speaking of old people...

[glen ropella]

Scientists create contact lens that magnifies at blink of an eye
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/feb/13/contact-lens-magnifies-blink-of-eye

> Pentagon-funded device could help people with age-related macular degeneration by enlarging objects so they can see them with peripheral vision

The only person I know personally with macular degeneration would _not_ be capable of learning how to wink properly to turn on/off the magnification. 8^)  What would be more likely is that they would forget they'd turned it on and freak out because everything was so huge.  I can imagine lots of old drivers causing more crashes because their lenses were on or off or clicking on/off when they were squinting to see something.  Now for soldiers on the other hand... that seems pretty cool.

--
⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella
Neolithic fear is such a motivating factory.


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[Steve Smith]

> Scientists create contact lens that magnifies at blink of an eye
> http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/feb/13/contact-lens-magnifies-blink-of-eye
>
>> Pentagon-funded device could help people with age-related macular degeneration by enlarging objects so they can see them with peripheral vision
> The only person I know personally with macular degeneration would _not_ be capable of learning how to wink properly to turn on/off the magnification. 8^)  What would be more likely is that they would forget they'd turned it on and freak out because everything was so huge.  I can imagine lots of old drivers causing more crashes because their lenses were on or off or clicking on/off when they were squinting to see something.  Now for soldiers on the other hand... that seems pretty cool.
I happened to sit at a bar for dinner last night next to a couple who
are both Opthamologists who were referencing this (not as a new
announcement, just the cool tech in their field these days?).

On top of that, I've a good friend in Toronto who was just coming out of
cataract surgery (at 49) yesterday afternoon.  She didn't think it was
funny when I asked her if she'd had one of these implanted just for
grins....   just like others don't seem to smile (grimace maybe) when I
suggest instead of a knee replacement (you know who you are), they just
have Flex-Foot Cheetah prosthetics engineered in place of them.

I know a fellow (also around 50) who has had MD since he was a teen and
gets around well enough on foot and even bicycle but cannot really
recognize a face... he has to stare off to one side to see your mouth
moving and facial features changing, but without foveal vision can't
really do much more than register that there are changes.   I'm guessing
this tech is just what he needs to improve his quality of life.

As for this becoming "the hazard we don't know", I believe it, but that
is always the case.   I just rode in a car with a retired professor who
bought a car with the new automatic-parallel-parking feature.   It
seemed to work, but sure made me nervous... partly because I don't know
how the algorithms work and manage a fail-safe mode and partly because
as with my own parents as they got very elderly, more aids to keep them
driving when they should have quit for many reasons wasn't necessarily a
good idea.   And with a huge demographic hump of baby-boomers heading
over the horizon (myself included), I can just imagine the mayhem we
will cause with each of us becoming a cyborg patchwork of sensory,
mobility, and cognitive fingers-in-the-dike!   Like the woman who I
bought my first car (64 T-bird) from who insisted that she wouldn't know
what to do without the turn indicator embedded on the front fenders to
remind her that she was planning to make a turn and which way!   Of
course, she was only 32, just very ditzy!

- Steve


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[glen ropella]

On 02/13/2015 02:17 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
> just like others don't seem to smile (grimace maybe) when I suggest instead of a knee replacement (you know who you are), they just have Flex-Foot Cheetah prosthetics engineered in place of them.

I don't quite grok why people feel so negative about prosthetics.  It doesn't seem to be purely about their (lack of) functionality.  I suppose this goes back to the same topic most of the threads on this list (in which I participate, anyway) deal with: the mind/body problem.  Your foot, or hand, or hair, is not just a body part... it's a part of one's self, one's identity.  We don't seem to feel this so much with things like aspirin or, say, what you ate for lunch.  But we feel it fairly strongly for things like SSRIs and other psychotropics as well as eyeballs and the body parts closely correlated with gender identity.

I'd maintain, however, that having one of those 5-year hormone pumping implants really is akin to having a metal knee ... or should be, anyway. It's not _merely_ that how we feel is a function of what we are.  It's full blown, how we feel _is_ what we are ... and vice versa.

> I know a fellow (also around 50) who has had MD since he was a teen and gets around well enough on foot and even bicycle but cannot really recognize a face... he has to stare off to one side to see your mouth moving and facial features changing, but without foveal vision can't really do much more than register that there are changes.   I'm guessing this tech is just what he needs to improve his quality of life.

Yep.  If the article hadn't said "age related macular degeneration", I wouldn't even have posted it ... there's no irony there.

> As for this becoming "the hazard we don't know", I believe it, but that is always the case.

