Sunday, February 9, 2014

Snack time


The Keystone Garter said...

I've figured out why the Greeks developed rationality. It was their myths. Their gods weren't perfect; were petty and political. This gave them the impetus to be better than their gods. The content of religions may also be important: love your neighbour and such forth. But ultimately The Iliad gods are more fallible than is Christianity which is less rote than is the Koran, all else equal.

This rational thinking is probably why AGW deniers such as the GOP and the CPC would be bad future-WMD administrators. IUt could be the loyalty accrued from believing in immortality in heaven keeps you sane and is better than dealing with potential mortality, but more than likely the same advisers, thought errors and allies that tell you to ignore AGW will cause you to ignore ways to avert tyranny and AI and pandemics. It is difficult to identify who good advisors are for averting future risks, but something like AGW is rational since Boyle discovered CO2 in the 1700s.
Too powerful a WMD sensor netowrk begets the risks of:
1) Treaty failure or divil unrest sabotage or triggers WWIII.
2) Tyranny.
3) Economic/QofL tax.
vs too weak a network triggering: 4) a failure to locate a future WMD.
5) Hacked/lost C+C occurs with both.
6) As does the risk of the network failing far in the future when technology ensures rapid development of a WMD/tyranny.
McCarthy and Stalin and Hitler are good examples of how tyranny happens. The Greeks and Romans failed when empire booty triggered political corruption as the raison d'aitre of their civlizations.
Stalin attacked the Courts later.

The Keystone Garter said...

...the militancy/patriotism of the Scots, 1150BC Sea Raiders, and 1890 Winnipeggers, might have something positive to do, at least in concert with rationality/education, with high a ROE population; in 1890 Wpg if your Court decision wasn't liked you might be tarred and feathered.
I'm studying tyranny. Checks and balances discovered optimal for using a sensor network, might not be applied. They might accidentally make things worse. The bureaucracy of an FDA to prevent supersmart technology or an AI tyrant, or whatever, will cost money and might cause everyone to shoot the sensors in a recession or something.
Over the long-term, maybe most people can be happy neocon Christians, but you'd want at least some people to be heroic and smart in reserve at least; NASA's Project Starship might get us the ability go to the nearest stars by century's end...B.Clinton didn't believe in dramatic changes to law (or anything else) as the French Revolution's means became their ends. But eventually the network could fail, and you'd have this at least small group of rational people who would be able to quickly prototype WMDs in darker moods. So we might need nootropic brain technologies eventually, which are themselves dangerous to behaviour...
Basically, the market forces rhetoric means GOP administrations can stack the Courts, and the same process occurs here when AB/SK, provinces that got GOP immigrants around 1900, get power after the PC CA merger. Hopefully you can measure who is rational and humane and/or who uses rational/humane advisors. Then you can reduce their ability to screw with this sensor network. Harper wisely kept us in Afghanistan, else it might be a bioterror lab. That means Harper, IDK about his Biblical oil cronies, would be good for #4 risks. Maybe can be in sensor power for #4 risks, but not #1-3?
My computer programming will focus upon #5. Alot of political leaders in Canada nad the USA are lawyers.