Where's the Free Market Going with Commercial Space Development?

On Sep 20, 7:18*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

More Mookie Mewling showing that the poor sod simply can't read
English and ignores what people say.

Hint: *Follow my original link on what Moore says *NOW* about "Moore's
Law".

'Nuff said...

On Sep 20, 3:20*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Sep 18, 2:46*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Sep 5, 8:13*pm, Howard Brazee wrote:
On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 13:52:15 -0700 (PDT), William Mook

wrote:
Am I immortal? *I don't know. *But there is reason to believe nearly
all of us alive today may be. *If you track longevity over time, you
will see that it is a hyperbolic function that reaches infinity in
2200 AD.

So when has that type of extrapolation ever worked out in real life?

Moore curve.

Nope. *

Yes. *Anyone who says the Moore curve hasn't worked out in real life
just isn't aware of what has transpired over the past FIFTY years in
the field of computer science and electronics! *lol.

Nope. *

Yes.

Your 'logic' (and I use that term as loosely as possible to fit
you within it) is that it will continue indefinitely. *

Never said any of that Freddie, and neither did Gordon. *In '65
extrapolating from 1958 data he thought it would last maybe 10 more
years. *Its lasted 50!! *That's an extrapolation that's worked! *Which
is what Howard asked for and to which I was replying.

NOBODY believes
that.

Nobody believes you Freddie.

Even Moore says we're coming to the end of that.

You're misquoting Gordon Freddie.

Hogwash, you ignorant git.

No, if you'd actually read the 1965 paper he thought it might last 10
years in 1965 - the extrapolation made in 1965 from data starting in
1958 lasted well beyond 1975 - which is an example of something Howard
was asking about.

Mookie's proof that he can read and plagiarize Wikipedia elided

Try this and educate yourself.

http://news.techworld.com/operating-...-law-is-dead-s....

Try understanding what I write rather than saying hurtful things -
IEEE projected that feature sizes would approach 1 nm by Sept 2011
Freddie - no one said Moore's law was under pressure given lattice
spacing was 0.54 nm.

Moore's prediction has been accurate for over 50 years. *Thus
providing an answer to Howard's question.

No, it doesn't.

Yes it does.

*You ASSUME that lifespan will continue to increase as
it has in the recent past.

No I didn't. *I gave Moore's law operating from 1958 through 2008 and
extrapolated in 1965 as an example of an extrapolation that actually
worked - which is what Howard asked for. *You are the one coming up
with wrong conclusions based on willful misreading of what I've said.

*There are *NO* examples that support that
sort of thing anywhere,

So?

and PARTICULARLY not in the world of
semiconductors.

Bull****. *Moore's Law is an extrapolation made in 1965 on only 7
years of data that Gordon Moore said would last maybe through 1975.
It has lasted well beyond that making it an example of an
extrapolation that worked - which is what Howard asked for.

Care to try again?

Care to say something accurate?

Care to return to the reality the rest of us are using?

You're the only one spouting delusional bull Freddie.

--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
*man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
*all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --George Bernard Shaw

Moore said at the outset his law was limited by the size of atoms.
That's why in 1965 he said that perhaps 1975 would see the end of this
law. The fact that doubling transistor count every 24 months occured
through 2008 is amazing. Fact is, I fully agree with Moore on things
coming to an end. There will be an end. I agree with IEEE who
reported a few months ago that we'd reach 1 nm feature sizes Sept 2011
- which given that lattice spacing is 0.253 nm in Silicon must be
close to the end of Moore law based on planar construction.

None of this changes the fact that

(a) Moore's law is a real world example of an extrapolation that
worked;

(b) Such laws can be identified for other processes to organize
development in other technologies.


Moore's law will not magically substitute for the hard work and rich
understanding needed to sustain real growth. The 'failure' of Moore's
law, upon reaching the limit of the extrapolation, a limit identified
at the outset, does not prove useful extrapolations do not exist or
cannot work.

