Some Latest Thoughts: Decabillionaires, Bostrom, De Grey, and Greg Bear's "Vitals"

Hi readers. Good news, I'm still alive. :)

I don't have a lot of time to devote to this post, but I wanted to get some ideas out there into the noosphere and in a slackerly way honor my once per week posting commitment (I'm happy to report I welched on last week's promised post and devoted my energy to "me" time instead).

But a sincere thanks to the readers who welcomed me back in the comments.

So here are some of the ideas.

1. Economic activity, and size of economic control and power may be a more accurate way to measure organismal size and strength than the size of the semi-permeable molecular membrane that surrounds it. In specific application, it might be more useful to consider decabillionaires among the largest organism that we know about, and many indigenous humans to be organisms about the same size as other primates. I remember reading about some anthropological thought about the degree to which tools should be considered part of an organism, and this mode of analysis could fit within that tradition.

2. I read "Vitals" by author Greg Bear, a great fiction book which I recommend to readers. I identify with the Cousins twins, and every other character seeking persistence maximization in the novel, but I think the book is worth mentioning because he spells out an interesting speculative theory about bacterial intelligence and cooperation -pointing out proven ways, for example, that infectious diseases can change animal (including human) behavior in such ways to facilitate the spread of those diseases. As SETI progresses, I remain disappointed that more energy isn't being spent to search for intelligence and agency here on earth in nontraditional areas, such as in groupings of humans (corporations, markets, nations, religions) networked IT devices, and in groupings of non-human organisms, such as in "Vitals". I also enjoyed reading "Rainbow's End", by Vernor Vinge, which touched on the IT emergent intelligence angle.

3. I recall reading recently about a study that demonstrates crowds can be moved by coordinated action by a handful of people within the crowd. This may be great news, because it potentially demonstrates a way that dumb behavior of the masses can be turned to more rational ends. Perhaps coordinated actions can be devised whereby a handful of moles within the Catholic church, evangelical christianity, and the major elements of other widespread religions such as islam can get widespread grassroots support for  investment in solving aging and minimizing existential risk.

4. Good news: Nick Bostrom is working a lot on reducing existential risk. An enterprising rich guy could steal a locket of Bostrom's hair and clone a bunch of him -might be doing us all a very big favor. Me personally, I wouldn't do it or encourage it, but that's because I'm a law abiding citizen. :)

From Bostrom's website:

"MARCH 2008

Working on two papers, one on moral uncertainty, the other on ethical issues related to artificial intelligence; and a short article on the Fermi paradox; and a collaborative roadmap project for brain emulation technology. Also thinking about the general challenges of rationality/wisdom in relation to big picture issues for humanity. "

5. Abrey de Gray is scheduled to defend the quest to cure aging at a bioethics conference sponsored by a christian organization partial to biblical values.

About the Center for Bioethics and and Human Dignity:

http://www.cbhd.org/aboutcbhd/index.html

"In 1993, more than a dozen leading Christian bioethicists gathered to assess the noticeable lack of explicit Christian engagement in the crucial bioethics arena. This group sponsored a major conference in May 1994, "The Christian Stake in Bioethics," and concurrently launched The Center for Bioethics & Human Dignity."

About the conference and Aubrey de Gray's announced involvement:

http://christiannewswire.com/news/710975833.html

"PHOENIX, Feb. 28 /Christian Newswire/ -- The Center for Bioethics & Human Dignity (CBHD) announces a public debate on radical life extension technology between the "Titans of Immortality Research," S. Jay Olshanksy, PhD, a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and Aubrey de Grey, PhD, a biomedical gerontologist with The Methuselah Foundation. The evening will be moderated by Anne McNamara, PhD, Grand Canyon University and will center on the question "Do you want to live forever?" The debate is free to the public and will be held in the Irene P. Flinn IMAX theater at the Arizona Science Center on March 6 beginning at 7:30 p.m. Olshanksy is coauthor of "The Quest for Immortality," while de Grey is coauthor of "Ending Aging" and editor-in-chief of Rejuvenation Research."

My thoughts on this christian/life-extensionist meeting: pretty much summed up by #3.

6. Caught the news about the world seed bank being put in a scandinavian country (Denmark?) Chosen because of its security: would remain frozen even during worst global warming scenarios. Thought occurs: is it also the optimal place to locate cryonically frozen bodies? If not, where?

Well, that's all I have time to write this week. Daily posts should start by Monday next week. Some questions to readers until then:

1. How would you evaluate your personal economic health? How does it compare to the impresssion others who are in your friend and/or competition cohorts view your economic health?

2. Where would be the optimal place to locate cryonic storage facilities?

Best of sucess in our persistence maximizing collaborations,

HA.

Comments

[TGGP]

On size, you are looking at something different and should pick a different word. People don't assume that someone is strong because they are fat. Size is volume, "impact" or "importance" is something different.

I am also interested in how diseases affect human behavior. Check out this on Greg Cochran and Paul Ewald's "New Germ Theory", this on a link between pathogens and collectivism and this on Toxoplasma gondii and human culture. While not discussing human behavior, I also like Competitive Release and Antibiotic Resistance, which I found relevant to the discussion on antinatalism.

[TGGP]

Eliezer Yudkowsky has had a string of posts on words, labels and meanings. I don't feel like listing them all again, since I already did it here.

[Nick Tarleton]

Thought occurs: is it also the optimal place to locate cryonically frozen bodies? If not, where?

From the Cryonics Institute:

"Why don't we set up a facility in the Arctic? The lower external temperature makes very little difference to the boil off of cryogens. Access, staffing and management would be much more expensive."

The lowest recorded temperature on Earth is -89 C (-129 F); liquid nitrogen is at or below -196 C (-321 F). So it doesn't seem like storage in cold places would help too much.

Optimal? Someplace politically secure, with low natural disaster risk, and easily accessible, I suppose.

[TGGP]

I remember reading about some anthropological thought about the degree to which tools should be considered part of an organism, and this mode of analysis could fit within that tradition.
That reminds me of Richard Dawkins' notion of an "extended phenotype".