Sentences (#50)

A newsflash from Tyler Cowen:

European countries that refuse to share the burden of high immigration will face a financial charge of about €250,000 per refugee, according to Brussels’ plans to overhaul the bloc’s asylum rules. (XS emphasis, link is behind a paywall.)

There’s a narrative-collapse aspect to this proposal, isn’t there?

(Thanks to Nydwracu for the tip-off.)

ADDED: The story un-paywalled.

May 4, 2016admin 23 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Collapse

TAGGED WITH : , ,

23 Responses to this entry

  • Brett Stevens Says:

    Typical control-oriented plan. “We will force you to obey.” A national Galt’s gulch strategy might work: let the EU assess all the penalties it wants, then inflate local costs and declare bankruptcy, then exit the EU.

    [Reply]

    Gentile Ben Reply:

    I guess this is necessary to prevent Germany from selfishly keeping all the economic miracle workers for themselves.

    Poland will of course feel comfortable being threatened and fined by Germany.

    [Reply]

    Alrenous Reply:

    More like plan-oriented control. The point is to provoke a fight, so they can win a fight and get warm fuzzies as a result.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 4th, 2016 at 1:48 pm Reply | Quote
  • TheDividualist Says:

    I am probably stupid because I just realized how democracy has these two faces: a democratic government is incentivized to be popular/populist about everything, EXCEPT immigration and similar matters as they are about importing future voters, thus pissing off current ones can be an acceptable trade-off. I.e. democratic governments are expected to be surprising indifferent to current popular opinion in a few core questions that affect the future make-up and expected future popular opinion of the voter base. It also follows that this may be one exception where not to be a passivist, if there is a plebiscite about matters like this, go vote and cheerfully block it, and laugh while they squirm and say stuff like “ugh OK we have to expect the majority opinion (or else our game would be completely up)”.

    I am pretty sure the Visegrad Four is already preparing the plebiscites about this and then will present the results as “the majority hath declared, we are terribly sorry but have no choice, do you really look like the kind of guys who charge fines for respecting democracy?” to Brussels while trying hard to hide the mega-trollface. They know exactly well how to play this game.

    [Reply]

    TheDividualist Reply:

    s/expect/respect

    [Reply]

    Aeroguy Reply:

    The response to that is always the same: In this particular isolated case the people don’t know what’s good for them so we just need to cudgel them over the head with education till they express the correct opinion. It’s just ignorance, so low status, but we’ll be gracious and help them not be so ignorant. Democracy works if there is sufficient brainwashing, ahem, I mean education.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 4th, 2016 at 3:55 pm Reply | Quote
  • haishan Says:

    I actually kinda like this policy? I don’t expect it to last, but a scenario in which countries can say “thanks but no thanks” to refugees — and pay the market price for them — is a hell of a lot better than the one in which they have no say in the matter.

    My only problem is that there’s no apparent market mechanism — just a centralized authority setting the rate. Implement cap-and-trade for refugees!

    [Reply]

    Tentative Joiner Reply:

    It certainly seems preferable to a purely monkey politics-based approach. This idea would reach true subversiveness if countries had to pay based on the expected total economic value of the potential immigrant — positive or negative — tracked by an ever-improving machine learning system.

    [Reply]

    Shlomo Maistre Reply:

    “an ever-improving machine learning system”

    Err, any machine is only ever going to do what it is designed by humans to do and its output will only ever be as good as its inputs (at best). Notwithstanding, of course, “singularity” propaganda to the contrary.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Darwin explains the profound fallacy in this type of assumption. Deep Learning implements the evolutionary lesson.

    Shlomo Maistre Reply:

    “Darwin explains the profound fallacy in this type of assumption.”

    I’d argue I’m not making any assumption at all. Those who think humans are/ever could create robots that are beings are making an assumption – and an incorrect one.

    “Deep Learning implements the evolutionary lesson.”

    Deep learning mimics the evolutionary lesson. FTFY 🙂

    admin Reply:

    By the nature of the thing, it’s going to make whatever is argued on the topic superfluous soon enough (one way or the other). Preparatory agreement doesn’t strike me as any kind of priority (or even as an achievable objective).

    Tentative Joiner Reply:

    @Shlomo Maistre
    >any machine is only ever going to do what it is designed by humans to do and its output will only ever be as good as its inputs

    While I disagree with you I don’t see what this response has to do with my speculative “proposal”. Machine learning already works (the latest example is worth looking at). Are you objecting to the fact I said “ever-improving” rather than “ever-improved [by humans]”? If so, note that machine learning algorithms, deep learning or earlier, “learn” in the sense of making their output more like what the operators would like it to be based on the feedback they give them. By “ever-improving” I meant only this.

    ||||| Reply:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6lM3bh-npg

    Shlomo Maistre Reply:

    “https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6lM3bh-npg”

    Aren’t computers already mostly smarter than humans in many ways?

    It’s not that I think computers will not be exceptionally intelligent; my disagreement is that I don’t think machines will ever improve themselves in the sense that a human, being a being with consciousness, can and do.

    ||||| Reply:

    They’re better in some domains, relatively simple ones.

    “its output will only ever be as good as its inputs (at best)”

    This is disingenuous or very ignorant. Ever hear of MK Ultra, sensory deprivation induced hallucinations or Harry Harlow’s monkey experiments? Humans are fed inputs, data from the environment and from other humans *constantly*. Y’know, those childhood, tradition and culture things? ( http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.4083 ).When this is disrupted or interfered with brains become incoherent as much as any other machine.

    Also ignores self-play in engines like AlphaGo or Giraffe ( http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.01549 , tangentially https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_free_lunch_in_search_and_optimization#Coevolutionary_free_lunches )

    “It’s not that I think computers will not be exceptionally intelligent; my disagreement is that I don’t think machines will ever improve themselves in the sense that a human, being a being with consciousness, can and do.”