On Sep 20, 7:23*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Sep 20, 3:24*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Sep 18, 10:30*am, Howard Brazee wrote:
On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 22:43:37 -0700 (PDT), William Mook

wrote:
So when has that type of extrapolation ever worked out in real life?

Moore curve.

Not to infinity. *

So?

So you failed to answer the question.

What question do you imagine I failed to answer Freddie? *

The one he asked, you pathetic Mook.


What question do you imagine that to be Freddie?

You asked when has any extrapolation ever worked?

No he didn't. *He asked "when has that type of extrapolation [to
infinity and beyond] ever worked out in real life?"

He didn't say to infinity and beyond - you did. *Haha and you can't go
beyond infinity! *lol. *You must get your entertainment the same place
you get your education TOY STORY. *lol.

Context - get some.

No, context is something you continue to ignore. Moore's law is real
world example of an extrapolation that works. We do ourselves a
disservice when we fail to look for others equally useful in other
areas of knowledge. Moore's law

I can't decide if you really are as stupid as you sound or you just
think everyone else is and will buy your Mookie Mewling.

I'm a genius Freddie, you are not. In fact, my IQ is so high that if
I were in a room with 100 geniuses, I'd likely be the one with the
highest IQ.

My mental capabilities irritate you and perhaps scare you that's why
you spend incredible amounts of time and effort in a vain attempt to
discredit what I say in the most hurtful way you can think of -
stooping even to dishonesty to make points that are in the end no
backed up by reality.

snip same old ****e

haha - Reality is what reality is Freddie. You either are helped by
understanding it, or hurt by mis-understanding it. Snipping what you
don't like won't change a thing. Reality needs no defense - you do.


--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

On Sep 20, 7:25 am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

massive meandering Mookie Mewling munched

You're a loon, Mook.

No, Freddie, that title is reserved for you.

You might as well accept it.

I accept the fact that you're nuts and I can't let your hatred of my
superiority affect me negatively.

It's not like you
can hide it from anyone else.

Projecting again Freddie? haha - You can't hide what you are from
anyone Freddie - and I can tell you from first hand experience - it
isn't pleasant. You must lead a lonely painful existence.

I mean, the only person that takes you seriously is The Guthball and
we're all pretty sure he should probably be institutionalized...

Functionally, you are a Bizzaro Guthball or Guthball is a Bizarro
Freddie and together you both operate to delimit any real discussion
of real science related to rockets and space technology - thus closing
usenet as a channel for any information that might threaten MTCR.

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

On Sep 21, 2:04*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

None of this changes the fact that

(a) Moore's law is a real world example of an extrapolation that
worked;

And it was *NOT* an answer to the question you were asked.

Yes it was. Howard asked when have extrapolations ever worked in the
real world. I answered, Moore's Law. End of debate.


(b) Such laws can be identified for other processes to organize
development in other technologies.

But none of them run indefinitely,

When did I say any extrapolation ran indefinitely? You said that and
gave sound reasons to suppose they do not.

Since human civilization is less than 10,000 years old, I would say
I'll have to wait and see on any such claim at indefinite processes.

With respect to an extrapolation that worked in real life, Moore's Law
is a good one. Moore himself didn't expect it to sustain beyond 1975
- for good and valid reasons and yet, here we are in 2010 with it
still going strong. There are other good and valid reasons to suppose
we'll reach an end to Moore's extrapolation on Sept 2011 - and Moore
is vocal about the importance of searching for other processes to
direct investment and research beyond that. Yet, other, younger
capable people are pointing to slight modification in the core
processes for IC manufacture that may sustain the growth through Feb
2053 - as to whether that works or not - we'll have to wait and
see.

as you presuppose for life
extension in your claim about how immortality is just around the
corner.

Um, I said that the best fit of the historical data on longevity is a
hyperbolic function which tends toward infinity around 2200 AD. If
you think another one fits better, what is it? I also said this in
response to a question asked by Guth am I immortal? THAT WAS A
SEPARATE QUESTION. Guth and Brazee are two different people who asked
two different questions. So, don't get confused.

