But first, let's get back to the origins of life on earth.
Our best current hypothesis is that the first replicator was a string of aminoacids. It's called the RNA world hypothesis, and this video is amazing:
Assuming that was the case, aminoacids fumbling into each other, somehow stumbling upon a mirroring structure, you can see how the environment was doing most the heavy lifting. Aminoacid density, water, temperature differentials, movement, all had to be perfectly balanced.
Suddenly, an RNA string discovers a neat trick. It allows survival juuuuust a bit outside the tight environmental envelope all its family lives within. And that's huge, because as the original environment fills up, anyone veering outside has new, uncontested space to replicate.
Long story short, a cell was formed, then a multicellular organism, then life got on dry land, then the air.
And then a human appears. It may have taken 3.5b years since that RNA chain, but here we are. Our greatest strength is how much of our behavior is software versus hardware. Each time a tribe solved a problem and went farther, the more untapped resources they could access.
Before you know it we have religions, and cities, and industrial revolutions and agricultural revolutions.
And space. We've been there. A little bit.
To live is to grow. To exceed our envelope & go farther. That's the real Embedded Growth Obligation. It's not capitalism, or even @EricRWeinstein's DISC. It's simply life. Our destiny is as obvious as it is inevitable.
If we accept that OCCUPY UNIVERSE is the rightful destiny of life, then all we can do is simply work to make it happen. And since the only way for it not to happen is for something to get in its way, perhaps we should eliminate anything that might stop it from happening.
No, I don't mean Bernie. He's old enough, we'll wait him out.
I mean the kinds of things that might wipe us out. Some call them existential risks. I focus one step earlier, on the Single Points of Failure and Single Points of Control (SPOF/SPOC). An existential risk can only exist if the lever exists with which it can kill us.
Instead of preventing existential risk, we should be building a civilization that cannot be brought down by taking down any one thing about it. Complex systems are ones that survive removal of a part. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
So what does a civilization free of SPOFs and SPOCs look like? One thing is for sure, it is very different from the one we have now.
Each community should be able to tend to at least some of its needs, and if they can get to full-blown self-replicator, they are effectively fully independent. Are self-replicators hard to build from basic materials? I really don't think so. Seriously.
It's important we get rid of undersea cables, as more obvious SPOFs and SPOCs have hardly been invented. thehindu.com/sci-tech/techn…
Once we are online, we'd need a perfectly distributed global community, enabling conversation on truly global scale, without censors and gatekeepers. Yours truly wrote a paper on this back in the day: arxiv.org/abs/0907.2485
Of course those ideas have matured over the last decade, and now the Blockchain, and Ethereum, Cardano and other avant-garde chains are breaking new ground on what can be done without SPOFs and SPOCs. There's just one thing though...
All the distributed computing in the world won't get you out of a hole when the owner of the keys is put in a damp room and explained the principles of rubber hose cryptography.
The way online communities create pseudo-objective centralized objects various players compete for, in a way we've not come very far at all. This was my other pivotal paper (and much less cited than the other one): researchgate.net/publication/24…
And while it does pretty much re-invent the wheel of Goodhart's law, I still think the application to online communities and the problem of replacing the "administrator" with something that cannot be captured and put in a damp room is still valuable.
This is the final piece to the puzzle that must be resolved. And it just might be the hardest. Or it may turn out obvious. Some have called it #gameb but that's just a specification. A lot of prototyping and experimentation is needed still -
In the meantime, the other SPOF is the rock we're sitting on. And if we don't want to be one of those single-planet species, we have got to do something about it.
Every time you hear someone say that we need to have fewer children, live within our means, in order to survive, remember that these people are proposing something that has never be done, and quite likely can never be done. Life does not stay static. It either grows or dies.
So if you ask me, I'd much rather aim for a trillion humans spread across the solar system as a modest intermediate goal before we can get off this star system. It's a good start.
As to how? The single greatest piece of advice I've heard so far comes from a familiar source. Meditate on these words. You know you've understood them when they've blown your mind for a couple of weeks in a row:
I'm apparently an idiot who should check his terminology better before tweeting. But that would be self-limiting. Oh well, I'm sure I'll make a v2 of this thread one day 🖖
Ok, let's work through VAERS data, see what can be known. First and very interesting datapoint is from April 2: "...there were only about 6 million v-safe users as of mid-March, yet about 90 million Americans had received at least their first dose by then."desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/…
This ^ is about the v-safe system, and implies a 6.6% signup rate by mid-March. What is more concerning to me though is that this quote is in a local newspaper,and I can't find any other data since. If anyone has more recent info I'd really like to see it.
V-Safe was launched in January as a way to get more data into VAERS. “Especially for these vaccines, we are going to hold ourselves to exceedingly high standards for safety monitoring after a vaccine is authorized and when it goes out more broadly” aappublications.org/news/2020/12/0…
So, first contribution here by @gui_8731, an analysis of the first 250 cases entered in the system, showing that 72% of the submissions were made by health sevice and pharma employees, which lends credence at least to that early data -
Is Elon Musk founder of Tesla? Let's answer this question together. But before we answer this one, we must answer whether @elonmusk is the founder of PayPal, for reasons that will soon become apparent. Two contentious topics, probably enough for a...🧵!
In '99, Paypal launched as a digital wallet by a company named Confinity, founded by Peter Thiel, Max Levchin, and Luke Nosek. Their main competitor was x.com, founded by one Elon Musk. They both soon realized that they could bleed to death or join forces.
In an acquisition in which x.com technically acquired confinity, but was more a merger of equals, x.com took ownership of PayPal, with Musk as CEO and largest single shareholder. 6 months later, in a board coup, Thiel took over as CEO.
I've tried to stay away from opining on the actual biology of ivermectin as I'm not of that field, but in a recent conversation someone put me in a spot where I was forced to dig deeper on the specifics. And if I have to suffer, might as well write here about what I learned.🧵
This person, who I consider a good person, was referring to @ydeigin's argument on blood plasma half-life being 18 hours, and therefore that a weekly regimen couldn't possibly be efficacious. Yuri has made that argument clearly here:
The point being that the antiparasitic effects are due to it wiping out all the parasites during the initial spike, not due to it having lasting protective effects from reinfection. First, the bad news: it's true that in an annual or biannual regimen, IVM is only effective if you
🧵It's hard to avoid the feeling that all is broken, to desire build a better world. Before we start on the next utopia, let's maybe dig some more, try to see where all this brokenness stems from.
Multipolar traps are situations in which every agent would prefer to act differently, but can't for fear of every other player, instead being forced to make their own situation a little worse to avoid others making it much worse instead
Meditations on Moloch from @slatestarcodex [1] as well as Inadequate Equilibria from @ESYudkowsky [2] are excellent introductions to the problem, and one you see it you can't unsee it.