I _wish_ I could express this to the anti-GMO-labeling people.  We (Oregon) voted on a measure last november that would have required products made with GE materials be labeled.  Most of the people against the measure seemed to be flat out pro-GMO.  I'm pro-GMO to a large extent.  But I was also for labeling it.  I think I'm in a small minority.

The reason I'm both pro-GMO and pro-labeling is precisely because i believe in tracking cause and effect, regardless of the wisdom underlying any intervention decision.  It's equally frustrating when, say, your program begins working for no apparent reason, as it is when your program stops working for no apparent reason.  It's my ignorance that frustrates me, not the current state (working or broken).  I failed several attempts to explain this to the pro-GMO-anti-labeling people I managed to argue with.

--
⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella
Is what the prophets have to say


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[Steve Smith]

On 2/13/15 5:31 PM, glen wrote:
>> just like others don't seem to smile (grimace maybe) when I suggest instead of a knee replacement (you know who you are), they just have Flex-Foot Cheetah prosthetics engineered in place of them.
> I don't quite grok why people feel so negative about prosthetics.  It doesn't seem to be purely about their (lack of) functionality.  I suppose this goes back to the same topic most of the threads on this list (in which I participate, anyway) deal with: the mind/body problem.  Your foot, or hand, or hair, is not just a body part... it's a part of one's self, one's identity.  We don't seem to feel this so much with things like aspirin or, say, what you ate for lunch.  But we feel it fairly strongly for things like SSRIs and other psychotropics as well as eyeballs and the body parts closely correlated with gender identity.
I "wore" a skin-tag on one eyelid for a decade before I *finally* tied a
bit of floss around it real tight and clipped it off with a pair of
toenail clippers (washed, dipped in alcohol which I then burned
off)...   it was a trivial bit of skin but I was nearly as attached to
it as it was to me... it *was* part of me.   I had a similar feeling
when I finally got tired of watching my hairline recede and cut off my
(very) long hair... it was part of *me*!

So I "get" the feeling and my challenge to our buddy about replacing his
legs below the thigh with prosthetics (particularly good for running,
but lousy for salsa dancing or bicycling, or playing hackey-sack) was
almost entirely specious.
>
> I'd maintain, however, that having one of those 5-year hormone pumping implants really is akin to having a metal knee ... or should be, anyway. It's not _merely_ that how we feel is a function of what we are.  It's full blown, how we feel _is_ what we are ... and vice versa.
>
>> I know a fellow (also around 50) who has had MD since he was a teen and gets around well enough on foot and even bicycle but cannot really recognize a face... he has to stare off to one side to see your mouth moving and facial features changing, but without foveal vision can't really do much more than register that there are changes.   I'm guessing this tech is just what he needs to improve his quality of life.
> Yep.  If the article hadn't said "age related macular degeneration", I wouldn't even have posted it ... there's no irony there.
I missed that part.   I also had a friend (dead now) who kept driving
with advancing MD until he literally was staying on the roads by riding
the rumble-strips...
>> As for this becoming "the hazard we don't know", I believe it, but that is always the case.
> I _wish_ I could express this to the anti-GMO-labeling people.  We (Oregon) voted on a measure last november that would have required products made with GE materials be labeled.  Most of the people against the measure seemed to be flat out pro-GMO.  I'm pro-GMO to a large extent.  But I was also for labeling it.  I think I'm in a small minority.
I definitely think it should be labeled and I'm not real happy about a
GMO crop of *anything* that I'm trying to grow coming into my
neighborhood within pollination distance.

There is an anecdote about the Peace Corps in a sub-Saharan African
country coming in and offering the people in a region low-sulfur sorghum
plants which made much more palatable molasses/sugar/etc... with higher
yeilds.   Every one was happy for 5 or 10 years until a recurring cycle
of locust infestations came through and cleaned out their crops...  the
high-sulfur variety were relatively robust to locusts, the "new and
improved" were not.    I don't really trust engineering-thinking (GMO)
to replace evolution...  humans and domesticated flora and fauna
"co-evolved"...  just jumping in and replacing things with "new and
improved" isn't as simple/obvious as one might imagine, I contend.

"get off my lawn!" said the old curmudgeon...
> The reason I'm both pro-GMO and pro-labeling is precisely because i believe in tracking cause and effect, regardless of the wisdom underlying any intervention decision.  It's equally frustrating when, say, your program begins working for no apparent reason, as it is when your program stops working for no apparent reason.  It's my ignorance that frustrates me, not the current state (working or broken).  I failed several attempts to explain this to the pro-GMO-anti-labeling people I managed to argue with.
I think progress is inevitable/human, but just because you *can* drive
faster than your headlights can illuminate safely, doesn't mean you
should.   I think GMO has some hidden/unintended risks that the pro-GMO
crowd isn't willing to look at and the anti-GMO crowd doesn't have the
ammunition to document.