To my mind Guth's question meant would I live long enough to see the
changes I keep talking about that are possible in the human
condition. My response is, I hope so. I gave sound reasons for
believing in that hope.



--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn

On Sep 21, 2:15*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Sep 20, 7:23*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Sep 20, 3:24*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Sep 18, 10:30*am, Howard Brazee wrote:
On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 22:43:37 -0700 (PDT), William Mook

wrote:
So when has that type of extrapolation ever worked out in real life?

Moore curve.

Not to infinity. *

So?

So you failed to answer the question.

What question do you imagine I failed to answer Freddie? *

The one he asked, you pathetic Mook.

What question do you imagine that to be Freddie?

No 'imagine' to it, Mookie.

You are certainly imagining something judging by the errors you are
making in restating what was said.

*It's right down there.

Nonsense.

*All you had to do
was read another line

You're the one who snips replies and re-arranges them to suit you.
Brazee asked what extrapolation has ever worked in real life, and I
replied Moore's Law. You are the one who is getting his shorts in a
twist about a totally separate question Guth asked. haha..

[snip - pointless verbal abuse]

You asked when has any extrapolation ever worked?

No he didn't. *He asked "when has that type of extrapolation [to
infinity and beyond] ever worked out in real life?"

He didn't say to infinity and beyond - you did. *Haha and you can't go
beyond infinity! *lol. *You must get your entertainment the same place
you get your education TOY STORY. *lol.

Context - get some.

No, context is something you continue to ignore. *Moore's law is *real
world example of an extrapolation that works. *We do ourselves a
disservice when we fail to look for others equally useful in other
areas of knowledge. *Moore's law

Except it doesn't answer the question. *

Yes it does. Its an example of an extrapolation that works in real
life. Moore himself didn't expect his law to last beyond 1975 and yet
here we are in 2010 with the law still strong and working - with
people predicting that by Sept 2011 we'll be very near the limit since
feature size will be about 4x the lattice spacing of Silicon
crystals. Moore himself urges the investment and research communities
to get off his law and onto more fruitful thoughts. Still, with
slight changes in the way ICs are processed, using MEMS technologies
that have been developing over the past 20 years, we may see a
continuation of growth to Feb 2053 - by working volumetric structures
rather than planar structures.

[snip - personally abusive attacks]

I can't decide if you really are as stupid as you sound or you just
think everyone else is and will buy your Mookie Mewling.

I'm a genius Freddie, you are not. *In fact, my IQ is so high that if
I were in a room with 100 geniuses, I'd likely be the one with the
highest IQ.

Mookie, you sound just like every other loon that posts to these
groups.

No I don't. I'm stating fact.

*It's not YOU that is nuts;

Nonsense. I was replying factually to the abusive statement you made
that I was stupid.

it's everyone else is small minded
or stupid or part of some vast conspiracy against you or some such.

More stuff and nonsense. What I've said - without all the dross you
keep adding is rather simple;

(1) Guth asks - am I immortal.
(2) I reply - the best fit for longevity is a hyperbolic function -
if true
many of us alive today will be alive for a very long time.
(3) Brazee asks - when has an extrapolation ever worked in reality
(4) I reply - Moore's law.

Which you used to launch an abusive tirade against all I am.

In addition

(5) Brazee observes - what we know today about aging is what we knew
years ago
(6) I reply - not so, I point out the Hayflick Limit, the discovery
of telomeres, the discovery of telomerase, the linking of telomerase
expression in cancer and so forth...

Which you ignored since it likely went well beyond what you know, and
you couldn't shape it into a hateful tirade.

Along the way you Freddie, pick and choose from the discussion to
create hateful hurtful and false impressions in public of me and all I
do and all I hold dear. I hate you for that Freddie, I deeply and
sincrely hate you - and in some sense I don't want you to get away
with all you say about me without some effort on my part to correct
this terrible and hateful things you say of me. That explains my
interest in you idiotic commentary.

