Talk-Polywell.org

a discussion forum for Polywell fusion
It is currently Tue Sep 23, 2014 10:20 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 120 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 9:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:17 pm
Posts: 78
KitemanSA wrote:
Kind of like the socialists?


Yes... Like the military, the largest socialist organization in the country.

OTOH, we tried outsourcing military functions to capitalistic private armies in the past. The Pinkertons (who were larger than the standing Army of the US at the time) and more recently Blackwater. That didn't work out so well either. What's a country to do.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 9:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am
Posts: 2114
In the military you swear subordination, not mindless obedience. In voting on politics most people do not do their own homework, but more or less vaguely base themselves on what their party's PR feeds them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:17 pm
Posts: 78
Betruger wrote:
In the military you swear subordination, not mindless obedience. In voting on politics most people do not do their own homework, but more or less vaguely base themselves on what their party's PR feeds them.


I fail to see the difference between mindfully and mindlessly being obedient. As either way you're obedient. In the military your options for free speech are easily curtailed. I do recall one Army officer Lt. Dan Choi who elected to uphold his oath as an officer after investigating the circumstances of our invasion of Iraq and determining that we were involved in an illegal war. He had, by the way, already served a tour of duty in Iraq. But still, it didn't go well for him.

I agree with your point on politics; that most people don't do their homework.

For those that do try to do their homework though the system is decidedly rigged against them almost totally in the executive and legislative branches with the media acting as surrogates for the government. The Judiciary would seem to be the most transparent (excepting the FISA security court) although that doesn't mean the game isn't rigged as we've seen with the Gore vs Bush and Citizen's United decisions.

Elected politicians... What a farce. Maybe they should be drafted instead. Or direct democracy for those who can demonstrate a competent understanding of the issues being voted on with representatives voting for those who can't. Coupled with a good leavening of mandatory infantry service in order to be considered a citizen.

WDYT? A little too much Heinlein or not enough? We could throw in some Orson Scott Card and Peter F. Hamilton for good measure.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 12:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 926
Location: Ohio
williatw wrote:
50 stem cell types (like blood cell types) can cover 95% of humanity and matching would prevent rejection.
Eventually there will be stem cell banks.
Low hanging fruit are grown corneas.
In 1 to 2 years there will grown corneas implanted into people in India
Also growing skin for burn victims[/i]

A question to anyone who can answer. If the organs are made from the same histocompatible stem cell type as the recipient (but not his actual cells) does that mean that the recipient could take the organ without the need for immunosuppressant drugs?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 2:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:17 pm
Posts: 78
williatw wrote:
williatw wrote:
50 stem cell types (like blood cell types) can cover 95% of humanity and matching would prevent rejection.
Eventually there will be stem cell banks.
Low hanging fruit are grown corneas.
In 1 to 2 years there will grown corneas implanted into people in India
Also growing skin for burn victims[/i]

A question to anyone who can answer. If the organs are made from the same histocompatible stem cell type as the recipient (but not his actual cells) does that mean that the recipient could take the organ without the need for immunosuppressant drugs?


I'd suggest that the jury will be out on this long after we actually start doing transplants using histocompatible stem cells.

Relatedly, Scientists have recently found 2 new blood types and expect to find 10 to 15 additional blood types. And we've been typing blood for compatibility for a long time.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120223183819.htm

Even if we get the cell coat of a transplanted organ compatible that doesn't mean that the internals of the cell will be compatible with the body it's being transplanted in to. A specific example might be the Thymus where immune cells are trained to recognize body from not body.

I'd recommend preventative transplantation if possible. Get as many new organs grown from your own cells as possible and have the organs all replaced at or near the same time. Probably at a much lower cost since your scheduling it to be done.

The other possibility is to grow your new organs and keep them in storage. Design a mechanism for passing arctic sea-life (fish, mammalian?) anti-freeze proteins into the cells or to be produced by the cells. Put them in a state of hibernation using Hydrogen Sulfide and cryogenically drop their temperature to freezing or near freezing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am
Posts: 2114
Netmaker wrote:
I fail to see the difference between mindfully and mindlessly being obedient. As either way you're obedient.
You answered it. But I guess Skipjack might be right. There might be no major difference in proportion of people who join military to be goosestepping zombies compared to proportion of people who mindlessly parrot their political affiliation.