Gun it!   said the old curmudgeon...

- Steve
>


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[Marcus G. Daniels]

Steve writes:

``I don't really trust engineering-thinking (GMO)
to replace evolution...  humans and domesticated flora and fauna
"co-evolved"...  just jumping in and replacing things with "new and
improved" isn't as simple/obvious as one might imagine, I contend.''

Perhaps the only way to learn the constraints in the problem space, though.
Risk vs. reward, like anything.

Marcus



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[Steve Smith]

On 2/14/15 8:56 AM, Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
> Steve writes:
>
> ``I don't really trust engineering-thinking (GMO)
> to replace evolution...  humans and domesticated flora and fauna
> "co-evolved"...  just jumping in and replacing things with "new and
> improved" isn't as simple/obvious as one might imagine, I contend.''
>
> Perhaps the only way to learn the constraints in the problem space, though.
> Risk vs. reward, like anything.
Absolutely.  The only question is whether we are aware of the scale of
the risks we take when we take them or are willing to consider the risks
we surely know are there but maybe cannot elaborate in detail (yet)?

Had we known the devastating effects on the biomes and human populations
of many parts of the world during the "age of exploration", I'm sure
some would still have exercised their right/need to abruptly introduce a
wide variety of unexpected creatures (from virus particles and bacteria
to pigs, cats and rabbits) to the "rest of the world", especially
islands throughout the Pacific, as part of their "manifest destiny".

I'm as much of a technophile as anyone here, yet, I believe we live in
the constant fog of "the evil you know", working like crazy to fix the
problems that are in our face today, often caused precisely by the
problems caused by our last round of "fixes", whilst being willfully
ignorant of an evil we "could know" but choose not to apprehend.   We
replace cane sugar (sucrose) with cyclamates in our diet only to find
the terrible side-effects a few years later, then we move on to new and
improved saccharines, and then with another turn of the wheel we pull in
aspartame and gawd knows what else all the while building a huge
industry on turning cornfields and soybean fields into food-product
streams that are now being implicated in some of our most tragic
public-health problems (widespread obesity, hormone imbalances, etc.)  
And this isn't even

I'm not sure why we need GMO in our foodsources.   We can cite world
famine and "improved productivity" as motivations, but those are never
ending cycles methinks...   we already have some huge human health and
possibly social dysfunction problems as a consequence of how we have
"engineered" our food-source.   GMO doesn't promise to address any of
those problems in any fundamental way, merely to help obscure the
problems in another layer of indirection.

I suspect you (and Glen and others) will insist that the pace and
quality of the march of tech progress is inevitable and maybe even
necessary in some fundamental way, so "get over it" and I have to defer
on that point.  I doubt my voice, or the millions of other
yet-more-shrill ones will have any significant effect in slowing this
latest fad in agricultural tech.

But that doesn't stop me from wanting to watch the 1.5 billion
car-pileup in morbid fascination whilst muttering to myself "I knew it
all along!"

In Glen's immortal words "Get off my lawn!" <shakes gnarly old fist
ineffectually>
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[Steve Smith]

Marcus writes:
> ...
> The consequences of their interventions in physical systems is not
> necessarily their primary concern, especially if they have reason to think
> there is manageable short-term risk.   And what better way to keep an
> organization intact than to cause and fix the same problems!
>
> So my claim it is these other agendas amplify bad consequences, not that we
> ultimately act in ignorance.   Anyone that doesn't act in ignorance is
> dealing with a trivial system.
I agree...  "these other agendas" are what I attribute to what *appears*
to me to be "willful ignorance".

It is only/mainly when a small portion of a group are acting on "these
other agendas" whilst the remainder of the group are kept in ignorance
of the larger picture in favor of a convenient oversimplified
understanding biased toward allowing said few to pursue said "other
agendas" unimpeded.

If only our biggest problem was the ignorance intrinsic in non-trivial
systems...   I believe *that* is the fundamental currency of life
itself, attempting to penetrate deeper into increasing predictive
knowledge of larger and larger systems impinging on said life's domain.

In that vein, it is natural that grass-roots organizations, activists,
average Joes and Janes would try to reduce *their* ignorance of the
larger systems they are coupled with, whether it would be the source of
their physical sustenance and shelter, or with the complex organizations
(political, industrial, religions) that have significant control over
those less abstract systems.