On the other hand, one has to wonder what the hell motivates you? Its
not enough that you think me a loon and you just ignore me. You've
got to make sure no one else pays any attention either. Why is that?
Don't you trust them? Are you the guardian of Truth? haha - that's a
sort of madness you know.

But one has to wonder what it is you do. You work on secret
projects. ooohh. No one's impressed. Or believes you.

But, still it does make one wonder. What is it you really do?

It doesn't seem to matter what is said, as long as it is off putting
to the casual reader. So, you are stalking me Freddie. Why?

Slander and other dirty tricks have a long history

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_tricks

Many of these dirty tricks you have exercised here against me.

It isn't beyond the realm of possibility that very smart people like
me are monitored and find themselves at the short end of a stick from
time to time when they stray into areas the government would rather
not have us stray into. MCTR is at risk in groups like this
especially with people like me talking. Taking appropriate legal
action against those that are to be silenced only signals those who
are to be denied missile secrets that what was said was important and
since its on the internet before action is taken, the game is lost.
The ONLY way groups such as this are to be safeguarded against leaks
that would weaken MCTR is to stalk and bash posts that could represent
leaks, and make it so unpleasant for those who are real threats to
MCTR to stop posting.

I'm not saying this is what is going on. I am only saying that if I
were in charge of keeping missile secrets secret, I would find usenet
a possible source of weakness and exercise well established dirty
tricks to keep good people from reading and writing on the groups.

This would explain the inordinate amount of time you spend stalking me
and bashing me. But I admit there are other possibilities - such as,
you are crazy and cannot stomach someone being smarter than you
showing you up for the fool you are.

Of course if I were selecting someone to keep usenet from becoming a
vehicle for losing control of missile secrets, I would choose you and
Guth as a team - you are really quite effective together.

This isn't an evil conspiracy - its just business as usual.

It isn't directed at me personally, its just that I happen to know a
thing or two.

My mental capabilities irritate you and perhaps scare you that's why
you spend incredible amounts of time and effort in a vain attempt to
discredit what I say in the most hurtful way you can think of -
stooping even to dishonesty to make points that are in the end no
backed up by reality.

I wouldn't be surprised if you really are nuts enough to believe the
preceding. *It would certainly explain your rapport with folks like
The Guthball.

You have more a rapport with Guth than I.




snip same old ****e

haha - Reality is what reality is Freddie. *You either are helped by
understanding it, or hurt by mis-understanding it. *Snipping what you
don't like won't change a thing. *Reality needs no defense - you do.

Another threat, Mr Mook?

Only in your paranoid mind Freddie. lol.

And you're right. *Reality is what it is

Yes.

and what it ISN'T is the
insane spew you put out.

Then, it doesn't need you to defend it then does it? What motivates
you to spend so much time stalking me Freddie?

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

On Sep 21, 10:11*am, William Mook wrote:
On Sep 21, 2:04*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:

William Mook wrote:

None of this changes the fact that

(a) Moore's law is a real world example of an extrapolation that
worked;

And it was *NOT* an answer to the question you were asked.

Yes it was. *Howard asked when have extrapolations ever worked in the
real world. *I answered, Moore's Law. *End of debate.



(b) Such laws can be identified for other processes to organize
development in other technologies.

But none of them run indefinitely,

When did I say any extrapolation ran indefinitely? *You said that and
gave sound reasons to suppose they do not.

Since human civilization is less than 10,000 years old, I would say
I'll have to wait and see on any such claim at indefinite processes.

With respect to an extrapolation that worked in real life, Moore's Law
is a good one. *Moore himself didn't expect it to sustain beyond 1975
- for good and valid reasons and yet, here we are in 2010 with it
still going strong. *There are other good and valid reasons to suppose
we'll reach an end to Moore's extrapolation on Sept 2011 - and Moore
is vocal about the importance of searching for other processes to
direct investment and research beyond that. *Yet, other, younger
capable people are pointing to slight modification in the core
processes for IC manufacture that may sustain the growth through Feb
2053 - *as to whether that works or not - we'll have to wait and
see.

as you presuppose for life
extension in your claim about how immortality is just around the
corner.

