[FRIAM] health care logistics

Mon Jan 24 17:46:45 EST 2022

Speaking of Star Trek, look closely.
[image: 7402328122238905285.jpg]

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 2:36 PM David Eric Smith <desmith at santafe.edu>
wrote:

> Do you suppose there is any etymology between the Star Trek character and
> the clearance level (very secretive and elite, etc.)?
>
> If there were, then Star Trek Q and QAnon would sort of be cousins.
>
> Or does everybody else already know that, and I just don’t get out?
>
> Eric
>
>
> On Jan 24, 2022, at 4:23 PM, Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com> wrote:
>
> Glen writes:
>
> < That's not true at all. Closed systems do have disclosures in terms of
> the behavior of their boundary. Granted, one may not have constitutive
> understanding of what's happening inside the membrane. But one can profile
> the behavior of the surface. And if that behavior changes over time, then
> it's capable of corruption.>
>
> My point is that if one has enough resources, it simply doesn't matter
> whether the constitutive understanding of what is happening inside the
> membrane is achieved by outsiders, nor does it matter how outsiders
> evaluate the changes on the surface.  The closed system simply does not
> concern itself with such evaluations as they are of no consequence.   It
> can jump between sets of principles for any number of reasons, including
> amusement.   I am of course thinking of Q!  (Musk is not quite there.)
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_(Star_Trek)
>
> Marcus
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of glen <
> gepropella at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, January 24, 2022 2:13 PM
> *To:* friam at redfish.com <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] health care logistics
>
> That's not true at all. Closed systems do have disclosures in terms of the
> behavior of their boundary. Granted, one may not have constitutive
> understanding of what's happening inside the membrane. But one can profile
> the behavior of the surface. And if that behavior changes over time, then
> it's capable of corruption.
>
> On 1/24/22 13:07, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> > Closed systems don't have disclosures, so there's can't be this social
> notion of corruption.  I changed my mind today:  I'll put new quarters into
> the machine and see what happens.
> >
> > Marcus
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of glen <
> gepropella at gmail.com>
> > *Sent:* Monday, January 24, 2022 1:26 PM
> > *To:* friam at redfish.com <friam at redfish.com>
> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] health care logistics
> > Well, yeah, I see little evidence of such principle-free attractors too
> ... because I'm conditioned to think all actors have prior principles and,
> when they achieve power, they slide into corruption. I.e. I see no evidence
> that there are no such thing as unprincipled actors. And that means, as an
> actor drifts from one set of principles to another, that is corruption. The
> only way out of that is to be vague about your principles (plausible
> deniability) or make your principles *generic* enough to apply to multiple,
> parallaxed, methods/behaviors ... or both.
> >
> > Arguments that rely on generlized principles are everywhere, from
> biology (survival, food, gene transfer, etc.) to psychology to politics.
> Even if many of those turn out to actually be vagaries instead of
> generalizations, those are the arguments ... and in the context of those
> arguments, power corrupts.
> >
> > One of the advantages the Bayesians and postmodernists have is they
> admit up front that their ephemerides will change. And as long as they're
> fairly clear about how they'll *try* to update their systems in a
> transparent way, then it's difficult to accuse them of corruption. Hence,
> secrecy and closed systems are more readily corruptible than open ones.
> >
> > On 1/24/22 11:56, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> >> If what you mean is that there are consequences to indifference to the
> environment and to each other, I don't see a lot of evidence of such
> attractors.   If there are no principles and we are merely beings that
> notice attractors and naming them, there's not  much point in ideology,
> religion, and so on.   Perhaps they were always delusions, and it was only
> the Musk's, etc. that have found, through their wealth, the autonomy to
> come to grips with that.   Counterexamples like Putin come to mind, where
> it does seem to be a reinforcement issue.