- Steve

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[Nick Thompson]

It's the old war between the Dionysians and the Apollonians, between the
grasshoppers and the ants.   Your ants and your Apollonians plant tiny
oaktrees in their lawn, build brick houses, develop communities, because
they are confident in their ability to make a future.  Your Dionysians grab
for all the gusto  they can get, having contempt for the possibility of
making a future.  I can't really argue for one position or the other.
Either makes sense to me.  What does offend me is when Dionysians represent
their revelry in Apollonian terms -- as making a better future.   Let the
technicians invent their toys, play with them, adorn them with skins and
aps, but don't let them ever claim that they are making progress.  It's just
what it is, and it will go where it goes, and on balance, we may be happier
or more miserable because of it.  Real progress, if there is such a thing,
requires a lot more than innovation.    

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Steve Smith
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:54 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: [FRIAM] GMO and "the evil you know"

On 2/14/15 8:56 AM, Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
> Steve writes:
>
> ``I don't really trust engineering-thinking (GMO) to replace
> evolution...  humans and domesticated flora and fauna "co-evolved"...  
> just jumping in and replacing things with "new and improved" isn't as
> simple/obvious as one might imagine, I contend.''
>
> Perhaps the only way to learn the constraints in the problem space,
though.
> Risk vs. reward, like anything.
Absolutely.  The only question is whether we are aware of the scale of the
risks we take when we take them or are willing to consider the risks we
surely know are there but maybe cannot elaborate in detail (yet)?

Had we known the devastating effects on the biomes and human populations of
many parts of the world during the "age of exploration", I'm sure some would
still have exercised their right/need to abruptly introduce a wide variety
of unexpected creatures (from virus particles and bacteria to pigs, cats and
rabbits) to the "rest of the world", especially islands throughout the
Pacific, as part of their "manifest destiny".

I'm as much of a technophile as anyone here, yet, I believe we live in the
constant fog of "the evil you know", working like crazy to fix the problems
that are in our face today, often caused precisely by the problems caused by
our last round of "fixes", whilst being willfully
ignorant of an evil we "could know" but choose not to apprehend.   We
replace cane sugar (sucrose) with cyclamates in our diet only to find the
terrible side-effects a few years later, then we move on to new and improved
saccharines, and then with another turn of the wheel we pull in aspartame
and gawd knows what else all the while building a huge industry on turning
cornfields and soybean fields into food-product streams that are now being
implicated in some of our most tragic
public-health problems (widespread obesity, hormone imbalances, etc.)  
And this isn't even

I'm not sure why we need GMO in our foodsources.   We can cite world
famine and "improved productivity" as motivations, but those are never
ending cycles methinks...   we already have some huge human health and
possibly social dysfunction problems as a consequence of how we have
"engineered" our food-source.   GMO doesn't promise to address any of
those problems in any fundamental way, merely to help obscure the problems
in another layer of indirection.

I suspect you (and Glen and others) will insist that the pace and quality of
the march of tech progress is inevitable and maybe even necessary in some
fundamental way, so "get over it" and I have to defer on that point.  I
doubt my voice, or the millions of other yet-more-shrill ones will have any
significant effect in slowing this latest fad in agricultural tech.

But that doesn't stop me from wanting to watch the 1.5 billion car-pileup in
morbid fascination whilst muttering to myself "I knew it all along!"

In Glen's immortal words "Get off my lawn!" <shakes gnarly old fist
ineffectually>
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe
> at St. John's College to unsubscribe
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[Steve Smith]

> It's the old war between the Dionysians and the Apollonians, between the
> grasshoppers and the ants.   Your ants and your Apollonians plant tiny
> oaktrees in their lawn, build brick houses, develop communities, because
> they are confident in their ability to make a future.  Your Dionysians grab
> for all the gusto  they can get, having contempt for the possibility of
> making a future.  I can't really argue for one position or the other.
> Either makes sense to me.  What does offend me is when Dionysians represent
> their revelry in Apollonian terms -- as making a better future.   Let the
> technicians invent their toys, play with them, adorn them with skins and
> aps, but don't let them ever claim that they are making progress.  It's just
> what it is, and it will go where it goes, and on balance, we may be happier
> or more miserable because of it.  Real progress, if there is such a thing,
> requires a lot more than innovation.

Nick -

Well said.  My task is similar, centering on the aspect of affecting one
thing
while indulging perhaps in an entirely "other" thing.  But I fear it
might be
even *worse* than that.  The Dionysian Ants espousing the building of a
better future and then proceeding to make a *worse* future (in the long
term)
under the guise of making it better.   Or so it seems.

The *un* in unenlightened self-interest I guess.

- Steve

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[Arlo Barnes]

Interesting that Apollo and Dionysus are contrasted. What about Bacchus, the darker and even more mercurial (heh) alter-ego of Dionysus?

-Arlo

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com