[FRIAM] health care logistics

Fri Jan 21 18:13:03 EST 2022

I didn't read the article but that last thing i want are horses.  They get
hurt, get sick, and they step on your feet.  Also, cows are a major source
of methane, a greenhouse gas.  I suspect horses aren't but still...

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 4:08 PM David Eric Smith <desmith at santafe.edu> wrote:

> I agree.
>
> There are good versions of Luddism that show some perspectives, and others
> that probably only show limits of capacity or imagination.  There are
> further limits to what small groups of people can know with any depth, or
> keep track of.
>
> The question of whether a reversion to animal traction is the only thing
> long-term sustainable, because our materials science operates so far
> outside any true recycling loops — whether or not we all die as the only
> alternative — is one I am willing to take seriously, and would be
> interested to claim a robust answer to.
>
> To do this fully and well would be desirable IMO.  But again, who will
> bell that cat?
>
> Eric
>
>
> On Jan 21, 2022, at 5:45 PM, Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com> wrote:
>
> In places that article is dismissive where it doesn't need to be, since so
> many of its points are strong.
> There are different approaches to solar and fusion for example that aren't
> included, instead arguing that horses are the answer!
> We'll all die before those solutions are adopted.  I am sure of that.
>
> Marcus
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of David Eric Smith <
> desmith at santafe.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, January 21, 2022 2:00 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] health care logistics
>
> Some of the condensations in this thread, as causal interpretations of
> social dynamics, are real gems.  They are much more interesting as claims
> than the endlessly recycled platitudes that seem to be all I am seeing in
> punditry.
>
> I have wondered about sending the following to the list, but this is
> probably a good thread in which to do it:
> https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i15p4508-d601755.html
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fideas.repec.org%2fa%2fgam%2fjeners%2fv14y2021i15p4508-d601755.html&c=E,1,wGOZJU7h7DQo6vunXv3upUOpfYLxwn02GPFhQoWQ-CkxB0yT-deimBYChsrihRKdLvE2wlF_TXBD5gep_51HWBGZTZlFJ9r8pDwJEUahxis4z9IyqMhl-iy3&typo=1>
>
> The claims are about important things.  They say that the sustainability
> rhetoric is so riddled with pie in the sky that it is not clear that an
> analysis of what we can actually do would even support goal-setting along
> the lines that are currently practiced.  For certain apps built on the
> libraries of sustainability, like the rhetoric of Green New Deal, the
> most-central aspiration (not curtailing population and energy consumption,
> and just replacing their sources) may actually be impossible in the sense
> that perpetual motion machines are impossible.  The other important factor
> is that we don’t get the dodge “but in the long run”, because the claim is
> that in a relatively short run we are all dead (or at least a great many of
> us, and the rest have greatly reduced options for what to do about
> anything).
>
> The important thing about the article (I know the author Rees) is that it
> tries to back up its claims with analysis where possible.  Some of the
> citations I consider a bit dodgy, but others are probably sound.  That does
> _not_ mean I am claiming the conclusions of the paper are right.  I haven’t
> done any shred of the work it would take me to backfill that tree of
> citations and take responsibility for deciding which of them I understand
> to be right.
>
> It is also important (to me, for my own reasons) to say that I do not mean
> _any_ blame for hypocrisy or bad faith toward a lot of the serious
> sustainability people, or even the GND advocates.  They work partly in a
> realm of human persuasion, and they are trying not to let the perfect
> undermine doing _something_ that might be good, or at least a little
> better.  I don’t know how many of the GND rhetoricians even have a detailed
>  understanding of our current situation, and among those (if there are
> any), how many would agree that it is as bad as Rees asserts.  There might
> be some, who would still do what persuasion they can because they don’t
> have ideas for what might be more helpful.
>
> I should also add that there is a lot not covered in this particular
> paper, where I have listened to claims of large unavoidable cascading
> failures.  Climate change leading to failure of Himalayan snowpacks that
> are the headwaters of rivers that supply drinking water, sanitation,
> irrigation, and hydropower to something like 1/4 of the world’s population,
> through infrastructure that has been built over a century, and can’t simply
> be moved or replaced.  That stops working and people start moving, and then
> all the stresses we already see around migration get amplified to much
> higher levels.  etc.  Those, too, I have not tried to either evaluate or
> get sources I can trust blindly.  But if they are real, they belong in view
> as well.
>
> Finally, I want to distance myself a bit from the affect and some overall
> impression in this piece, or by these authors.  I have no interest in
> whether something is heterodox or any other kind of dox.  The misanthropy
> that comes through in their scornful delivery in places, but also their
> claim that there are “graceful” exits with so little as 1-child policies,
> are to me departures (understandable, but still departures) from the thing
> that makes the article valuable, which is the substance of its claims about
> what exists and what can be assembled into systems.  I think one can keep