> >>
> >> Marcus
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of glen <
> gepropella at gmail.com>
> >> *Sent:* Monday, January 24, 2022 12:41 PM
> >> *To:* friam at redfish.com <friam at redfish.com>
> >> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] health care logistics
> >> Scaled need for entropy: It's not clear to me why we'd believe smaller
> orgs need less entropy. I agree they have smaller *stores* of "energy".
> And, to some extent, I can see that some ways entropy manifests could
> dissipate those stores more than they accumulate  them. (Regarding meeting
> objectives as one kind of store ... e.g. using money to achieve some
> objective is a - perhaps inefficient - transfer from one store to another
> -- since Tom posted about SysDyn.) But I could easily argue that small orgs
> need *more* entropy than large orgs.
> >>
> >> Semantics of Corruption: Well, I agree that one can't be corrupt if one
> has no principles from the start. This is, I think, a fundamental part of
> the arguments in favor of open-ended evolution (and extending into
> metaphysics like parallel worlds). But even  if we gave up on the idea that
> there's an, in principle, set of values to start with, we can still arrive
> at an attractor so strong that the system will never leave it. The argument
> against Growth and the need for a "paradigm shift" is exactly such an
> argument. We're so brainwashed by that paradigm, even those of us who see
> the engine's headlight at the end of the tunnel can't think any
> differently. So ... how could I say it so you agree with it? Power is
> self-reinforcing even when it becomes obsolete?
> >>
> >>
> >> On 1/24/22 11:30, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> >>> Employees in a large organization are in one sense cells, but in
> another sense parasites.   (The largest parasite being the CEO.)
> Nevertheless, the organization needs the diversity of these agents --
> whatever one calls them -- to innovate and survive.   Without  the entropy,
> the organization is just a machine, and the people can be replaced with
> simple robots.   It is small organizations, where there is less ability to
> take on debt and tolerate waste, where shared values can help keep focus in
> a situation of limited resources.
> >>>
> >>> I don't really buy your claim that power corrupts.   One could just as
> well say that being weak makes one rationalize their weakness.   If there
> isn't a shared value system, there is no reason to say that it has been
> corrupted.   Perhaps rather that once entropy is eliminated, then death
> will soon follow.  Entropy could still be high and inter-group violence
> common.
> >>>
> >>> Marcus
> >>>
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of glen <
> gepropella at gmail.com>
> >>> *Sent:* Monday, January 24, 2022 12:00 PM
> >>> *To:* friam at redfish.com <friam at redfish.com>
> >>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] health care logistics
> >>> At first, I struggled to see how this mapped to health care logistics.
> But on 2nd read, it clearly does.
> >>>
> >>> The question that now dominates is a) shared values - even if it's
> overshoot and we know it's overshoot, do the exploiters (and their
> rhetorical victims) care at all about the same things the ... "earthists"
> or "humanists" or "biodiversisists" might care about? And b) nonlinear
> exploitation power - orthogonal to shared values, is it possible the
> space/landscape has changed so radically that the tiny produce we now
> exploit might have a huge impact going forward? (Or, maybe vice versa,
> every Joule we squeeze out now has a much smaller impact than the Joules we
> extracted in the '60s?)
> >>>
> >>> Those questions translate to health care in the form of motivation
> comparison between, e.g., pharma employees. Some are in it for the science.
> Some are in it for the money. Some are humanitarians. Etc. Do the
> executives share the values of their employees? A little? A lot? The same
> with insurance undewriters, financialists at hospitals and offices, etc.
> >>>
> >>> Technically, it's completely reasonable to NOT implement
> bootstrappable systems, systems "written in" themselves. We've talked a lot
> on this list about self-reference and if/where we use the words "tautology"
> or "degeneracy". Even if we assume the shared value that earth is just the
> initial *seed* for life and that seed will be a dried up husk when we
> diaspora into the galaxy, *when* will we have to solve the sustainability
> question? Perhaps we should solve it for our 2nd planet? Or maybe we
> iterate slowly from our current non-bootstrapping algorithm of "growth"
> toward an algorithm of sustainable?
