A Safe Haven for Humanity?

On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 08:58:12 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

I consider the most likely resolution to the Fermi Paradox to be that
technological species are inherently unstable.

Or that making suitable kit to explore the galaxy as proposed by Fermi
is rather harder to get right than a simple analysis would suggest.

That seems unlikely. We have the science and most of the technology to
do it right now. Hard to imagine that capacity wouldn't be mature in a
few centuries.

The problem seems much more likely to be social than scientific.

On Monday, 6 March 2017 09:58:15 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
snip
There are deeper technical articles too but that basic premise is that
democracy is broken because the ignorati are now malleable putty in the
hands of sophisticated AI systems designed to exploit their inner fears.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

It does not take AI to recognise that TV advertising is aimed, very precisely, at a very low IQ audience.
"Educationally challenged" is the modern, PC term for mentally retarded.
The same goes for "soaps," most TV News channels and "Reality TV" of course.
Religion, obesity, sugar, takeaways, smoking, litter, poor fitness and the popularity of barely edible, toxic garbage are all clear indicators of the same problem.
We share a global "Idiocracy" with the breeders and mouth breathers.
Dumb and dumber outnumber "us" by a hundred million to one.
Many of them can be found behind the wheels of non-Google cars!

No feelings were intentionally hurt in the creation of this post. ;-))

On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 07:11:32 -0800 (PST), "Chris.B"
wrote:

On Monday, 6 March 2017 09:58:15 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
snip
There are deeper technical articles too but that basic premise is that
democracy is broken because the ignorati are now malleable putty in the
hands of sophisticated AI systems designed to exploit their inner fears.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

It does not take AI to recognise that TV advertising is aimed, very precisely, at a very low IQ audience.
"Educationally challenged" is the modern, PC term for mentally retarded.
The same goes for "soaps," most TV News channels and "Reality TV" of course.
Religion, obesity, sugar, takeaways, smoking, litter, poor fitness and the popularity of barely edible, toxic garbage are all clear indicators of the same problem.
We share a global "Idiocracy" with the breeders and mouth breathers.
Dumb and dumber outnumber "us" by a hundred million to one.
Many of them can be found behind the wheels of non-Google cars!

Our fundamental problem is not with stupid people. It is with people
who have not been trained in the methods of thinking. Anybody of
average intelligence or better (thus, a significant majority of the
population) is capable of critical, evidence-based thinking. It is
poor education, enabled by dogmatic political philosophy and dogmatic
religious philosophy that is at the root of our difficulties.

On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 8:24:45 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:

On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 07:11:32 -0800 (PST), "Chris.B"
wrote:

On Monday, 6 March 2017 09:58:15 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
snip
There are deeper technical articles too but that basic premise is that
democracy is broken because the ignorati are now malleable putty in the
hands of sophisticated AI systems designed to exploit their inner fears.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

That, and that those who believe they are superior are just as foolish.

It does not take AI to recognise that TV advertising is aimed, very
precisely, at a very low IQ audience.
"Educationally challenged" is the modern, PC term for mentally retarded..
The same goes for "soaps," most TV News channels and "Reality TV" of course.

How would you know unless you watched those shows?

Religion, obesity, sugar, takeaways, smoking, litter, poor fitness and
the popularity of barely edible, toxic garbage are all clear indicators
of the same problem.
We share a global "Idiocracy" with the breeders

That works pretty good for the animal kingdom.

and mouth breathers.

Dogs do it all the time.

Dumb and dumber outnumber "us" by a hundred million to one.
Many of them can be found behind the wheels of non-Google cars!

“Ninety-nine percent of the people in the world are fools and the
rest of us are in great danger of contagion.� – Thornton Wilder

You and Wilder have an elitist attitude.

Our fundamental problem is not with stupid people. It is with people
who have not been trained in the methods of thinking.

I've been re-reading "Gulf" wherein Heinlein brings up Renshaw on memory
training and Korzybski on semantics as bases for proper thinking.

Anybody of average intelligence or better (thus, a significant majority
of the population) is capable of critical, evidence-based thinking. It is
poor education, enabled by dogmatic political philosophy and dogmatic
religious philosophy that is at the root of our difficulties.

Baloney! The schools where the poorest learning occurs is in areas
controlled by "progressives" who refuse to hold pupils accountable for
their actions. THAT "dogmatic political philosophy" and the mistaken
belief that it's more important to indoctrinate students with "political
correctness" than it is to teach them the three "R's" are the REAL
reasons students can't think when they get out of school.

On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 08:48:13 -0800 (PST), Gary Harnagel
wrote:

That, and that those who believe they are superior are just as foolish.

Most of those you refer to actually are intellectually superior. But
people in the U.S. have been raised to lack respect for intelligence
and education. (Just look at you- a science denier who refuses to use
evidence-based thinking.)

You and Wilder have an elitist attitude.

There is nothing elitist about being smart and educated.

On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 9:48:15 AM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:
On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 8:24:45 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:

Anybody of average intelligence or better (thus, a significant majority
of the population) is capable of critical, evidence-based thinking. It is
poor education, enabled by dogmatic political philosophy and dogmatic
religious philosophy that is at the root of our difficulties.

Baloney! The schools where the poorest learning occurs is in areas
controlled by "progressives" who refuse to hold pupils accountable for
their actions. THAT "dogmatic political philosophy" and the mistaken
belief that it's more important to indoctrinate students with "political
correctness" than it is to teach them the three "R's" are the REAL
reasons students can't think when they get out of school.

I think that *both* of you have a point. Critical thinking is not taught because
it will offend the right wing - and the left wing would rather boost children's
self esteem than have them learn grammar, spelling, and arithmetic.

