Re: [FRIAM] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-06 Thread Arlo Barnes
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Parks, Raymond rcpa...@sandia.gov wrote:

 My wife hates New and Improved and news-stories about vehicular homicide
 that state the car hit the group of children at the school bus stop. The
 first has been a staple of language comedy - how can something be new and
 improved at the same time?


 Would it help to think of the phrase as a shortening of renewed, and
improved in the renewal?


 Her gripe with the second is that a car (or truck or ...) has no volition
 - it must be controlled by someone. The driver hit the group of children
 with the car under their control. This will still be true for autonomous
 vehicles - even if the passengers in the car have no control (unlikely),
 the software developers who program the algorithms of the autonomous
 vehicle will be liable when the car hits the school children - the
 programmers hit the school children.


No, that is the opposite of what happened - the car physically contacted
(hit) the children, while the driver was shielded from physically
contacting the children by the shell of the car, or the programmer from the
indirection of the technology.
However, the discussion on how the cause-effect relationship can be parsed
as relates to liability in auto
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU#http://www.hellointernet.fm/podcast/19-related
accidents is a good one, especially amusing is the idea of
software-wrangling using the doctrine of the elemental.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote:

 If I *was* should be If I were, subjunctive. Loan is a noun so I can not
 loan you something .. lend (verb) you something. Less - Fewer.  It
 goes on.


The was/were thing keeps coming up on alt.usage.english and the English
Stack Exchange - it seems like there is not a strong enough grammar in this
context for English for there to be a hard-and-fast rule either way; trying
to compare English to other languages results in pointless rules like the
'no split infinitives' dogma.
I do not think I have heard people say I will loan you something, but I
will lend you something seems like it would be rarer still (that is the
usage I favour, however). Sometimes I notice people mix up 'lend' and
'rent', oddly enough.

-Arlo James Barnes

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] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-06 Thread Steve Smith

Glen -
Useless anecdote:  I opened the fridge one day and noticed the CO2 
regulator on the keg was broken.  I asked my office mate about it.  
He said: Yeah, the regulator broke.  I asked: It just 
spontaneously broke all by itself? He didn't respond.


And the keg _in the office_?  It just got there all by itself?


What are you implying?  Are you saying that the alcohol (materially) 
caused the broken regulator?  And hence the efficient blame lies on 
the agent who placed the alcohol there?  Pfft!  If anything, alcohol 
is a depressant and would stabilize the motor control system of the 
consumer so as to make regulator breakage _less_ likely.  Something 
like carbonated kombucha is way more dangerous, in my not so humble 
opinion.


I have not yet seen you staggeringly drunk, but beyond stabilization of 
the motor control system, there is a mode where one is likely to lose 
one's balance and in trying to catch themselves, can tear the tap or 
regulator from the keg, or the keg from the fridge or heck, the fridge 
from it's upright position if you are as big and clumsy as I am...


And besides, who said that the keg in the fridge in the office had 
alcohol in it, it *could have been* Kambucha, maybe even with Chia Seeds 
in it!


- Sieve


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] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-06 Thread Steve Smith

Glen-


Useless anecdote:  I opened the fridge one day and noticed the CO2 
regulator on the keg was broken.  I asked my office mate about it.  He 
said: Yeah, the regulator broke.  I asked: It just spontaneously 
broke all by itself?  He didn't respond.
This sounds like a scenario that would happen if XKCD was drawn by 
Steven Wright.




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] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-06 Thread glen
On 08/06/2015 12:08 AM, Steve Smith wrote:
 I don't think that's true at all.  It's not the voluntary movement that 
 concerns most.  It's the involuntary movement that concerns most, especially 
 liberals, because most liberals (I think) tend to give more weight to 
 unintential or coincident circumstances than most conservatives.
 
 Would these be the canonical knee jerk liberals?  Or the neologistical 
 knee jerk conservatives?