> >>>
> >>> The same argument goes for the Big Software argument proffered By Dr.
> Coon. Sure open source packages developed by some kid in Iowa shouldn't
> found the entire Java-based infrastructure. But, similarly, not every piece
> of crypto or opsec needs to come from Israel or the NSA. Can we move
> between and within Big Software and hacking? Can we move between Growth and
> Sustainability?
> >>>
> >>> And more importantly, should we all agree on values, like some fascist
> state? Or is there room for reasonable disagreement or meandering
> non-equilibria?
> >>>
> >>> On 1/21/22 13:00, David Eric Smith wrote:
> >>>> 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,brEn7VKkm2bAeteufr44p-mu9QIrgjmeVD3Mm5Gt1VGoZKl5ZUSsECfDv6iF2_IEUiifx2-KlNwNXrxq_LHO0BGYiq23Q0B7cwpwmzKbyrYprfkhN-wORcY,&typo=1>
> <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,1,5oUnhQA_b8VwMjJmMDyizwdh0dy2aTQG1Uuro5WnR0rscoqv3id-eximvVqh8S_EMRXpLGQ1H7qKVApyeNg2tz5pnXrB-orC3IAXVwnqvwBMbA,,&typo=1>>
> <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,z3fv0okh0Bx1vL_4q8nY26g8oNiltAe9h-WTzx6T35I11z3H_mv5Vr2znpKvSrL_dOFuT7_N88hadgtfJ-ERUHgQqQe-FE_m71MgtF9311S5Q3hd9V4M1RYgOnv6&typo=1&ancr_add=1>
> <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,vGEgiPESFPO54n9VqCmCqCSrTg1WwbMpTuxsM3RTf2I5lXxybmJTEoK1KkBPXNMI42H4sThnAtiZ5sZAd3d9t-qM2HOdkfVGllmAmfiI&typo=1>>>
> <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,fxaRYhdjUSBDhxaIRTz9raIYildn4d13UKrj5fXK4r3pIIzhJW-dSeOweR7bPzybAD9_suUvApx9vTSFrrvGI8WO4mWe7TaW3e480b0fma8JDVKC-Bm2&typo=1&ancr_add=1>
> <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,WkEBmHnqxzRI-y-DnvmbDxdF4d6hHHBAzsbvpFcEq5IJD4NvBD2UsaTHdJji108MAaPLlLPiStrugcqQqaOiMWtRPPD06_j86OHIGMgxDGaIvA,,&typo=1&ancr_add=1>
> <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,TPI7OWo1BSJ_bwS9Glh1mpaxejYJfJmnvuI1-IdxEjI2JxnAdWd07bTUI2xTTrA_zb4ObBr5V5LQEHU1UvRm3_28XOARVJuGhh6sLVQvjw,,&typo=1>>>>
> <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,C7ZtrQEYrDREYieUnjZfXk7h_fqoJVo_XLRZmQyXYUyZDc0kdEBj0zr06ye4i8_yl3UqA9_-CyhgrU8dJLGGrUO2zXkjfIdPbVLlTLzRgotXQlf6_N1iirnYZw,,&typo=1&ancr_add=1>
> <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,kbE-VsFbc0X0JtCpCWBbSozm7vJyYF01IsFO0OLFuJClsD1e6N9rRJnq2j_d0b194MJa75oFFcb7J-zpwzouX8_ZOqDF4NBmbEBLr5lxKmt7Dl0,&typo=1&ancr_add=1>
> <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,dX2XLygBzEKSBEmwRpWLYCCNxAbMocoEqT9qbTbVrV7CHhEdlHxy3SEMeb8q_5k7OU7kkhRh2K0-dZ0rMJp0Xos3TKR3shQEJ9jCb-Ek&typo=1&ancr_add=1>
> <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,fyHIg4Tjg8E8y1z3SeBjhUBQ-CSi_TXwdT9EpUHKM2DmWF9WI7lG93IxpbRbWdE7ZBHbOm-aruXZKfU4pzzSACYkAdxNOjvD0eJtROWU_Q,,&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 <
> mailto:gepropella at gmail.com <gepropella at gmail.com> <
