Subject: Chat with Scott Mintz
From: Scott Mintz <scott.w.mintz@gmail.com>
To: barriticus@gmail.com

Scott: Moving to Mexico?
me: most likely, but probably not until August or September if I do, and I'll have an internet connection
me: depends on various factors, such as if I need to be in NYC in August for book launch press, etc
me: I've lived there before as a freelancer, works well
Scott: Do you have friends or family in Mexico?
Scott: Got it.
me: it would also reduce my dependency on writing for outlets that I don't like as I can live much cheaper, and would in fact be able to contribute directly to the Africa fund with part of my surplus
me: my mom's family is from the border
me: and my grandma used to live in Guanajuato state
Scott: That makes a lot of sense then.
Scott: Hopefully we can put PPM in such a position that the demand on your surplus isn't greater than an amount you'd be willing/wanting to give anyway.
me: I imagine that won't be a problem, I'll have a lot more time to work on it very soon
me: and go after grants, donations, etc
me: we'll also have more people on board to help direct our various tasks
Scott: Yea, unfortunately the cost of living in NY is fairly high.
Scott: Yes, I'm looking forward to that.
Scott: Speaking of which I wanted to discuss with either you guys or the Blog in general some ideas I had for the network.
me: actually, Brooklyn isn't any more expensive than austin or Dallas, but I was distracted, and at any rate I like to keep low overhead
Scott: I'm fully aware that some if not all the ideas will be unacceptable, but I fill I wouldn't be doing my duty if I didn't share them.
me: of course, propose anything that comes to mind
Scott: Excessive dating is a distraction that I wish happened more often.
me: it's hard to avoid in New York when you're one of about seven straight males
Scott: I've never been to Dallas but I've been to Austin. I had a great time.
Scott: Clearly you have better luck than I do then.
me: yeah, I'll be in Austin next week, in fact plan to get some recruiting done there
Scott: By the way, I was watching something about Bushwhich (sp) being a major crime place on TV. I believe it was for prostitution.
Scott: Wick
me: Bushwick was one of the murder capitals of the nation just 15 years ago
me: now it's pretty decent
Scott: Glad to hear things have improved :)
me: but I still made fun of everyone there in a column I write for a local website, thereby starting an internet civil war. Then I got on a plane and left, lol
Scott: What can you do
me: start a bunch of trouble and then leave, apparently
me: there were over 120 angry comments on one website alone last time I checked
Scott: Nothing like good old fashioned bullying.
Scott: jk
me: 150 on another
Scott: that's impressive
me: I'd managed to recruit exactly two people among that useless self-absorbed population after making several efforts
Scott: I don't want to mention who, because well I'm not sure if it appropriate of me or not, but I know someone who in theory recruited clients as a result of online altercations that were made on a forum.
me: I'll bet; lots of e-rage out there
me: assuming this was a lawyer
Scott: no :)
me: is that someone you?
Scott: When I said appropriate, I don't know what my ethical and legal limitations are, but this person was an investment manager.
Scott: It seems forum readers interest in this person's services increased as a result of his firm stances and disagreements with other individuals.
me: very good
me: another new specimen of internet dynamic
Scott: certainly there is an internet aspect behind it especially in cases where a person is nothing more than a moniker
Scott: Whether or not you have any intentions of doing so, kindly do not attribute that particular dynamic to me if ever discussing it.
me: of course
me: anyway, I'm backlogged on internet dynamics that need to be written about as it is
me: and I'm already aware of things similar to what you mentioned, come to think of it anyway, and will use those as examples if necessary
Scott: thanks
Scott: appreciated
Scott: How are things coming with the Manifesto?
me: good, got to finish this next Skeptical Inquirer column and then I'll complete first draft and send it to you and Clark for thoughts
Scott: ok
Scott: good luck with that
me: If you want to discuss your new ideas, give me a ring later this evening, should be done writing by then
me: I'm writing an open letter to religious congressmen demanding that they make preparations for the rapture and the War against the Beast
me: which I will follow up with phone calls
me: to about 300 elected officials
me: which I will record for purposes of hilarity
Scott: Okay, I may do just that to discuss
Scott: But I'll probably post the document on the blog as well.
me: perfect
me: also
Scott: Not to sound like a paranoid old man, but do you know your laws on recording conversations?
me: in order to decide any such matters
me: to some extent, it varies by state
Scott: yea
me: basically, I pronounce you, myself, and Clark to be a triumvirate until such time as the "republic" can be built
Scott: some i know consent of both parties are required while others only one party needs to know
me: any controversial issues can be decided by two of three votes
Scott: I'm okay with triumvirate as long as there are no attempts on my life
me: no promises, Crassus
me: I get to be Caesar though
Scott: then i demand constant bodyguards
me: Crassus and Pompey are up for grabs
Scott: and they must be loyal, not the kind that think for themselves
me: post an ad on craigslist in some southern state then
Scott: or will switch sides for a few shillings
Scott: haha
me: As I recall, the original triumvirate worked out quite well and ended with handshakes all around
Scott: I'm reading the wiki on crassus as we speak
me: spoiler: he was forced to drink molten gold and then died of natural causes
me: unless I am thinking of pompey
Scott: death by molten gold is a natural cause?