The "three R's" are a basic foundation, but students can be taught those without
having the ability to think creatively, independently, and critically. The
converse, however, is not true - without basic thinking skills, one can only
pretend to function in the higher-level tasks.

Now, it's not elitist to note that most people don't have genius-level IQs.
However, the idea that one *needs* a genius-level IQ to be able to determine
which side one's bread is buttered on, to determine where one's basic economic
interests lie, and otherwise to make rational use of the electoral franchise and
function as a responsible citizen of a democracy... it's one I disagree with,
but I'm not sure that "elitist" is the right word for it.

Of course, politicians are good at lying, which is one thing that tempts one to
consider that such a view has some truth.

I think that in the U.S., the Congressional committee system - which means
communities that don't return incumbents face the potential loss of Federal
spending in their districts, and hence jobs - makes it difficult for voters of
*any* intelligence level to exercise their vote in a way that works for their
good in both the short term and the long term.

Incidentally, this reminds me of this magazine article that was recently pointed
out to me:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...family/518280/

John Savard

On Thursday, 23 February 2017 11:29:59 UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:
While it appears extremely unlikely that Proxima Centauri b has an atmosphere, and
thus unlikely there is existing life on it...

according to Wikipedia, Proxima Centauri has an expected lifespan of four
*trillion* years... and at the end of its life, it will go straight to being a
white dwarf without becoming a red giant.

Also, it's 15,000 astronomical units away from Alpha Centauri A, a star which is a
lot like our Sun. So when *that* star becomes a red giant, that might be just an
interesting celestial spectacle from Proxima Centauri, rather than a threat to
people living on Proxima Centauri b.

Thus, we may be extremely fortunate in having a long-term safe home for humanity
nearby, just as we were fortunate in having the Moon to help us take our first
steps into space.

John Savard

What is the downside physiological of living off a red dwarf as opposed to a yellow main sequence star? Will our vision change to a different frequency span, something like that?

On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 7:04:43 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:

On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 9:48:15 AM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 8:24:45 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:

Anybody of average intelligence or better (thus, a significant majority
of the population) is capable of critical, evidence-based thinking. It is
poor education, enabled by dogmatic political philosophy and dogmatic
religious philosophy that is at the root of our difficulties.

Baloney! The schools where the poorest learning occurs is in areas
controlled by "progressives" who refuse to hold pupils accountable for
their actions. THAT "dogmatic political philosophy" and the mistaken
belief that it's more important to indoctrinate students with "political
correctness" than it is to teach them the three "R's" are the REAL
reasons students can't think when they get out of school.

I think that *both* of you have a point. Critical thinking is not taught
because it will offend the right wing - and the left wing would rather
boost children's self esteem than have them learn grammar, spelling, and
arithmetic.

Indeed! And attempts to" boost children's self-esteem" when they have not
done anything to deserve it is actually damaging. OTOH, acknowledging
their potential is uplifting.

The "three R's" are a basic foundation, but students can be taught those
without having the ability to think creatively, independently, and
critically. The converse, however, is not true - without basic thinking
skills, one can only pretend to function in the higher-level tasks.

Indeed again. And the latter are quite evident in the "professional"
workforce. Actually, it appears as laziness (they say, "Hey, my teachers
told me I'm great so I deserve high pay 'cause I've got it made."

Now, it's not elitist to note that most people don't have genius-level IQs.

Yep, 50% of the population must be below normal :-)

However, Wilder's 99% is hyperbole. And so is Heinlein's "average man"
who just manages to make it back from the store without breaking his leg.

However, the idea that one *needs* a genius-level IQ to be able to
determine which side one's bread is buttered on, to determine where one's
basic economic interests lie, and otherwise to make rational use of the
electoral franchise and function as a responsible citizen of a democracy...
it's one I disagree with, but I'm not sure that "elitist" is the right
word for it.

Of course, politicians are good at lying, which is one thing that tempts
one to consider that such a view has some truth.

I think that in the U.S., the Congressional committee system - which means
communities that don't return incumbents face the potential loss of Federal
spending in their districts, and hence jobs - makes it difficult for voters
of *any* intelligence level to exercise their vote in a way that works for
their good in both the short term and the long term.

Incidentally, this reminds me of this magazine article that was recently
pointed out to me:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...family/518280/

John Savard

Yes, quite so. We seem to be in a transition period where robotics are
taking over a lot of the menial jobs but the "menial" workers aren't
up to filling the new jobs that are created. After all, their teachers
told them they had it made so why would they have to stretch themselves?

On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 11:25:23 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:

On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 08:48:13 -0800 (PST), Gary Harnagel
wrote:

That, and that those who believe they are superior are just as foolish.

Most of those you refer to actually are intellectually superior.

You sound like an elitist :-)

But people in the U.S. have been raised to lack respect for intelligence
and education.

Yes. After all, it's more important to tell students they're great,
particularly when they haven't done anything.

(Just look at you- a science denier who refuses to use
evidence-based thinking.)

First of all, I am NOT a "science denier." This is a pejorative that you
casually throw around to prevent critical discussion. You have done
NOTHING in the way of presenting convincing evidence while others (like
Raz and Savard) have actually DISCUSSED the evidence and have affected my
thinking. IOW, I have NEVER observed any critical thinking come from you,
only claims that I should fall in line 'cause everyone who counts says so.

You and Wilder have an elitist attitude.

There is nothing elitist about being smart and educated.

There is claiming 99% of the population are fools.

On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 05:48:57 -0800 (PST), Gary Harnagel
wrote:

(Just look at you- a science denier who refuses to use
evidence-based thinking.)

First of all, I am NOT a "science denier." This is a pejorative that you
casually throw around to prevent critical discussion.

You are a science denier. Not a pejorative, just a simple fact.