The way I see it though, the dirt simple pragmatism of military is different from frivolous lifestyle of "care free" voting. In joining the military the subordination/submission difference is that you willfully submit to the role of cog in the machine because that's how a functioning war machine works. Because you get almost instantly get nowhere due to command&control noise if there isn't a top-down hierarchy. But a mindless drone in this role will never serve a ... let's call it righteous for briefness' sake.. a righteous war machine as well as a 100% thinking human.

This isn't even a human or military dynamic, but basic logistic or even mechanical dynamic. One brain/CPU coordinating many limbs/tools. Just a matter of efficiency. This goal oriented pragmatism just isn't IMO such a natural characteristic of modern day average joes voting.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 12:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Posts: 4839
Location: North East Coast
Betruger wrote:
In the military you swear subordination, not mindless obedience. In voting on politics most people do not do their own homework, but more or less vaguely base themselves on what their party's PR feeds them.


Specifically, you swear to uphold and defend the constitution against enemies foreign and domestic. You also swear to obey the orders of the officers appointed above you. However, in the case of "b" conflicting with "a", "a" wins. But it still may get you shot. At least later someone may figure out you were right... :wink:

_________________
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 6:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am
Posts: 2114
In the US mil anyway. I don't know about other countries.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2012 2:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:20 pm
Posts: 582
Location: Austin, TX, NorAm, Sol III
ladajo wrote:
Betruger wrote:
In the military you swear subordination, not mindless obedience. In voting on politics most people do not do their own homework, but more or less vaguely base themselves on what their party's PR feeds them.


Specifically, you swear to uphold and defend the constitution against enemies foreign and domestic. You also swear to obey the orders of the officers appointed above you. However, in the case of "b" conflicting with "a", "a" wins. But it still may get you shot. At least later someone may figure out you were right... :wink:

Minor nit to pick: "You swear to obey the lawful orders of the officers appointed above you." ;) Of course disobeying an unlawful order can still get you shot, but at least later someone may figure out you were right. :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Posts: 4839
Location: North East Coast
I guess to nit pick for fine detail, it is fair to point out that the officer oath is different from the enlisted oath.

The officer oath is the "oath of office".

Quote:
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God


The enlisted oath is the "oath of enlistment".

Quote:
I, XXXXXXXXXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

_________________
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 1:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 926
Location: Ohio
Fullerene C60 administration doubles rat lifespan with no toxicity
http://www.kurzweilai.net/fullerene-c60 ... o-toxicity
Great I will be eating olive oil and sh%$^# buckyballs...wonder if that means toxicity to just the rat or the environment caused by millions of people doing the aforementioned thing?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 01, 2012 9:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 926
Location: Ohio
Aubrey de Grey debates the goal of defeating aging entirely

http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/04/aubrey ... oal-of.htm


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 01, 2012 10:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am
Posts: 2114
A couple of pretty stubborn deathists in the comments. Surprisingly... or unsurprisingly, they have no different arguments from the usual.

The bottom line still is what Kurt argues - there is no good reason to effectively condemn others to death. The right to live longer is as inalienable as those other inalienable rights. It's one and the same as those.

_________________
You can do anything you want with laws except make Americans obey them. | What I want to do is to look up S. . . . I call him the Schadenfreudean Man.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2012 3:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 926
Location: Ohio
Betruger wrote:
A couple of pretty stubborn deathists in the comments. Surprisingly... or unsurprisingly, they have no different arguments from the usual.

The bottom line still is what Kurt argues - there is no good reason to effectively condemn others to death. The right to live longer is as inalienable as those other inalienable rights. It's one and the same as those.
I watched the whole thing. Toward the end of part 2 their was a summation of the pros/cons. The Con person mentioned overpop, resource depletion, etc. the usual bugaboos. Would have to say..almost certaintly the treatments would at least initially costs 10's if not 100's of thousands of dollars. Therefore its effect on the world pop would be negligible because most couldn't afford it especially in the 3rd world. However the part about the "immortal" Stalin type had more cred though.


Last edited by williatw on Wed May 02, 2012 9:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2012 5:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:17 pm
Posts: 78
williatw wrote:
However the part about the "immortal" Stalin type had more cred though.


It wouldn't have to be a Stalin type. Just your average fortune 500 CEO who thinks only of his/her own stock options and doesn't care whether the company or country survives as long as they get their cut.

The general danger is the accumulation of overwhelming power whether that power be economic or political.

One solution I've read is that people who choose to be effectively immortal (I'm not talking 10-20 yrs life extension) would have to leave Earth and become a colonist.

Not so pleasant now but it would probably give a big financial kick in the pants to our space industry and greatly improve the odds for successful space colonization.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 120 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 8  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group