Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] like definition

From: Ian Goddard <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:40:15 -0800 (PST)

spike wrote:

>Ian, these are examples of like being used as a 
>speech filler, as teens often do.  The sentences 
>below can have the likes surgically removed without 
>changing their meaning. The insight I had was from 
>listening to highly articulate and intelligent 
>like-sayers.

 Right, I see your point. 

>In 1984 newspeak, Orwell suggested that we replace 
>the descriptions of degree with a single word and
>its negative.  His example was good, double plus
>ungood, etc.  
>
>Like is another example of a possible improvement 
>of newspeak:  replace phrases denoting exactness 
>with like.  

 I liked your initial idea about teaching machines
what natural-language words like 'like' mean. It could
be a worthwhile project to pursue that further.

~Ian

__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ 
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

---

From: Erik Starck <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 10:27:35 +0100

At 21:58 2005-03-19 spike wrote:
>Are they talking much about this?  How are they proposing
>to deal with it?  Importing legions of young workers?  From
>where?  Africa?  Rural Afghanistan?

There's an ongoing debate in Sweden about this. The solution from the 
government is of course, you guessed it, raise the taxes! The fact that we 
already have the highest taxes in the world doesn't seem to concern them.

At the same time, about 25% of the population in their working age doesn't 
work, so of course there is a pool of people to pick from already. The 
first problem is then of course to get these people to work, and for that 
to happen new jobs must be created. Something that the current government 
is completely incapable of doing. This is a much more urgent issue.

I could go on forever writing about this, but the conclusion is basically 
that it's a real political mess that most likely in the end will put an end 
to the giant nanny state. The road to get there will be bumpy, though. The 
next election in Sweden is in 2006.

Germany is going through a similar transformation but they're slightly 
ahead of Sweden. They are seeing the highest unemployment figures since the 
30s. Now the government has been forced to lower taxes and reduce benefits 
in order to fuel the economy with new jobs.

The thing is, since the inclusion of the former Eastern Europe countries 
into EU there is an increasing pressure on the former welfare states to 
decrease tax levels. Slovakia is a perfect example of why, with their 19% 
flat tax:
"<http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery;jsessionid=3fn30gkr35qaa?method=4&dsid=2222&dekey=Slovakia&gwp=8&curtab=2222_1&sbid=lc02a>Slovakia 
has introduced a 19% flat tax in 2004; the government was then able to 
collect 10 percent more income tax than it had expected, and the number of 
new firms registering in Slovakia jumped 12 percent."
http://www.answers.com/topic/flat-tax

So, what will happen now? My guess is that the high tax countries will move 
closer to the low tax ones. This will decrease the barriers for young 
people from east to move over to the western countries to find work.

At the same time, big things are happening. Major changes that make people 
scared. When people are scared they cling on to what they feel is safe. In 
Europe in general and Sweden in particular, to most people the Nanny State 
is the safest thing in the world. They are gonna cling on hard to it, even 
as it goes down.

This is the place where it would be perfect to include an Atlas 
Shrugged-quote, but I'll resist the temptation.

--
BR
Erik