Scott: I'm okay with Crassus. He allegedely died in battle and then had molten gold poured into his mouth as a symbol of his greed.
me: it's a natural cause when you run around acting like Crassus
me: I recommend Commentaries of Caesar, which is of course not entirely objective but which at any rate is more objective than one might expect
me: when compared to reports by other historians
Scott: is it available on audio-tape?
Scott: jk
me: there are a bunch of people running around claiming that the fall of the Roman Empire bears profound lessons for the U.S. but those people don't know what they're talking about
Scott: I'm glad to hear that in some weird way.
me: there are of course some lessons, but any decline in the U.S. is based on largely different causes
me: you should be, Rome fell hard
me: still, half of it prospered for another six, seven hundred years
me: Byzantines
Scott: So far history has shown that all big powers come to an end, hopefully our demise will be less violent and not too soon.
me: well, largely, yes, but it depends on how one defines a power and a fall
Scott: all good questions to which i have no clear answer to
me: China is arguably a series of dynasties that provide a common thread of governance for four, five thousand years
me: leading up to the Mao dynasty
Scott: but by definition a dynasty has changed as we've become more global, no?
me: of course, and the main thrust of my intentions and emphasis...
me: involves that very idea
me: these are all increasingly obsolete institutions - nation-states
me: build by necessity of proximity, linguistics
Scott: don't make fun but I can't wait until we have credible evidence or experience what we know to be intelligent life outside of our planet
Scott: i foresee, optimistically and ideally, and end to bickering, etc.
me: I would imagine that the bickering will amplify to some extent. There are billions who will see intelligent life as a threat to their worldviews
Scott: instead of nation states, or countries, we'd become united as a planet-state
Scott: I would hope more optimistically and sadistically, that fear would act as a tool to unite
me: hopefully, but hopefully the correct sort of planet-state
me: we can see examples in history of unification of formerly adversarial populations in the face of greater enemies, of course
Scott: taking a page if you will from Watchmen
me: never got around to reading it
me: Reagan spoke on the issue twice
me: about how we would unify in the face of an outside threat
Scott: yes, the hope would be an ideally created planet-state rather than one that is bifurcated.
me: the thing is, though, that many would welcome a takeover by a superior alien civilization
Scott: I've never heard those speeches, but sounds like something I would be interested in hearing.
me: you can Youtube them
me: they are not particularly profound examples of rhetoric, of course
Scott: That's the plot line in the sci-fi show V (remake of an old movie).
me: note that one of the Rockefellers who just recently died spent quite a bit of money in the '90s investigating the possibility of recent visitations
me: he was close to the Clintons
Scott: however, in the case of V there is the dichotomy that their intentions are evil
me: yeah, I've read the plot on Wikipedia
me: you may be familiar with Stephen Hawking's recent warnings
Scott: Do you know offhand what what to look for in youtube? i.e. Reagan unification speech/
me: one of the few near-certainties in astrobiology is that other life would be either far, far advanced or microbial in nature
me: Reagan aliens
Scott: that's according to hawkings?
me: that's the consensus of pretty much every scientist who bothers with it (not as many as should)
me: it's simply a matter of statistics
Scott: well, hopefully they are advanced and kind enough to know if any of their by-products of living are toxic to human life
me: there is, however, another factor that may contradict that rule
me: which is that there may be a tendency of civilizations to discard corporeal existence, such that we would never find them
me: I have another hypothesis
me: which is that, as civilizations advance to a certain technology level, destructive power becomes more easily obtainable; this is born out by the example of nuclear proliferation and, now, nanotechnology
me: a centrally-controlled civilization might determine that the risks are too great to continue
me: despite the potential rewardsd
me: and consciously choose to place themselves under the control of sentient machines in order to ensure that technology develops no further
Scott: in some sci-fi that's generally referred to as ascension, where we essentially become energy
me: and thus there may be a number of small civilizations, relegated to a few planets, which have put themselves in tech stasis as a means of risk aversion
Scott: while I hear your second theory, it doesn't sound practical
me: of course, that puts them at the risk of predatory civilizations that may come across them
Scott: going back hundreds if not thousands of years, newer technologies were always risk factors
me: absolutely
Scott: i have no evidence to back this up, but i don't foresee a freeze on technological advacements
me: but we can define a point at which things become fundamentally different - the point at which the power to obliterate one's own planet becomes available enough that it is likely to be used
me: neither do I
Scott: why stop there
Scott: what about the power to destroy universes
me: and in fact I prefer that we continue to approach the singularity as the rewards are of infinite value
me: that power doesn't seem to be deployed very often in our own universe, at least
Scott: agreed, we simply need to remain optimistic that there is a net positive
Scott: yes, but a hundred years ago, we didn't have the ability to destroy countries
me: I recently had a discussion with a brilliant fellow working for NASA in some capacity who is adamant that speed of light travel really is the likely limit
me: and let us hope it is
Scott: i don't see where the point of inflection can occur where we decide to stop
me: it would basically require a technocratic conspiracy/world takeover
me: which is an unlikely prospect
Scott: agreed and as you say, for the best
Scott: so, now warp 2.0?
