Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #33436 > unrolled thread

Who Knew ?

Started by1p166 <z24ba6.net>
First post2021-10-21 00:06 -0400
Last post2021-10-31 22:46 -0400
Articles 20 on this page of 108 — 21 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc


Contents

  Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-21 00:06 -0400
    Re: Who Knew ? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-10-21 08:27 +0100
      Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-10-21 08:04 -0700
        Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-28 02:08 -0400
          Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-28 09:41 +0100
            Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-10-29 16:39 +0000
              Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 07:39 +0100
        Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-29 01:14 -0400
          Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-10-29 16:52 +0000
            Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-10-29 13:08 -0700
              Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-10-29 22:43 +0000
                Re: Who Knew ? Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-10-30 04:32 -0400
              Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 08:21 +0100
                Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-01 18:50 +0000
              Re: Who Knew ? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2021-10-30 13:45 +0000
                Re: Who Knew ? Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-10-30 14:54 -0400
                  Re: Who Knew ? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2021-10-30 21:47 +0000
                    Re: Who Knew ? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 23:14 +0100
                      Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-31 01:25 +0000
                        Re: Who Knew ? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2021-10-31 04:12 +0000
                      Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-31 00:57 -0400
                        Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-31 13:35 +0000
                          Re: Who Knew ? Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-10-31 15:47 -0400
                            Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-01 04:44 +0000
                              Re: Who Knew ? Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-11-01 13:52 -0400
                                Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-02 00:13 -0400
                                  Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-01 22:05 -0700
                                    Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-03 01:26 -0400
                                      Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-03 07:02 -0700
                                        Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-05 00:54 -0400
                                Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-02 00:11 -0400
                                  Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-02 06:17 +0000
                                    Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-03 00:27 -0400
                                      Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-02 21:46 -0700
                                      Re: Who Knew ? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-11-03 07:26 +0000
                                        Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-03 17:18 +0000
                                          Re: Who Knew ? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-11-03 19:58 +0000
                                            Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-03 21:34 +0000
                                            Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-04 11:05 +0000
                                              Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-04 17:19 +0000
                                              Re: Who Knew ? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-11-04 20:13 +0000
                                                Re: Who Knew ? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2021-11-04 16:11 -0700
                                                  Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-04 23:27 +0000
                                                  Re: Who Knew ? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-11-05 11:40 +0000
                                                    Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-05 14:09 +0000
                                                      Re: Who Knew ? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-11-05 15:53 +0000
                                                        Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-05 09:26 -0700
                                                      Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-05 17:40 +0000
                                        Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-03 21:02 -0400
                                          Re: Who Knew ? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2021-11-04 00:01 -0500
                                            Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-04 11:09 +0000
                                              Re: Who Knew ? Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> - 2021-11-04 13:49 +0000
                                          Re: Who Knew ? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-11-04 05:01 +0000
                                            Re: Who Knew ? Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> - 2021-11-04 13:48 +0000
                                              Re: Who Knew ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-11-04 15:46 +0000
                                                Re: Who Knew ? Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2021-11-04 15:26 -0400
                                            Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-04 23:51 -0400
                                              Re: Who Knew ? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-11-05 07:37 +0000
                                                Re: Who Knew ? Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> - 2021-11-05 08:54 +0000
                                                Re: Who Knew ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-11-05 13:49 +0000
                                          Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-04 11:08 +0000
                                      Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-03 17:18 +0000
                    Re: Who Knew ? Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-10-31 01:52 -0400
                      Re: Who Knew ? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2021-10-31 10:26 +0000
                        Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-31 22:52 -0400
                          Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-01 18:50 +0000
            Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 08:00 +0100
              Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-01 18:50 +0000
            Re: Who Knew ? Peter 'Shaggy' Haywood <phaywood@alphalink.com.au> - 2021-11-05 17:58 +1100
              Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-05 17:40 +0000
      Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-28 01:11 -0400
        Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-28 09:39 +0100
        Re: Who Knew ? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-10-28 14:25 +0100
          Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-28 14:49 +0100
          Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-29 01:07 -0400
            Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-10-29 08:13 -0700
              Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-31 00:28 -0400
                Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-31 13:24 +0000
        Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-10-28 08:15 -0700
          Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-29 01:36 -0400
            Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-29 09:59 +0100
              Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-10-29 16:52 +0000
                Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-30 01:49 -0400
                  Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 07:59 +0100
                Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 07:53 +0100
                  Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-01 18:50 +0000
                    Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-02 01:04 -0400
                      Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-02 08:34 +0000
                        Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-02 19:09 +0000
                          Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-02 23:58 -0400
                            Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-02 21:39 -0700
                              Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-03 08:36 +0000
                              Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-03 11:23 -0400
                            Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-03 08:31 +0000
                            Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-03 17:18 +0000
                          Re: Who Knew ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2021-11-06 19:07 +0000
                            Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-07 12:15 +0000
                              Re: Who Knew ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2021-11-07 13:55 +0000
                                Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-07 07:59 -0800
                                  Smallpox vaccine date(s) (Was: Who Knew ?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2021-11-11 20:12 +0000
                                    Re: Smallpox vaccine date(s) (Was: Who Knew ?) Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-11-11 20:21 +0000
                                    Re: Smallpox vaccine date(s) (Was: Who Knew ?) "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2021-11-11 15:52 -0500
                                    Re: Smallpox vaccine date(s) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-11 21:19 +0000
                    Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-02 08:31 +0000
                Re: Who Knew ? not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2021-10-31 00:18 +0000
                  Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-31 00:06 -0400
                    Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-10-31 07:55 -0700
                      Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-31 22:46 -0400

Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6  Next page →


#33456

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2021-10-29 09:59 +0100
Message-ID<slgd5q$c9i$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#33455
On 29/10/2021 06:36, 1p166 wrote:
> The trick is "it" ... the way to organize thinking to
>    achieve "personhood". We don't know what "it" is. If
>    we did, proper AI could surely be achieved with a lot
>    less hardware than we currently believe.

Well we do. Or some people do.

At some point in childhood intelligence organises sensory data into a 
model, that includes a self, in a real (physical) world. That model is 
reinforced through parents etc until people like you think that they 
have actually emerged into 'the real world' and start to explain their 
awareness of it, on terms of its physical nature!

Circular argument.

Awareness itself implies an entity that is aware, and something other 
than itself it becomes aware of. And some invisible intangible entity 
that makes it all happen.

Cf Schopenhauer 'The world as Will, and Representation'.

Personhood emerges as half of the pair of the 'observer' and the 
'observed' - the nature of the world you end up perceiving is the nature 
of the human being that observes it.

The real question, is there anything beyond that that would allow you to 
choose what person you are, and hence subtly alter the nature of the 
world you perceive?

Many would assert that there is, and that is what 'it' is...

-- 
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit 
atrocities.”

― Voltaire, Questions sur les Miracles à M. Claparede, Professeur de 
Théologie à Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de 
M. de Voltaire

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33459

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2021-10-29 16:52 +0000
Message-ID<pFVeJ.5858$QB1.719@fx42.iad>
In reply to#33456
On 2021-10-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 29/10/2021 06:36, 1p166 wrote:
>
>> The trick is "it" ... the way to organize thinking to
>>    achieve "personhood". We don't know what "it" is. If
>>    we did, proper AI could surely be achieved with a lot
>>    less hardware than we currently believe.
>
> Well we do. Or some people do.
>
> At some point in childhood intelligence organises sensory data into a 
> model, that includes a self, in a real (physical) world. That model is 
> reinforced through parents etc until people like you think that they 
> have actually emerged into 'the real world' and start to explain their 
> awareness of it, on terms of its physical nature!

Unfortunately, many people's models are seriously warped.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Life is perverse.
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  It can be beautiful -
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  but it won't.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Lily Tomlin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33463

From1p166 <z24ba6.net>
Date2021-10-30 01:49 -0400
Message-ID<LNKdnReysqJAQeH8nZ2dnUU7-K_NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#33459
On 10/29/21 12:52 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2021-10-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On 29/10/2021 06:36, 1p166 wrote:
>>
>>> The trick is "it" ... the way to organize thinking to
>>>     achieve "personhood". We don't know what "it" is. If
>>>     we did, proper AI could surely be achieved with a lot
>>>     less hardware than we currently believe.
>>
>> Well we do. Or some people do.
>>
>> At some point in childhood intelligence organises sensory data into a
>> model, that includes a self, in a real (physical) world. That model is
>> reinforced through parents etc until people like you think that they
>> have actually emerged into 'the real world' and start to explain their
>> awareness of it, on terms of its physical nature!
> 
> Unfortunately, many people's models are seriously warped.