Although I appreciate the pun (is it a pun? can a 2 word phrase be a pun?  I 
was surprised that a 2 word phrase can be an oxymoron.), I'd guess it might be 
related to the DRD4 gene and the preference some have for new exploratory 
experiences.  I can imagine that anyone open to new experiences would tend to 
give more weight to coincidences and happenstance than someone less open to new 
experiences.

 The latter would be the ammunition, not the guns, right?   Once, dynamite was 
 a weapon of choice until the industry came up with a way of tagging it 
 such that even after rapid disassembly one could determine the stick or 
 case of Dynamite it came from and with good record keeping who purchased it 
 and therefore used it or allowed it to be (stolen and?) used.   Is there an 
 equivalent for ammunition?   I suppose anyone can pour their own bullets, so 
 that doesn't work well...  One might be able to design signature rifling 
 that causes new guns to always throw a tagged slug (what about metal-jacket 
 slugs?)... or perhaps tagging the gunpowder (similar to dynamite?) with 
 mixing your own powder being similar in challenge to making your own high 
 explosive to avoid the tagging problem?

Yes, ammunition is also part of the material cause.  Regulating ammunition is, 
I think, in the same category as regulating guns, except for the added 
environmental aspect.  Parts of the forest up here are absolutely loaded (!) 
with slugs from idiots firing their guns for no reason ... as if they were toys.

-- 
⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella
So pour some coins in my crater



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] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-05 Thread Parks, Raymond
  My wife hates New and Improved and news-stories about vehicular homicide 
that state the car hit the group of children at the school bus stop.  The 
first has been a staple of language comedy - how can something be new and 
improved at the same time?  Her gripe with the second is that a car (or truck 
or ...) has no volition - it must be controlled by someone.  The driver hit the 
group of children with the car under their control.  This will still be true 
for autonomous vehicles - even if the passengers in the car have no control 
(unlikely), the software developers who program the algorithms of the 
autonomous vehicle will be liable when the car hits the school children - the 
programmers hit the school children.

  Speaking of autonomous vehicles, as I was commuting to work this morning, my 
Prius did it's oh noes, I'm skidding thing when I accelerated quickly out of 
my side street - there's always a patch of gravel and the anti-skid thinks the 
drive wheels have lost traction, drops power to the wheels, and suddenly I'm 
not accelerating into the hole in traffic that seemed plenty big enough.  After 
that, the anti-skid did the opposite (accelerated) when the car bumped over the 
potholes at Alameda and Rio Grande.

  That made me think that the real problem with autonomous vehicles is how do 
they handle the abnormal environment.  In nuclear safety, we consider that any 
system has to operate in a normal (i.e. expected) environment, in abnormal 
(i.e. rare, not expected) environments, and malevolent (i.e. bad guys 
attacking) environments.  The edge cases of the abnormal environment will be 
the second biggest problem for autonomous vehicles (the malevolent environment 
is the biggest problem).  I expect, however, that those edge cases will happen 
more often than outright attacks and will have equally spectacular failure 
modes.

  How will autonomous vehicles handle construction zones (that should be part 
of the normal environment, but I don't know if the programmers have thought 
about the infinite variations that can be encountered)?

  How will autonomous vehicles handle GPS mapping errors? Humans seem to have 
trouble when their GPS tells them to turn into a one-way street or over a 
non-existent bridge - will autonomous vehicles do better?

  How will autonomous vehicles handle low-water crossings?  That, too, should 
be part of the normal environment, but sometimes an exceptionally heavy rain 
moves them into the abnormal environment.

  Presumably, autonomous vehicles will detect the tree branch that fell into 
the roadway - but will they notice the tree branch starting to fall?  I'm not 
sure most humans would notice the latter, but some would.

  I've driven in the mountains after some heavy rains and noticed on a curve 
ahead that the dirt under the blacktop had been washed out.  I knew from my 
long-distance observation not to drive over that section of road.  Would an 
autonomous vehicle notice that?

  Sorry to hijack the thread, but feel free to answer with a new subject.  At 
least the first paragraph is on topic.