> mailto:gepropella at gmail.com <gepropella at gmail.com> <
> mailto:gepropella at gmail.com <gepropella at gmail.com> <
> mailto:gepropella at gmail.com <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 <
> mailto:gepropella at gmail.com <gepropella at gmail.com> <
> mailto:gepropella at gmail.com <gepropella at gmail.com> <
> mailto:gepropella at gmail.com <gepropella at gmail.com> <
> mailto:gepropella at gmail.com <gepropella at gmail.com>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This video essay concludes with the same point:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The Fake Futurism of Elon Musk
> >>>>>>> https://youtu.be/5OtKEetGy2Y <https://youtu.be/5OtKEetGy2Y> <
> https://youtu.be/5OtKEetGy2Y <https://youtu.be/5OtKEetGy2Y>> <
> https://youtu.be/5OtKEetGy2Y <https://youtu.be/5OtKEetGy2Y <
> https://youtu.be/5OtKEetGy2Y>>> <https://youtu.be/5OtKEetGy2Y <
> https://youtu.be/5OtKEetGy2Y <https://youtu.be/5OtKEetGy2Y <
> 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  //bit.ly/virtualfriam
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2f%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,_XZOZ5wf7r9rTrFVDWHEAJKJwz8zLoqqhsGQJ266ukswEcrMNqbmhP421tiKmWTQWFitKaLKRIWA_jHrWAa4ijPH_nFnYx_ftIqc_XhwsnvGAAY,&typo=1&ancr_add=1>
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,_80vv5D9WMpKGHIC5OcTaD5460fE-GQmr8yVfyuuRxaj7mft6l8UubyQHvWC3208JiQKbPtSkNKMfk_vtV54CiCNdTZWqxceesr4fs36M4UbzajyacWQ&typo=1>
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,WswJR-N9bwT6xkGA2vBmG5QbgOkoZht6WVbueQMUWtrfkMt129Ibr3fepqpA1rsJnho7FBYZBs-WJcEMtDl-TIz7faGkmpPt6WcdWqOhOQ,,&typo=1>
> archives:
>  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,UEUn3_ilnvjLW2qgH39JGYjMS0j2pl6vdsvYMH3cOYXg6GdbOXM1ydmt6nkpC7oFh3r8lcsyuiSykMMBkTSBRI2XaC8bjwLrB3A64Z7ZRece9wHS7ZjL0uwY&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,uX_37TNh5cREqt8MUbh7TD69tvxktp95IRUv_9WINJglXrTahRfs5G-X4F_LBzuwnQv6jF2f3KkUB0fu25-fEQjjKuat8Azpq9VJwYHyEQUWwQ,,&typo=1
> un/subscribe
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,J2kcwVsbSybAtBW7YivBidmPwaPdXxJtSx9HwueulMe59AixKfP6L6hzjuyD11Yy0hSZ3cYyOZ7h5MBgLWQr0I9umXATAlqBsUR1Ou-tuHU3fDop&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,wln-6CdrjA_4uff3GI8wUCZyIMC88Zxins7KuUVLX80jEH0pwrBwf2AUT_JOUB14aM0k0ZzsK50CXFoLhPstKdytYXRamh1YY0ACGC9EiTb4NzQx&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,1,7NIsmfgWqdPw0RZtyrM7sk9AMPG5BvhV1sAqwPUcd8T_2waciCSI09GeQfgBs4uyvChcZtyL4aKJfcPVVN4k8bsBtADKfOriRvU8iueSPEGhNwSMoiA,&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/20220124/709d96ae/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 7402328122238905285.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 654498 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20220124/709d96ae/attachment-0001.jpg>