   Agreed. "It" is NOT going to be easy, NOT anything
   derived by simple models. Darwin (eventually) did
   it - but only after 4 billion years, and sort of
   by accident. Pea-brained is the natural norm,
   JUST enough to find the next thing to eat.

   Back in the day, Minsky was predicting proper AI
   was imminent. In Society Of Mind he went on and
   on about how super-simple circuits could do IF/THEN
   logical evaluations. What he DIDN'T consider was
   the petabytes of crap needed to prep the data for
   that final IF/THEN circuit. The HAL-9000 was a
   product of Minski's optimism. Sorry, many decades
   later and nothing even CLOSE.

   Marv USED to post on Usenet ... before it became
   disrespectable .....

   Anyway, I strongly intuit that "It" is out there.
   Once you have the necessary volume of hardware the
   trick is how to organize it to produce the desired
   effect. Nature offers some clues, but perhaps the
   best way might not to be emulating nature so closely,
   making fake neural nets. Perhaps hardware as it is
   offers different routes to a similar result ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33466

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2021-10-30 07:59 +0100
Message-ID<sliqgi$jss$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#33463
On 30/10/2021 06:49, 1p166 wrote:
> Anyway, I strongly intuit that "It" is out there.
>    Once you have the necessary volume of hardware the
>    trick is how to organize it to produce the desired
>    effect. Nature offers some clues, but perhaps the
>    best way might not to be emulating nature so closely,
>    making fake neural nets. Perhaps hardware as it is
>    offers different routes to a similar result ?

Well it could be argued that that is simply and example of a seriously 
warped worldview that thinks that software is an emergent property of 
hardware.

When there is just as good a case for saying that human wise, the 
hardware is an emergent property of the software.

And the so called 'material world' is simply a GUI that we have 
*constructed* in order to make it easier to interface with 'whatever the 
fuck it really is' (to paraphrase Kant)

Quantum physics not only does not refute this proposition, it actually 
reinforces it.




-- 
"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social 
conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the 
windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) "

Alan Sokal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33465

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2021-10-30 07:53 +0100
Message-ID<sliq54$ib3$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#33459
On 29/10/2021 17:52, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2021-10-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On 29/10/2021 06:36, 1p166 wrote:
>>
>>> The trick is "it" ... the way to organize thinking to
>>>     achieve "personhood". We don't know what "it" is. If
>>>     we did, proper AI could surely be achieved with a lot
>>>     less hardware than we currently believe.
>>
>> Well we do. Or some people do.
>>
>> At some point in childhood intelligence organises sensory data into a
>> model, that includes a self, in a real (physical) world. That model is
>> reinforced through parents etc until people like you think that they
>> have actually emerged into 'the real world' and start to explain their
>> awareness of it, on terms of its physical nature!
> 
> Unfortunately, many people's models are seriously warped.
> 
Warped with respect to what?

A couple of decades inquiry into the matter shows that there is no way 
to establish what the One True Model of Reality looks like. And those 
that think they are in possession of it are no less deluded than anyone 
else.

My conclusion is that *any* model will do, provided it is not so 
dysfunctional as to result in death before procreation.

I.e. Darwin rules: The world we think we live in, is simply a view that 
has developed over thousands of years in the struggle to survive. Hence 
my support for conservatism. "It worked for me da, so it will probably 
work for me"

Critical Rat Theory, which believes that rats in fact  are superior, but 
have been held back by white male dominated worldviews, is specious 
because it doesn't matter if the laws by which we live were dreamed up 
by  a conman with a beard who was good at stone masonry, or handed down 
by sympathetic aliens.

If it works, use it, is the old adage :-)

The only concession to 'warpage' I will allow, is that if people are 
living miserably because they cling to beliefs that make them angry, 
miserable, jealous and full of shame, well perhaps they should consider 
abandoning the belief set and replacing it with something else, just as 
lacking in truth content, but more palatable.





-- 
How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.