Ray Parks
Consilient Heuristician/IDART Old-Timer
V: 505-844-4024  M: 505-238-9359  P: 505-951-6084


On Aug 5, 2015, at 10:14 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:

I have to admit to a fascination on evolution of language.  Remember The 
MacNeil/Lehrer Report? Robert MacNeil had a great series on the evolution of 
English, even to influence of the sea islands (Gullah),

There are some downsides.  I'm bitchy about a few usages: If I *was* should be 
If I were, subjunctive. Loan is a noun so I can not loan you something .. 
lend (verb) you something. Less - Fewer.  It goes on.

I bet we all have our own favorites.

   -- Owen

On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Gary Schiltz 
g...@naturesvisualarts.commailto:g...@naturesvisualarts.com wrote:
Enough is enough. If bro and bruuh are added to the dictionary, I will start 
speaking Spanish exclusively. And what the fuck is on fleek? Wait, I really 
don't want to know.

Seriously *not* unbothered :-(

On Tuesday, August 4, 2015, glen ep ropella 
g...@tempusdictum.commailto:g...@tempusdictum.com wrote:
http://qz.com/465820/how-brand-new-words-are-spreading-across-america/

--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847tel:971-255-2847, 
http://tempusdictum.comhttp://tempusdictum.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] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-05 Thread Parks, Raymond
Ooh, is rekt one of the new words from the original article on Quartz?

Ray Parks
Consilient Heuristician/IDART Old-Timer
V: 505-844-4024  M: 505-238-9359  P: 505-951-6084
NIPR: rcpa...@sandia.govmailto:rcpa...@sandia.gov
SIPR: rcpar...@sandia.doe.sgov.govmailto:rcpar...@sandia.doe.sgov.gov (send 
NIPR reminder)
JWICS: dopa...@doe.ic.govmailto:dopa...@doe.ic.gov (send NIPR reminder)



On Aug 5, 2015, at 11:46 AM, cody dooderson wrote:

While this is not totally related, xkcd had a funny cartoon on self driving 
cars yesterday. http://xkcd.com/1559/ . The situation in the cartoon might 
qualify as a a malevolent situation. Others might just say that the self 
driving car got rekt.

Cody Smith


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] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-05 Thread Parks, Raymond
Ok, I think I get the reference to Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics III regarding 
voluntary action or volition.  However, you have once again puzzled me as I 
don't understand how Robert Rosen is relevant.  Are you thinking that the 
programmers of an autonomous vehicle do not have a relationship with the 
actions of that vehicle?  They are responsible for the metabolic and repair 
subsystems of the vehicle.  I would argue that the software algorithms that 
control the vehicle are metabolic.

Ray Parks
Consilient Heuristician/IDART Old-Timer
V: 505-844-4024  M: 505-238-9359  P: 505-951-6084


On Aug 5, 2015, at 1:04 PM, glen wrote:


Heh, Aristotle and Robert Rosen just rolled over in their graves.

On 08/05/2015 10:25 AM, Parks, Raymond wrote:
Her gripe with the second is that a car (or truck or ...) has no volition - it 
must be controlled by someone.  The driver hit the group of children with the 
car under their control.  This will still be true for autonomous vehicles - 
even if the passengers in the car have no control (unlikely), the software 
developers who program the algorithms of the autonomous vehicle will be liable 
when the car hits the school children - the programmers hit the school children.

--
⇔ glen


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


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

Re: [FRIAM] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-05 Thread glen


Sorry for being vague.  I meant the 4 causes: formal, efficient, material, and 
final.  Rosen yapped endlessly about agency, efficient cause.  They're rolling 
over in their graves because the idea that the automatic car is _not_ 
responsible but the programmers or the drivers _are_ avoids the separation of 
cause into the 4 types.

Useless anecdote:  I opened the fridge one day and noticed the CO2 regulator on the keg was broken. 
 I asked my office mate about it.  He said: Yeah, the regulator broke.  I asked: 
It just spontaneously broke all by itself?  He didn't respond.


