X-Message-Number: 30078 References: <> From: David Stodolsky <> Subject: Re: Stodolsky's replies Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 22:15:35 +0100 On 26 Nov 2007, at 17:01, wrote: > In reply to some of my questions, David Stodolsky wrote in part; > >> The goal is to get cryonics accepted as a default treatment upon >> deanimation. > > > > Much too vague. Accepted in what degree and how soon? It would be completely accepted within the new organizations set up - let's call them Fellowships. If social movement theory is correct (and its widespread adoption by advertising agencies suggests that it is) and the cryonics movement is ready to engage with society (as is already apparent in its political and other outreach activities), then we can expect a very rapid growth in membership as the transition to a mass movement proceeds. The growth would be dependent upon the degree of conflict with the local culture. For example, we wouldn't expect much religious-based opposition in the old East Germany, which has the lowest rate of religious belief in, at least, Europe. There is a "democratic deficit" in Europe. This means people don't join political parties and elections have low turnouts. A well organized group can have a big influence on the political and social conditions in a jurisdiction, even if numbers are small. A few percent of the vote gets you into the legislature in most places in Europe, due to proportional voting, etc. This probably means that a movement with one percent of the population could get someone, not just someone they support, into the high political office. This one percent could be concentrated in a small town or city, and therefore the absolute number could be low. A town of 10,000 people could be strongly influenced by a fellowship of 100, if it was well organized (with the suggested demographic, this would be about 25 families). Since about a third of the population, at least of the UK, would choose bio-stasis if it was "gratis", these kind of numbers are readily achieveable with adequate start-up resources. Once political influence was reached, the administrative rule making to ensure cooperation with a bio-stasis organization or even legislation to make bio-stasis accepted as a default measure, wouldn't be far off in that jurisdiction. How long this would take is entirely dependent upon the amount of financial support behind the effort. In any case, we are talking about increasing participation by hundreds with each effort, not just by one or two persons. > >> I have repeatedly developed and validated new technologies, and >> gotten them accepted. > > Others are developing cryonics technology. The increased effectiveness of cryonics technology is unlikely to have much influence upon recruitment. There are plenty who already believe that reversible bio-stasis has been perfected and this hasn't led to a vast increase. Even current methods leave the Popemobile in the dust :-) > "Validation" presumably means > proof of effectiveness, and he isn't going to provide that. If he > has gotten new > technologies accepted, what exactly were they, and did they have any > similarity to cryonics in terms of cultural resistance? > Acceptance in my jobs as professor / researcher means getting published in peer-reviewed journals. My publications range from optics to psychotherapy: http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$13 Another measure of acceptance is having people read and cite the published work, and that also has been accomplished. Last time I looked, I had dozens of citations. However, to get any info on acceptance by users, we have to look at the main line in my research, which has been on the role of anonymity in groups. The first major innovation concerned guiding dialogue in small groups. This was proven to benefit the users in a lot of ways and that software was applied by others, who requested the disk: Stodolsky, D. (1987). Dialogue management program for the Apple II computer. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 19, 483-484. http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$21 The next major effort concerned using Internet technology to improve scientific communication. While I haven't gotten funding to validate this, I have argued that an analysis of problems of the current model make it obvious that it would be an improvement. This was enough to get an independent researcher to choose it for implementation: Stodolsky, D. (2002). Scientific publication needs a peer consensus. Psycoloquy, 13(2). http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$20 Finally, my contagion vigilance work has yet to be funded, but we have some acceptance data from the potential participants in the last research proposal: Stodolsky, D. S. (2007). Acceptance of Virus Radar. Unpublished Manuscript. Institute for Social Informatics, Copenhagen, Denmark: http://files.secureid.org/dss/VirusRadar3.3.pdf Most would agree that if someone is willing to pay 50 Euro/month out of a salary of 300 Euro/month, they accept the application. In terms of cultural resistance: Anonymity tends to upset power relations and, in the final analysis, that is one thing we are talking about with the acceptance of bio-stasis/resurrection. So, there is some relationship. In terms of widespread acceptance, this psycho-acoustics publication has had the maximum effect: Stodolsky, D. (1970). The standardization of monaural phase. Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics, Au-18, 288-299. The proposal was incorporated into a Standard that is probably built into every modern piece of audio technology. Maybe given a few more years some of the more recent stuff will get that kind of coverage. > >> The objective would be to >> validate a working model for an organization of this type. [church or > similar organization] > > The Venturist organization already exists. Many partly similar > organizations > exist, such as fraternal organizations. Cryonics organizations > have made > efforts to broaden their appeal and promote fellow-feeling, with > very small > success because of our small numbers and diversity of members. The current plan differs from the Venturist model, because it includes suspension funding instead of requiring it as a precondition. Part of the small numbers problem is overcome by a publicity effort and simple sign up, and retention is ensured by ongoing service. > In any event, > what is needed is not just a generalized objective but some kind > of plan or > concept with enough detail to allow meaningful discussion. Producing a comprehensive proposal is a major investment and the potential funder's requirements must be known first, if there isn't going to be lot of wasted effort. > >> An adequate test would require a few different sites, each effort >> adjusted to the local conditions. A minimum time-frame would be 3 >> years. At least two people would need support, one at the PhD level >> and another for routine work / familiarity with local conditions. >> Overhead would include a paid-up suspension for each of the efforts. >> A substantial amount of legal work would need to be done by a local >> attorney to set up the organizational structure and get approvals >> from local authorities. The launch would require a substantial >> publicity effort, since a minimum of one-hundred persons per site >> would probably be required for a valid test. Given the current state >> of the USD, this would cost about $800,000.This is an optimistic >> figure. > > I don't know where these numbers come from, and I don't know why > a lot of > legal work would be required. All numbers are absolute minimums. The financial number is just two salaries and overhead (at 100%), which is needed for starting up anything like this. A detailed budget could tell what a certain promotional effort would cost, but it wouldn't tell how big the effect would be. The unknows are very large, so probably the uncertainies can only be reduced by a survey or a pilot project that generates some data. > I have formed several corporations with no legal > help, and as far as I know the Venturists didn't need any legal > help in > setting up, nor approval of local authorities. If a physical > plant is > envisioned, there might be local questions such as zoning, but > there is no indication > of a physical plant or real estate being involved. Setting up and getting approval for a church-like organization qualified to receive tax benefits is not that easy in Denmark and is pretty much impossible in some European countries, in which state churches are dominant. The legal costs will be substantial, it is impossible to know in advance how big they will be. There will be real estate involved, since ongoing services need to be supported. >> . Calculations have >> shown that participation would be economically neutral in high-tax >> countries, such as those in Northern Europe. That is, after taxes, >> members would have the same disposable income. > > I don't understand this. Even if donations are tax deductible, > that only > reduces the net cost of the donation and doesn't eliminate it. I > believe the > Venturists have tax deductible status as a church, but again, > where is the > evidence that another such organization will do better? You need to talk to an estate planner to get the lowdown on this. Large donors often end up with more disposable income after 'giving away' assets. There was recently a major lawsuit here because teachers at a school were donating their salaries back to the school and collecting only expenses, with the effect that the State ended up with the entire tab. The school won. This also works with church schools, where parents 'donate' to the church and the school is free. They get 'reminded', if they fail to donate. If ongoing services are provided, it is easy to give participants a net benefit greater than their contribution, in a high tax area. > >> I have developed a >> marriage system designed to resist the transmission of diseases and >> to maximize social support among members: > > > Where is the relevance? The only relevance I see here is fostering > social > support among members, and where is the evidence that this was > successful? Any > numbers available? Contracting a contagious disease is often harmful to your health. We are trying to keep people alive. > >> Also, I have reviewed the literature and performed some statistical >> tests on survey data related to cryonics, in order to identify the >> appropriate demographic. > > This horse is dead. We know which groups are better recruitment > prospects, > but that doesn't help us because the absolute numbers are so small. Absolute numbers make no difference in savings per new member. However, given a small number of new members the amount saved may be insignificant. > Paid > advertising doesn't work, except the Web. Absolute numbers are small, because the service isn't being packaged correctly. Fixing that is part of the strategy. > Certainly it might be possible to > utilize the Web more efficiently or more extensively with > volunteer labor, but that > is not D.S.'s proposal. The Web is essential for just about any project these days. For example, the Web is an integrated part of the contagious disease management strategy. > > > Also, I said that D.S.'s figure of long term increase in life > expectancy of > 3 months per year was nonsense, and he replied in part: This line of discussion was merely to point out the need for social research to ensure that even current patients remain safe. If immortality is not perfected before cryonics becomes a political question, there will be trouble. While there are some optimists that think that we can have immortality within 50 years, most don't see it as a realistic possibility (Doug Skrecky's recent estimate was first half of the 22'nd Century and this doesn't take into account social factors, which seem to be the main limit these days). Even with a conservative growth estimate, we will see cryonics as a political force in 50 years. The longer we wait to deal with these issues, the more expensive and dangerous the confrontation will become when it reaches the political level. dss David Stodolsky Skype: davidstodolsky Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30078