: "The Universe is Flux, All else is 
Opinion".   It is the nature of "life" to evolve which (so far?) 
requires a finite lifetime for the individual...   so who am I to argue 
with the end of an individual life, culture or species?



Flux on!

 - Steve

On 6/9/16 12:20 PM, Pamela McCorduck wrote:

I like this idea, Glen. Don't necessarily agree, but it's worth examining.

Sent from my iPhone


On Jun 9, 2016, at 9:53 AM, glen ☣  wrote:


On 06/08/2016 11:27 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
`` I'm pretty much a luddite myself, or at least "conservative" in the sense of 
believing that we are outdriving our headlights on many fronts.''

Experiments can be risky but sometimes they pay off..

The deeper point, I think, is that we not only _must_ outdrive our headlights, 
we've been doing it for billions of years.  I've been trying to find some spare 
time to explore the idea that science is a sub-discipline of engineering. It's 
counter to our normal paradigm where we think engineering is applied science.  
But I find it an attractive idea that you can't learn or understand anything 
without violently destroying/reorganizing some small part of the universe 
first.  Hence, all knowledge comes through engineering first.  We have to force 
the ambience through our intentional filter before we can do anything with it 
... like playdough through a stencil ... cast some liquid reality into the mold 
that is your mind, as it were.

--
☣ 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





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] Fascinating article on how AI is driving change in SEO, categories of AI and the Law of Accelerating Returns

[Steven A Smith]

On 6/8/16 12:27 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:

`` I'm pretty much a luddite myself, or at least "conservative" in the sense of 
believing that we are outdriving our headlights on many fronts.''

Experiments can be risky but sometimes they pay off..

http://discovermagazine.com/2010/mar/07-dr-drank-broth-gave-ulcer-solved-medical-mystery
I agree and believe that Homo Sapiens has been as "successful" as we 
have been *because* of the diversity or our "experimentation"... my 
issue probably has something to do with the stakes... I don't think 
humanity has been in an "all in" situation before the last 50 years or so?


 I'm not sure what an all out nuclear exchange in the 60's would have 
looked like... probably not global extinciton... just a lot of the 
northern hemisphere?


Nuclear Armageddon is still possible but it seems like we've (mostly) 
missed that window and instead are facing a plethora of unintended 
consequences from our less obviously warlike "progress"...  which of 
course, we often race headlong forward escalating our tech responses to 
mitigate the consequences of the last round.


In major metropolises like New York City, the introduction of the 
internal combustion engine cleared the majority of the "disease-causing" 
horse manure buildup in the streets (daily!) and it took 50 or more 
years for the replacement consequences to come home to roost.


- Steve



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