On 08/05/2015 12:26 PM, Parks, Raymond wrote:

Ok, I think I get the reference to Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics III regarding 
voluntary action or volition.  However, you have once again puzzled me as I 
don't understand how Robert Rosen is relevant.  Are you thinking that the 
programmers of an autonomous vehicle do not have a relationship with the 
actions of that vehicle?  They are responsible for the metabolic and repair 
subsystems of the vehicle.  I would argue that the software algorithms that 
control the vehicle are metabolic.


On Aug 5, 2015, at 1:04 PM, glen wrote:


Heh, Aristotle and Robert Rosen just rolled over in their graves.

On 08/05/2015 10:25 AM, Parks, Raymond wrote:
Her gripe with the second is that a car (or truck or ...) has no volition - it 
must be controlled by someone.  The driver hit the group of children with the 
car under their control.  This will still be true for autonomous vehicles - 
even if the passengers in the car have no control (unlikely), the software 
developers who program the algorithms of the autonomous vehicle will be liable 
when the car hits the school children - the programmers hit the school children.


--
⇔ glen


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

Re: [FRIAM] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-05 Thread Marcus Daniels
Useless anecdote:  I opened the fridge one day and noticed the CO2 regulator 
on the keg was broken.  I asked my office mate about it.  He said: Yeah, the 
regulator broke.  I asked: It just spontaneously broke all by itself?  He 
didn't respond.

And the keg _in the office_?  It just got there all by itself?  

Marcus

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


Re: [FRIAM] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-05 Thread glen

On 08/05/2015 12:49 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:

Useless anecdote:  I opened the fridge one day and noticed the CO2 regulator on the keg was broken.  I 
asked my office mate about it.  He said: Yeah, the regulator broke.  I asked: It just 
spontaneously broke all by itself?  He didn't respond.

And the keg _in the office_?  It just got there all by itself?


What are you implying?  Are you saying that the alcohol (materially) caused the 
broken regulator?  And hence the efficient blame lies on the agent who placed 
the alcohol there?  Pfft!  If anything, alcohol is a depressant and would 
stabilize the motor control system of the consumer so as to make regulator 
breakage _less_ likely.  Something like carbonated kombucha is way more 
dangerous, in my not so humble opinion.

--
⇔ glen


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

Re: [FRIAM] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-05 Thread Parks, Raymond
Aha, so I was wrong about which of Aristotle's writings you were referencing.

The telos of an autonomous vehicle is transportation of cargo (human or not) 
from point A to point B.  The autonomous car in the xkcd cartoon Cody found is 
fulfilling its telos.

The efficient cause of an autonomous vehicle includes human user(s) and the 
humans who made the vehicle.  The programmers are part of that second group.  
Black Hat in the xkcd is a human user and the efficient cause of the vehicle in 
the comic trying to drive to Alaska.

The formal cause of an autonomous vehicle is the form of a vehicle.

The material cause of the vehicle  is probably the weakest of the four causes.  
Such a vehicle will be made of metal, plastic (oil), glass (sand, fire), and 
lots of other materials.  This is where Aristotle's philosophy smacks into 
modern technology.  In Aristotlean terms, the material cause of an autonomous 
vehicle is mostly earth with some fire.  However, I have no idea how the 
virtual would fit into his philosophy - is software air or water?

  At the risk of being unpopular on this group, I would point out that many 
gun-owners have made the argument that none of their guns have spontaneously 
fired.  Referring back to Ethics - an arm (whether or not it holds a sword) 
does not harm without voluntary movement by the person.

Ray Parks
Consilient Heuristician/IDART Old-Timer
V: 505-844-4024  M: 505-238-9359  P: 505-951-6084


On Aug 5, 2015, at 1:35 PM, glen wrote:


Sorry for being vague.  I meant the 4 causes: formal, efficient, material, and 
final.  Rosen yapped endlessly about agency, efficient cause.  They're rolling 
over in their graves because the idea that the automatic car is _not_ 
responsible but the programmers or the drivers _are_ avoids the separation of 
cause into the 4 types.