Um, I said that the best fit of the historical data on longevity is a
hyperbolic function which tends toward infinity around 2200 AD. *If
you think another one fits better, what is it? *I also said this in
response to a question asked by Guth am I immortal? *THAT WAS A
SEPARATE QUESTION. *Guth and Brazee are two different people who asked
two different questions. *So, don't get confused.

To my mind Guth's question meant would I live long enough to see the
changes I keep talking about that are possible in the human
condition. *My response is, I hope so. *I gave sound reasons for
believing in that hope.



--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn

Perhaps you should become a Rothschild "sean", as an immortal with
unlimited powers and authority you can pretty much take as long as you
like, and/or slack off and pretend as much as you like. Meanwhile the
rest of us mortal village idiots that are not nearly as well to do,
have to be somewhat selective and thus pick and choose our goals and
especially our fights carefully.

If we can not get you in charge of anything NASA, DARPA or even DoE
that'll put your better fly-by-rocket technology, Mook SSP
alternatives and/or those Mook green/renewable volumes of cheap
hydrogen on the map of what you claim and I tend to agree that we
can't live without, then what is anyone to do with your best ideas or
those of anyone else?

If you were given a blank Federal Reserve check or their plutonium
credit card, with an unlimited line of credit for accomplishing any
one specific thing; what would that one thing be?

At least our Steven Chu as our Secretary of Energy has been quietly
assisting a few geothermal prototypes of clean energy advancements,
that should pay off in the near future. (hopefully the sooner the
better)

So what’s the one next big thing by William Mook that’s going all the
way for us?

~ BG

On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:11:19 -0700 (PDT), William Mook
wrote:

And it was *NOT* an answer to the question you were asked.

Yes it was. Howard asked when have extrapolations ever worked in the
real world. I answered, Moore's Law. End of debate.

I intended to say "So when has that type of extrapolation ever worked
out in real life?". Which is not the same thing.

"That type of extrapolation" is one that doesn't end - immortality is
beyond extrapolation - it is infinite.

So you answered a question that is different from the one I asked,
which is why there continues to be a debate, despite your observation
to the contrary.

--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."

- James Madison

Howard Brazee wrote:
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:11:19 -0700 (PDT), William Mook
wrote:

And it was *NOT* an answer to the question you were asked.

Yes it was. Howard asked when have extrapolations ever worked in the
real world. I answered, Moore's Law. End of debate.

I intended to say "So when has that type of extrapolation ever worked
out in real life?". Which is not the same thing.

"That type of extrapolation" is one that doesn't end - immortality is
beyond extrapolation - it is infinite.

You asked a question that cannot be answered. "Who can say he is
immortal, until he has reached the end of time?"

--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com

On Sep 21, 9:29*pm, Howard Brazee wrote:
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:11:19 -0700 (PDT), William Mook

wrote:
And it was *NOT* an answer to the question you were asked.

Yes it was. *Howard asked when have extrapolations ever worked in the
real world. *I answered, Moore's Law. *End of debate.

I intended to say "So when has that type of extrapolation ever worked
out in real life?". * *Which is not the same thing.

"That type of extrapolation" is one that doesn't end - immortality is
beyond extrapolation - it is infinite.

So you answered a question that is different from the one I asked,
which is why there continues to be a debate, despite your observation
to the contrary.

--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."

- James Madison

Well, I read it differently. I would say no extrapolation that
involved infinities COULD work out in real life since human
civilization and record keeping has been around only 10,000 years or
so. In a very real sense if we extended life span to say 1,000 years
- it would be a real game changer - and it would meet certain usages
of 'immortal' in the context of Guth's original question.

On Sep 21, 2:40*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Sep 21, 10:11*am, William Mook wrote:



On Sep 21, 2:04*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:

William Mook wrote:

None of this changes the fact that

(a) Moore's law is a real world example of an extrapolation that
worked;

And it was *NOT* an answer to the question you were asked.