Scott: no
me: speed of light is enough for us to colonize what we need to colonize
Scott: does that preclude folds in space i.e. wormholes/
me: I don't believe so, but I am a bit rusty on wormholes and the theoretical uses we may end up having for them
me: most likely we would have to create our own wormholes
me: existing ones are not practical to reach
me: a related concept
me: is that we ought not to advertise our existence
Scott: i didn't even know we knew of an existing wormhole?
Scott: temporarily? permanently?
me: I believe their existence have simply been deduced
me: another problem in reaching them, of course
Scott: got it, and makes sense, i have a weird feeling have a wormhole in our backyard would be interesting
me: I'd say that's a pretty reasonable feeling
Scott: speaking of technologies of advacement, something that would have profound affects, would be an improve way to transfer knowledge.
Scott: plus a harddrive that is less prone to forgetfullness
me: essentially, our project is a step in that direction, if only rudimentary
Scott: I have an unsubstantiated theory that retention of knowledge separates the very, very smart from the genius.
Scott: Fully agreed, which is one of the many reasons I am passionate about the project.
me: those techs will come of their own accord and are already on their way, from the direction of Tokyo's university system
me: incidentally, I had a conversation once with a brilliant Japanese research scientist who is working on one of the most potentially important developments currently in play
me: about two years ago
me: they had managed to have participants move a cursor on a computer without any head gear or devices
me: simply by thought emissions
me: which, despite the assumptions of certain of my skeptical colleagues, do exist
Scott: that's pretty cool
Scott: i knew it could be done using devices, but the implications are that brainwaves are wireless
me: at any rate, in terms of our own contributions to this century, we can be of invaluable assistance to the extent that we can devise a more perfect collaborative tool
me: or schematic, rather
me: you've seen the inefficiencies that exist within every organizationn
me: some of these are easily remedied
me: some are more challenging
me: but as I noted in that blog post the other night
me: we must pay close attention to how we proceed, what works, what gets results, what ensures the highest probability of success
me: I suspect that we will make particular progress in this by examining the worst methods of collaboration
Scott: like you said, it's not easy to discover
Scott: some instances require different mediums of communication
Scott: certain people have innate preferences
me: I am fortunate to have accompanied my father and uncle to Africa when I was 17 when they were working for some damned fool Pentacostal financier on his quest to establish a business empire
me: if they had succeeded, I would have learned a few thinhs
Scott: there are the psychological implications as well such as dismissing certain information while retaining those that support your own views
me: but as they failed epically, went broke, had their passports seized, lost their equipment to corruption, blew their funds, I learned quite a bit more
me: that's absolutely true
Scott: i'm optimistic we can learn a lot, but I think more of what will be gained will have to be done through trial and error (scientifically if you will)
Scott: sorry to hear that about your "adventures", at least some good did come out of it
me: we'll have to take it step by step, accumulate observations, and only adapt new techniques after, as you say, trial and error and scientific process
me: which is why I plan on implementing a variety of test methods by which two or more participants will be given tasks to be performed under various differing circumstances/schematics/limitations
Scott: the psychology of organizations is certainly a relevant topic for all facets of life as well as informational systems that improve the quality and quantity of "global" knowledge.
me: we'll also be contacting researchers who have done studies pertinent to our goals to see what has already been determined regarding the psychological aspects of such things
me: absolutely
Scott: that's a good idea, but do you plan on accounting for the differences between 2 people? maybe a slightly larger sample size?
me: oops, gotta run, I'll be available by phone later
me: yes, we'll have numerous tests to provide for those differences
me: or, rather, to account for them
Scott: got it,
Scott: nice chatting and i'll post something to the blog soon.
me: word,later