Useless anecdote:  I opened the fridge one day and noticed the CO2 regulator on 
the keg was broken.  I asked my office mate about it.  He said: Yeah, the 
regulator broke.  I asked: It just spontaneously broke all by itself?  He 
didn't respond.


On 08/05/2015 12:26 PM, Parks, Raymond wrote:
Ok, I think I get the reference to Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics III regarding 
voluntary action or volition.  However, you have once again puzzled me as I 
don't understand how Robert Rosen is relevant.  Are you thinking that the 
programmers of an autonomous vehicle do not have a relationship with the 
actions of that vehicle?  They are responsible for the metabolic and repair 
subsystems of the vehicle.  I would argue that the software algorithms that 
control the vehicle are metabolic.


On Aug 5, 2015, at 1:04 PM, glen wrote:


Heh, Aristotle and Robert Rosen just rolled over in their graves.

On 08/05/2015 10:25 AM, Parks, Raymond wrote:
Her gripe with the second is that a car (or truck or ...) has no volition - it 
must be controlled by someone.  The driver hit the group of children with the 
car under their control.  This will still be true for autonomous vehicles - 
even if the passengers in the car have no control (unlikely), the software 
developers who program the algorithms of the autonomous vehicle will be liable 
when the car hits the school children - the programmers hit the school children.

--
⇔ glen


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


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

Re: [FRIAM] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-05 Thread glen

On 08/05/2015 01:20 PM, Parks, Raymond wrote:

   At the risk of being unpopular on this group, I would point out that many 
gun-owners have made the argument that none of their guns have spontaneously 
fired.  Referring back to Ethics - an arm (whether or not it holds a sword) 
does not harm without voluntary movement by the person.


I don't think that's true at all.  It's not the voluntary movement that 
concerns most.  It's the involuntary movement that concerns most, especially 
liberals, because most liberals (I think) tend to give more weight to 
unintential or coincident circumstances than most conservatives.

An analogous consideration is the (seemingly) popular conservative position 
that if you have succeeded at something (e.g. making money), it's because _you_ 
did it, not because you were lucky or fortunate.  (The alternative position 
that God did it for you, or allowed you to do it is an interesting hedge.)  
Most liberals tend to place at least a little more weight on luck or 
circumstance when considering one's success.

So, it's not spontanous firing the gun control people are worried about.  It's 
not even the rational, intently intentional firing they're worried about.  It's 
the accidental and/or rash, semi-intentional firings they're worried about.  
Hence the solution: remove the material cause.

--
⇔ glen


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

Re: [FRIAM] [EXTERNAL] Re: How brand-new words are spreading across America

2015-08-05 Thread Frank Wimberly
Nick Hanauer is clear that he is a multi-billionaire because Jeff Bezos
called him back before another guy when Hanauer had some venture capital to
invest.  See:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html#.VcJ-ElDnbqA

Frank

Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Phone
(505) 670-9918
On 08/05/2015 01:20 PM, Parks, Raymond wrote:

At the risk of being unpopular on this group, I would point out that
 many gun-owners have made the argument that none of their guns have
 spontaneously fired.  Referring back to Ethics - an arm (whether or not it
 holds a sword) does not harm without voluntary movement by the person.


I don't think that's true at all.  It's not the voluntary movement that
concerns most.  It's the involuntary movement that concerns most,
especially liberals, because most liberals (I think) tend to give more
weight to unintential or coincident circumstances than most conservatives.

An analogous consideration is the (seemingly) popular conservative position
that if you have succeeded at something (e.g. making money), it's because
_you_ did it, not because you were lucky or fortunate.  (The alternative
position that God did it for you, or allowed you to do it is an interesting
hedge.)  Most liberals tend to place at least a little more weight on luck
or circumstance when considering one's success.

So, it's not spontanous firing the gun control people are worried about.
It's not even the rational, intently intentional firing they're worried
about.  It's the accidental and/or rash, semi-intentional firings they're
worried about.  Hence the solution: remove the material cause.

-- 
⇔ 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