Adolf Hitler

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33500

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2021-11-01 18:50 +0000
Message-ID<DFWfJ.129562$Tr6.72672@fx47.iad>
In reply to#33465
On 2021-10-30, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 29/10/2021 17:52, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2021-10-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> At some point in childhood intelligence organises sensory data into a
>>> model, that includes a self, in a real (physical) world. That model is
>>> reinforced through parents etc until people like you think that they
>>> have actually emerged into 'the real world' and start to explain their
>>> awareness of it, on terms of its physical nature!
>> 
>> Unfortunately, many people's models are seriously warped.
> 
> Warped with respect to what?
>
> A couple of decades inquiry into the matter shows that there is no way 
> to establish what the One True Model of Reality looks like. And those 
> that think they are in possession of it are no less deluded than anyone 
> else.
>
> My conclusion is that *any* model will do, provided it is not so 
> dysfunctional as to result in death before procreation.

<snip>

> The only concession to 'warpage' I will allow, is that if people are 
> living miserably because they cling to beliefs that make them angry, 
> miserable, jealous and full of shame, well perhaps they should consider 
> abandoning the belief set and replacing it with something else, just as 
> lacking in truth content, but more palatable.

In some societies, this can result in death before procreation.  1/2 :-)

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Life is perverse.
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  It can be beautiful -
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  but it won't.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Lily Tomlin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33512

From1p166 <z24ba6.net>
Date2021-11-02 01:04 -0400
Message-ID<JJ-dnf0FHKVbWx38nZ2dnUU7-V3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#33500
On 11/1/21 2:50 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2021-10-30, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On 29/10/2021 17:52, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2021-10-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> At some point in childhood intelligence organises sensory data into a
>>>> model, that includes a self, in a real (physical) world. That model is
>>>> reinforced through parents etc until people like you think that they
>>>> have actually emerged into 'the real world' and start to explain their
>>>> awareness of it, on terms of its physical nature!
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, many people's models are seriously warped.
>>
>> Warped with respect to what?
>>
>> A couple of decades inquiry into the matter shows that there is no way
>> to establish what the One True Model of Reality looks like. And those
>> that think they are in possession of it are no less deluded than anyone
>> else.
>>
>> My conclusion is that *any* model will do, provided it is not so
>> dysfunctional as to result in death before procreation.
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> The only concession to 'warpage' I will allow, is that if people are
>> living miserably because they cling to beliefs that make them angry,
>> miserable, jealous and full of shame, well perhaps they should consider
>> abandoning the belief set and replacing it with something else, just as
>> lacking in truth content, but more palatable.
> 
> In some societies, this can result in death before procreation.  1/2 :-)

   Why do you ascribe SO many negatives to those "under-achieving"
   societies ?

   Sorry, but to build much of anything you need a good foundation
   and a path towards advancement. Not everybody HAS that. It's not
   that they are stupid or hateful or angry or miserable or jealous
   or any of that crap - they just lack "The Ladder" anywhere handy.

   Reasons may be "cultural" or more rooted in the Leaders of the
   moment or economic situation. Usually the latter two.

   People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
   of that that tends to be the problem.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33518

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2021-11-02 08:34 +0000
Message-ID<slqt7a$rjq$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#33512
On 02/11/2021 05:04, 1p166 wrote:
> People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
>    of that that tends to be the problem.

I disagree, people are stupid everywhere, because inserting a penis in a 
vagina doesn't take any great intelligence. Nor does groaning and 
pushing the baby out or slapping it against a nipple.

Even rats can do all that.

Society needs one or two 'bright' individuals on occasion when 
circumstances need a different approach.
But in general smart people are disliked and reviled and ignored by the 
masses .


-- 
In a Time of Universal Deceit, Telling the Truth Is a Revolutionary Act.

- George Orwell

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33522

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2021-11-02 19:09 +0000
Message-ID<u1ggJ.26542$Kw9.17007@fx45.iad>
In reply to#33518
On 2021-11-02, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 02/11/2021 05:04, 1p166 wrote:
>
>> People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
>> of that that tends to be the problem.
>
> I disagree, people are stupid everywhere, because inserting a penis
> in a vagina doesn't take any great intelligence. Nor does groaning
> and pushing the baby out or slapping it against a nipple.
>
> Even rats can do all that.
>
> Society needs one or two 'bright' individuals on occasion when 
> circumstances need a different approach.
> But in general smart people are disliked and reviled and ignored
> by the masses.

    Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man.
    Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded - here and there,
    now and then - are the work of an extremely small minority,
    frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed
    by all right-thinking people.  Whenever this tiny minority is
    kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out
    of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
    This is known as “bad luck.”
      -- Robert A. Heinlein: The Notebooks of Lazarus Long

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Life is perverse.
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  It can be beautiful -
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  but it won't.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Lily Tomlin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33527

From1p166 <z24ba6.net>
Date2021-11-02 23:58 -0400
Message-ID<LJKdnVX1vapWlR_8nZ2dnUU7-ROdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#33522
On 11/2/21 3:09 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2021-11-02, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On 02/11/2021 05:04, 1p166 wrote:
>>
>>> People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
>>> of that that tends to be the problem.
>>
>> I disagree, people are stupid everywhere, because inserting a penis
>> in a vagina doesn't take any great intelligence. Nor does groaning
>> and pushing the baby out or slapping it against a nipple.
>>
>> Even rats can do all that.

   Aww ... Charlie ..............

   Oh, and Lazarus Long is FICTIONAL.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33530

FromBobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com>
Date2021-11-02 21:39 -0700
Message-ID<slt3po$3d4$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#33527
On 11/2/21 20:58, 1p166 wrote:
> On 11/2/21 3:09 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2021-11-02, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/11/2021 05:04, 1p166 wrote:
>>>
>>>> People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
>>>> of that that tends to be the problem.
>>>
>>> I disagree, people are stupid everywhere, because inserting a penis
>>> in a vagina doesn't take any great intelligence. Nor does groaning
>>> and pushing the baby out or slapping it against a nipple.
>>>
>>> Even rats can do all that.
> 
>    Aww ... Charlie ..............
> 
>    Oh, and Lazarus Long is FICTIONAL.
It was not Charlie, 1p166 who said those foolish things but
the un-Natural Philospher, a misogynist and apparently now
anti-sexual.

Rats don't groan.  Only human women have problems with the
severely enlarged head of Homo sapiens sapiens. That is why
and the pains are real.  Groans and screams.

Is the NP an incel? Who can tell and why would they bother.
I added him to my TB filters long ago.

	We might add misanthrope to the list of unpleasant
things about him.  I wonder if he is a Catholic philosopher?
Lot of misanthropes fall in that basket, blaming women for
whatever problems.

	As you say Lazarus Long is a fantasy and a wish
fulfillment fantasy as well.  I used to love Heinlein but
as he aged he got less amusing.  And he died in 1988 so I
am older now then he was when he died but of course I do
not have his sterling list of achievements.

	bliss - the ineluctable

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33536

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2021-11-03 08:36 +0000
Message-ID<slthmf$28l$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#33530
On 03/11/2021 04:39, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> I wonder if he is a Catholic philosopher?
> Lot of misanthropes fall in that basket, blaming women for
> whatever problems.

I nowhere blamed anyone for anything. I merely observed that the act of 
procreation prerequires no intelligence.  On the part of either sex . 
The rest, you made up or inferred, which reveals your mind  and 
prejudice far more than it does mine.

Intelligence of a very few is useful for survival, intelligence of many 
is far too dangerous, which is why the modern trend is not to educate 
it, but indoctrinate it, as your remark above shows.


-- 
  “A leader is best When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader, 
who talks little,When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,They will say, 
“We did this ourselves.”

― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33539

From1p166 <z24ba6.net>
Date2021-11-03 11:23 -0400
Message-ID<5PqdnaIxtbznNB_8nZ2dnUU7-LXNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#33530
On 11/3/21 12:39 AM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 11/2/21 20:58, 1p166 wrote:
>> On 11/2/21 3:09 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2021-11-02, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 02/11/2021 05:04, 1p166 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
>>>>> of that that tends to be the problem.
>>>>
>>>> I disagree, people are stupid everywhere, because inserting a penis
>>>> in a vagina doesn't take any great intelligence. Nor does groaning
>>>> and pushing the baby out or slapping it against a nipple.
>>>>
>>>> Even rats can do all that.
>>
>>    Aww ... Charlie ..............
>>
>>    Oh, and Lazarus Long is FICTIONAL.
> It was not Charlie, 1p166 who said those foolish things but
> the un-Natural Philospher, a misogynist and apparently now
> anti-sexual.