> the claims as important questions and let the other stuff go its own ways.
>
> Anyway, more than I know how to chew on,
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> On Jan 21, 2022, at 11:47 AM, glen <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well, except that this solipsism betrays a profound similarity between the
> cheerful billionaire exploiter and the unfixable deplorables. It's almost
> psychotically self-centered. I can imagine a slow, corrupting process where
> I would if I could, as well. But that transformation would have to be
> complete closure to prevent any light of empathy or sympathy from peeking
> in and popping the boil.
>
> I suppose people like Gates are more interesting than Musk, shambling
> about extruding money according to an opaque template ... less
> transparently ideological than Musk's profiteering. All philanthropy smacks
> of this sort of thing, though, Effective Altruism being the worst of the
> bunch. Power corrupts. It's not a lesson the non-powerful can actually
> learn, though. So it's a good thing to keep around a nicely scaled
> gradation of the super rich and the destitute poor, with some walkability
> up and down the scale. That way we can, as a collective, re-learn the
> lesson that power corrupts on a steady basis. The assumption of equality
> prevents that lesson from being re-learned. The absurdity of philanthropy
> and poverty are "collateral damage" in service of the latent trait, spoken
> as a well-off white man born into a racist patriarchy, anyway.
>
> On 1/21/22 08:31, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>
> If anything, Musk is suspicious because he is not overtly apocalyptic.
>   Some criticisms of Don’t Look Up were along the lines that it fails to
> try to persuade a change of course in favor of being condescending.  That
> was the whole point of the movie:  Comic relief among the reasonable who
> must suffer those who are just unfixable.  Musk is amusing because he is
> cheerful going about his billionaire life as it all comes crashing down.
> Doing what he can to profit from insane energy policy of the last several
> generations and making what contingency plans he can.  I certainly would if
> I could.
>
> On Jan 21, 2022, at 7:48 AM, glen <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This video essay concludes with the same point:
>
> The Fake Futurism of Elon Musk
> https://youtu.be/5OtKEetGy2Y
>
> Perhaps a better title would have been "Muskian Futurism is
> Eschatological". But there's some deeper stuff there in the middle of the
> video about the appeal of geezers like Sanders to "the youth", perhaps
> dovetailing with our prior discussion of the [opt|pess]imism vs
> hope-despair plane. The mistake the Muskians seem to make is conflating
> Musk's "apocalyptic help the rich survive the end times capitalism" with
> the good old fashioned future orientation of classic science fiction ...
> and, perhaps, even the optimistic glossing of the present by authors like
> Steven Pinker. While Pinker seems to be a hypnotized neoliberal cultist,
> his views still retain some sense of "shared values" in the Enlightenment,
> where something, vague as it is, like equality founds the whole
> perspective. Egalitarian utopias like Star Trek were, it seemed to me,
> standard fare for classic sci-fi. Gibson, Blade Runner, et al turned that
> dark and brought us (perhaps correlated with the rise of Hell and Brimstone
> Christianity) to Muskianism.
>
> But this is all just from my nostalgizing as a dying white man. It would
> be interesting to see a disinterested historian present the plectic arcs.
>
> On 1/20/22 14:33, glen wrote:
> Even if there are multiple paths to nearly equivalent optima, each unit
> (human, hospital, corporation, state) has to share some values with the
> others in order for the the optima to be commensurate.
>
>
>
> --
> glen
> Theorem 3. There exists a double master function.
>
> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2f%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,TkgTczgVVtBzBRykO2btmGbowc8tiSvGJI6oWA1xzQKgV3ymK97WHY6s9GpzoglMSYih0HungTfel2ZCI4x8vbmZVihpfg9SL40t67lanxopBw,,&typo=1
> un/subscribe
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,JmkkBrzRrp0_SLwVACgLxWCNX96WfvpU4GhV51n8f9G3nhrs_jLWHhmpcqFx0Ms5ZPjKvi62gNLjqlY6TxCJhrMo9C32nBQZEBulaAlBpMxrQS-f1UxC2Q,,&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,E78ec_FagdiholuLLpSPDEGJDTUStKo8NwcpHSuD4spkiCwiCl2sXYXdzL_ivPMB4xYMqmn19_KVY7QQsqM2qwIn-S4GpI-U-acwrpM1IIzbAqMYldE,&typo=1
> archives:
> 5/2017 thru present
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,JWprAarfNiGHkFwoX61h8B1FqemMuqz976v52Nl1aH6fFzM4WRNoJVwvCCRpQ3x7GxK-qT9_L_Nh5I2FjH99QGGVAdfEdokyJ9M8v3IVZVXoHhy1Ew2XmYqeoHFl&typo=1
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
>
>
> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2f%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,6Yljp0NMDBx6Iyfx9Vyw8P430vrRf2KeMkazE3Ig3bZb-WoudjUVJ7km9pHuO12iLKZEE-Z_qmoFFOIgCJ7pRXjnaVwDaPmcml3EH8gL_oon1Klk2hOgxsOy&typo=1
> un/subscribe
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,IGTN1eQPze-VBB8FITPDv1b7dZTWWXvyEz9Gb8v4V2Fl7qqBC4fMA9UF9RoZ8EkkfQ22FUqm8crPfMI7sPzWe7U5YCcm3uiySjZQ9boL_g,,&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,Var54A7UmMoUkq_Aw9yNRDK9RFVxDnCMNOBYxEf1Sr5sS4_UmbOLMjkhKN99dzyzPzpgFfOdE1pKHY64t7f5C3Nljdv5iAVbuJhAOi0CCzHx&typo=1
> archives:
> 5/2017 thru present
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,eZxgoflRRQmFJ-DKx9jF1oHhP12XwhibKny8tln9r3z4tQX9r8eLkz8wR7UuHpGH18dd4QMPkcP9DIgCrYw-Pzw0rGwggfxIc_pCJkghKgdwh-41nzx0&typo=1
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
>
>
> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives:
>  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20220121/77e27a3a/attachment.html>