Yes it was. *Howard asked when have extrapolations ever worked in the
real world. *I answered, Moore's Law. *End of debate.

(b) Such laws can be identified for other processes to organize
development in other technologies.

But none of them run indefinitely,

When did I say any extrapolation ran indefinitely? *You said that and
gave sound reasons to suppose they do not.

Since human civilization is less than 10,000 years old, I would say
I'll have to wait and see on any such claim at indefinite processes.

With respect to an extrapolation that worked in real life, Moore's Law
is a good one. *Moore himself didn't expect it to sustain beyond 1975
- for good and valid reasons and yet, here we are in 2010 with it
still going strong. *There are other good and valid reasons to suppose
we'll reach an end to Moore's extrapolation on Sept 2011 - and Moore
is vocal about the importance of searching for other processes to
direct investment and research beyond that. *Yet, other, younger
capable people are pointing to slight modification in the core
processes for IC manufacture that may sustain the growth through Feb
2053 - *as to whether that works or not - we'll have to wait and
see.

as you presuppose for life
extension in your claim about how immortality is just around the
corner.

Um, I said that the best fit of the historical data on longevity is a
hyperbolic function which tends toward infinity around 2200 AD. *If
you think another one fits better, what is it? *I also said this in
response to a question asked by Guth am I immortal? *THAT WAS A
SEPARATE QUESTION. *Guth and Brazee are two different people who asked
two different questions. *So, don't get confused.

To my mind Guth's question meant would I live long enough to see the
changes I keep talking about that are possible in the human
condition. *My response is, I hope so. *I gave sound reasons for
believing in that hope.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn

Perhaps you should become a Rothschild "sean", as an immortal with
unlimited powers and authority you can pretty much take as long as you
like, and/or slack off and pretend as much as you like. *Meanwhile the
rest of us mortal village idiots that are not nearly as well to do,
have to be somewhat selective and thus pick and choose our goals and
especially our fights carefully.

Successful extension of human life span and vitality resulting from
longevity research flies in the face of George Bernard Shaw's longing
after a depopulation bomb. So, its likely not to be welcomed by
anyone who worries about over population. Still, its something we can
do if we want to. Its something that will change the very nature of
human existence. Living in a society where people do not die - for a
period of 1,000 years - will radically transform society over that
1,000 years.


If we can not get you in charge of anything NASA, DARPA or even DoE
that'll put your better fly-by-rocket technology, Mook SSP
alternatives and/or those Mook green/renewable volumes of cheap
hydrogen on the map of what you claim and I tend to agree that we
can't live without, then what is anyone to do with your best ideas or
those of anyone else?

Since the 1940s and well established by the 1960s - following the
strict letter of the law - committees have arose to take decisions in
secret to help maintain USA leadership in a nuclear and scientific
age. We are at the end of this era which will dissolve through
increasingly appalling common mode failure - and usher in another
state of affairs.

If you were given a blank Federal Reserve check or their plutonium
credit card, with an unlimited line of credit for accomplishing any
one specific thing; *what would that one thing be?

Focusing on specific organizations is like focusing on the symptoms
rather than understanding the disease.

At least our Steven Chu as our Secretary of Energy has been quietly
assisting a few geothermal prototypes of clean energy advancements,

Focusing on specific personalities satisfies human emotional needs,
but merely confuses the issues involved.

that should pay off in the near future. (hopefully the sooner the
better)

So what’s the one next big thing by William Mook that’s going all the
way for us?

*~ BG

The human race faces a die off as it depletes its natural resources.
The wise guys that are responsible for the cardinal decisions of our
society are attempting to manage the die off to benefit the USA. They
will fail in this attempt. If they fail early, we have a chance to
build something new - around our current understanding of how
organizations work and how behavior emerges from groups - with the
likely survival of most of us. If they fail late, most of us alive
today will die - and those survivors, will have a chance to rebuild
along the same lines then - but with far less cultural and social and
biological diversity. This will likely be rebuilt in the next 10,000
years as we expand across the cosmos - as personalities are recovered
from the past.