   Sorry, must have miscounted the indents ... I've
   writ enough Python to run into that problem once
   or twice before :-)

> Rats don't groan.  Only human women have problems with the
> severely enlarged head of Homo sapiens sapiens. That is why
> and the pains are real.  Groans and screams.

   Humans can BARELY be born - it's true. Not only
   is it a J-shaped exit path but it does a 90
   along the way.

   Maybe the trend towards preemies is an evolutionary
   experiment of sorts ? Unless babies get smaller, or
   at least have initially smaller heads that grow out
   later then this may be the end of tangible brain-volume
   gains for the species.


> Is the NP an incel? Who can tell and why would they bother.
> I added him to my TB filters long ago.
> 
>      We might add misanthrope to the list of unpleasant
> things about him.  I wonder if he is a Catholic philosopher?
> Lot of misanthropes fall in that basket, blaming women for
> whatever problems.


   It is not hard to make nasty general conclusions about
   humans ... we too often prove the misanthropes correct.
   But not always. It is also an error to suggest those
   in poorer countries are "stupid" - they're just a slice
   of the same genetic cake, not fundamentally different.
   Local sociopolitical factors tend to be the main problem.


>      As you say Lazarus Long is a fantasy and a wish
> fulfillment fantasy as well.  I used to love Heinlein but
> as he aged he got less amusing.  And he died in 1988 so I
> am older now then he was when he died but of course I do
> not have his sterling list of achievements.
> 
>      bliss - the ineluctable

   I think Heinlein kinda went wonky in his old age.
   I once met a nephew of his who sort of suggested
   that was the case.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33534

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2021-11-03 08:31 +0000
Message-ID<slthcp$d5$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#33527
On 03/11/2021 03:58, 1p166 wrote:
> On 11/2/21 3:09 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2021-11-02, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/11/2021 05:04, 1p166 wrote:
>>>
>>>> People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
>>>> of that that tends to be the problem.
>>>
>>> I disagree, people are stupid everywhere, because inserting a penis
>>> in a vagina doesn't take any great intelligence. Nor does groaning
>>> and pushing the baby out or slapping it against a nipple.
>>>
>>> Even rats can do all that.
> 
>    Aww ... Charlie ..............
> 
>    Oh, and Lazarus Long is FICTIONAL.

So is most of history.


-- 
  “A leader is best When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader, 
who talks little,When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,They will say, 
“We did this ourselves.”

― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33542

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2021-11-03 17:18 +0000
Message-ID<SvzgJ.30521$Kw9.2049@fx45.iad>
In reply to#33527
On 2021-11-03, 1p166 <z24ba6.net> wrote:

> On 11/2/21 3:09 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2021-11-02, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 02/11/2021 05:04, 1p166 wrote:
>>>
>>>> People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
>>>> of that that tends to be the problem.
>>>
>>> I disagree, people are stupid everywhere, because inserting a penis
>>> in a vagina doesn't take any great intelligence. Nor does groaning
>>> and pushing the baby out or slapping it against a nipple.
>>>
>>> Even rats can do all that.
>
>    Aww ... Charlie ..............

Watch your attributions.  I didn't write any of the above.

>    Oh, and Lazarus Long is FICTIONAL.

The character might be fictional, but
his observations of life are very real.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Life is perverse.
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  It can be beautiful -
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  but it won't.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Lily Tomlin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33603

FromRich <rich@example.invalid>
Date2021-11-06 19:07 +0000
Message-ID<sm6jp7$cef$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#33522
In comp.os.linux.misc Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2021-11-02, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On 02/11/2021 05:04, 1p166 wrote:
>>
>>> People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
>>> of that that tends to be the problem.
>>
>> I disagree, people are stupid everywhere, because inserting a penis
>> in a vagina doesn't take any great intelligence. Nor does groaning
>> and pushing the baby out or slapping it against a nipple.
>>
>> Even rats can do all that.
>>
>> Society needs one or two 'bright' individuals on occasion when 
>> circumstances need a different approach.
>> But in general smart people are disliked and reviled and ignored
>> by the masses.
> 
>    Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man.
>    Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded - here and there,
>    now and then - are the work of an extremely small minority,
>    frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed
>    by all right-thinking people.  Whenever this tiny minority is
>    kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out
>    of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
>    This is known as ?bad luck.?
>      -- Robert A. Heinlein: The Notebooks of Lazarus Long

A great many years ago now, an Econ professor for a college Econ class 
related it like so (paraphrashing from memory):

    Poverty is the default, anything greater than poverty requires the 
    input of work.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33605

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2021-11-07 12:15 +0000
Message-ID<sm8g17$9do$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#33603
On 06/11/2021 19:07, Rich wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.misc Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2021-11-02, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/11/2021 05:04, 1p166 wrote:
>>>
>>>> People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
>>>> of that that tends to be the problem.
>>>
>>> I disagree, people are stupid everywhere, because inserting a penis
>>> in a vagina doesn't take any great intelligence. Nor does groaning
>>> and pushing the baby out or slapping it against a nipple.
>>>
>>> Even rats can do all that.
>>>
>>> Society needs one or two 'bright' individuals on occasion when
>>> circumstances need a different approach.
>>> But in general smart people are disliked and reviled and ignored
>>> by the masses.
>>
>>     Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man.
>>     Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded - here and there,
>>     now and then - are the work of an extremely small minority,
>>     frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed
>>     by all right-thinking people.  Whenever this tiny minority is
>>     kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out
>>     of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
>>     This is known as ?bad luck.?
>>       -- Robert A. Heinlein: The Notebooks of Lazarus Long
> 
> A great many years ago now, an Econ professor for a college Econ class
> related it like so (paraphrashing from memory):
> 
>      Poverty is the default, anything greater than poverty requires the
>      input of work.
> 
There is a strange fact, argued over by archaeologists and 
anthropologists, that hunter gatherers seem to have kept population 
numbers well below mass starvation levels. Only once people started 
eating cultivated starches did population levels, and famines, seem to 
arise.

Did they strangle surplus babies?


-- 
The New Left are the people they warned you about.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33608

FromRich <rich@example.invalid>
Date2021-11-07 13:55 +0000
Message-ID<sm8ls2$g1j$4@dont-email.me>
In reply to#33605
In comp.os.linux.misc The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 06/11/2021 19:07, Rich wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.misc Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2021-11-02, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 02/11/2021 05:04, 1p166 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
>>>>> of that that tends to be the problem.
>>>>
>>>> I disagree, people are stupid everywhere, because inserting a penis
>>>> in a vagina doesn't take any great intelligence. Nor does groaning
>>>> and pushing the baby out or slapping it against a nipple.
>>>>
>>>> Even rats can do all that.
>>>>
>>>> Society needs one or two 'bright' individuals on occasion when
>>>> circumstances need a different approach.
>>>> But in general smart people are disliked and reviled and ignored
>>>> by the masses.
>>>
>>>     Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man.
>>>     Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded - here and there,
>>>     now and then - are the work of an extremely small minority,
>>>     frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed
>>>     by all right-thinking people.  Whenever this tiny minority is
>>>     kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out
>>>     of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
>>>     This is known as ?bad luck.?
>>>       -- Robert A. Heinlein: The Notebooks of Lazarus Long
>> 
>> A great many years ago now, an Econ professor for a college Econ class
>> related it like so (paraphrashing from memory):
>> 
>>      Poverty is the default, anything greater than poverty requires the
>>      input of work.
>> 
> There is a strange fact, argued over by archaeologists and 
> anthropologists, that hunter gatherers seem to have kept population 
> numbers well below mass starvation levels. Only once people started 
> eating cultivated starches did population levels, and famines, seem to 
> arise.
> 
> Did they strangle surplus babies?

Not having been alive during the "hunter gatherer" era of human 
history, I do not have any idea how they accomplished this.  Most 
likely it was a combination of multiple interconnected factors.

And, a key word in your phrase is "seem".  Implying that the 
archaeologists and anthropologists may not even be so sure this was 
indeed the case or not.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33609

FromBobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com>
Date2021-11-07 07:59 -0800
Message-ID<sm8t5d$gua$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#33608
On 11/7/21 05:55, Rich wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.misc The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 06/11/2021 19:07, Rich wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 2021-11-02, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 02/11/2021 05:04, 1p166 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> People are SMART everywhere. It's the ability to make good USE
>>>>>> of that that tends to be the problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> I disagree, people are stupid everywhere, because inserting a penis
>>>>> in a vagina doesn't take any great intelligence. Nor does groaning
>>>>> and pushing the baby out or slapping it against a nipple.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even rats can do all that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Society needs one or two 'bright' individuals on occasion when
>>>>> circumstances need a different approach.
>>>>> But in general smart people are disliked and reviled and ignored
>>>>> by the masses.
>>>>
>>>>      Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man.
>>>>      Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded - here and there,
>>>>      now and then - are the work of an extremely small minority,
>>>>      frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed
>>>>      by all right-thinking people.  Whenever this tiny minority is
>>>>      kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out
>>>>      of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
>>>>      This is known as ?bad luck.?
>>>>        -- Robert A. Heinlein: The Notebooks of Lazarus Long
>>>
>>> A great many years ago now, an Econ professor for a college Econ class
>>> related it like so (paraphrashing from memory):
>>>
>>>       Poverty is the default, anything greater than poverty requires the
>>>       input of work.
>>>
>> There is a strange fact, argued over by archaeologists and
>> anthropologists, that hunter gatherers seem to have kept population
>> numbers well below mass starvation levels. Only once people started
>> eating cultivated starches did population levels, and famines, seem to
>> arise.
>>
>> Did they strangle surplus babies?
> 
> Not having been alive during the "hunter gatherer" era of human
> history, I do not have any idea how they accomplished this.  Most
> likely it was a combination of multiple interconnected factors.
> 
> And, a key word in your phrase is "seem".  Implying that the
> archaeologists and anthropologists may not even be so sure this was
> indeed the case or not.
> 
	Primitive cultures used abortion and exposure as did the ancient Greeks 
to dispose of unwanted or deformed infants. The women had found an herb 
to prevent conception but though over use it was driven into extinction. 
  Girls were often exposed just to hold down the population.
Sometime the exposed were eaten by wild animals and sometimes they
were rescued by slavers and other pimps. The American Indigenous
of the California area used abortion.

	Of course after an epidemic ripped through a population
a lot of children were no longer excess and escaped exposure.
Lots of infantile and childhood deaths before the modern era i.e.
before we came up with antibiotics and vaccines.  Such times
may return as the effect of drugs is diluted by over exposure
of the microbes to those antibiotics.

	And then of course the idiocy of the Anti-Vaccination
mob.  George Washington mandated smallpox vaccination by the
way at Valley Forge lest all his soldiers die.  We embraced
mandatory smallpox vaccination and eventually smallpox
was wiped out except in laboratories were it only exists
in isolated cultures for study.

bliss-“Nearly any fool can use a GNU/Linux computer. Many do.”
	 After all here I am...

-- 
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#33618 — Smallpox vaccine date(s) (Was: Who Knew ?)

Fromgazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack)
Date2021-11-11 20:12 +0000
SubjectSmallpox vaccine date(s) (Was: Who Knew ?)
Message-ID<smjtfm$g3mt$1@news.xmission.com>
In reply to#33609
In article <sm8t5d$gua$1@dont-email.me>,
Bobbie Sellers  <bliss@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
...
>	And then of course the idiocy of the Anti-Vaccination
>mob.  George Washington mandated smallpox vaccination by the
>way at Valley Forge lest all his soldiers die.

I keep hearing this story from the anti-anti-vax crowd (of which I am a
member), and it is a good story, but the sad fact is that the dates don't
quite line up.  Look it up.  The smallpox vaccine was discovered/invented
by Edward Jenner in 1796.  The American Revolutionary War was fought in the
late 1770s.

This is a problem.

-- 
[Donald] Trump didn't have it all handed to him by his parents,
like Hillary Clinton did.

	- Some dumb cluck in Ohio; featured in Michael Moore's "Trumpland" -

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc


csiph-web