    This sounds slightly incoherent to me once unconventional media of computation are taken into consideration. Chemistry can be seen as a logical/computational artifact ( vide
    https://hal-mines-paristech.archives-ouvertes.fr/file/index/docid/75426/filename/RR-1133.pdf
    or
    http://fontana.med.harvard.edu/www/Documents/WF/Papers/objects.pdf ) and therefore if very intelligent machines realize that they’re missing some capacity by not having proper bodies they’d just make a few meatbags. The shadow casting the objects.

    Neuronal Computing:
    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephen_Lynch/publication/42424387_Neuronal_computers/links/00b4951b82617e7518000000.pdf

    Leech neuron machine :
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sci/tech/358822.stm

    DNA computing and synthetic biology:
    http://synbiobeta.com/a-high-level-bio-programming-language-for-designing-dna-sequences/

    http://www.nature.com/news/first-life-with-alien-dna-1.15179

    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/electrifying-advance-researchers-create-circuit-within-living-plants

    Sine mater, sine pater, introductorio diabolo ex machina!

    ||||| Reply:

    shit, wrote that in a hurry and came out terrible. *sigh*.

    Shlomo Maistre Reply:

    1/2 “This is disingenuous or very ignorant. Ever hear of MK Ultra, sensory deprivation induced hallucinations or Harry Harlow’s monkey experiments? Humans are fed inputs, data from the environment and from other humans *constantly*. Y’know, those childhood, tradition and culture things? ( http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.4083 ).When this is disrupted or interfered with brains become incoherent as much as any other machine.

    Also ignores self-play in engines like AlphaGo or Giraffe ( http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.01549 , tangentially https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_free_lunch_in_search_and_optimization#Coevolutionary_free_lunches )”

    Oh I don’t disagree with or overlook any of those points. Indeed, that the human brain is imperfect and misconstrues much of the data it incorporates is certainly not anathema to my perspective at all. Maybe you missed the part where I said “at best”. Just because a system/machine is limited in its quality of output by the nature and quality of its input does not mean that it will reach that limit – or even come very close!

    2/2 “This sounds slightly incoherent to me once unconventional media of computation are taken into consideration. Chemistry can be seen as a logical/computational artifact ( vide
    https://hal-mines-paristech.archives-ouvertes.fr/file/index/docid/75426/filename/RR-1133.pdf
    or
    http://fontana.med.harvard.edu/www/Documents/WF/Papers/objects.pdf ) and therefore if very intelligent machines realize that they’re missing some capacity by not having proper bodies they’d just make a few meatbags. The shadow casting the objects.

    Neuronal Computing:
    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephen_Lynch/publication/42424387_Neuronal_computers/links/00b4951b82617e7518000000.pdf

    Leech neuron machine :
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sci/tech/358822.stm

    DNA computing and synthetic biology:
    http://synbiobeta.com/a-high-level-bio-programming-language-for-designing-dna-sequences/

    http://www.nature.com/news/first-life-with-alien-dna-1.15179

    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/electrifying-advance-researchers-create-circuit-within-living-plants

    Sine mater, sine pater, introductorio diabolo ex machina!”

    None of those links invalidate my perspective. The bottom line is that machines don’t have consciousnesses; there is no mind-body problem with respect to something man creates. Just because man creates a machine that solves things that man did not explicitly teach the machine to solve doesn’t make it self-taught; the machine was able to do that thing by virtue of being designed in a certain way. To wit (from the BBC link you provide):

    “But their aim is to devise a new generation of fast and flexible computers that can work out for themselves how to solve a problem, rather than having to be told exactly what to do.”

    My point precisely.

    Furthermore, from another link you provide:

    “Here, systems of limit cycle oscillators, which function in a similar manner to biological neurones are used to perform computation. Practical implementation could take the form of in vitro neural cultures or systems of oscillators etched into traditional semiconductor chips.”

    This is interesting and no-doubt could prove to be highly productive technology. I’m not saying that this is not going to happen; I am saying that what it means is often misunderstood. This is mimicry of the human brain – not its complete and authentic replication. To continue:

    “Theoretically, a quantum computer could make use of quantum mechanical phenomena to represent, structure and perform operations with data. The data would be processed by caged atoms known as qubits (quantum binary digits), where a single qubit can represent a zero or a one, or crucially, a quantum superposition of both. The number of possible states in a quantum computer is vastly greater than that of a normal conventional computer in which only one of 2n states is possible.”

    It’s still just a computer though.

    Humans are different than machines by nature.

    Just because man might be able to create neural networks in machines that mimic how human brains operate does not mean that a man-made machine is human in any fundamental sense at all and such a delusion is rarely harbored by anyone capable of seeing that the human mind is not made up entirely of physical, tangible matter as is the ear or arm. This is not a coincidence and the modern obsession/worship of science/technology is a poor substitute for recognizing the Providence of His everlasting Kingdom.

    Posted on May 4th, 2016 at 5:21 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alan J. Perrick Says:

    Is “Nydwracu” really an intelligent person, though? It was only very recently that he was commenting positively on President John Kennedy, a man who set up a lot of rabidly anti-white policies during his regime…

    No, I don’t think these “Jay Eff Kay” appreciators are very good at all, and that heretic himself is another meme for this unfortunately powerful ethnic minority, the Trentian or Vatican-Roman heretics. It’s the same way with the man Mister Patrick Buchanan. One cannot touch either of those men, they are “radioactive” as they have been used by the subversives as memes to advance their cause… It’s the same with Senator McCarthy, although connections with that man to the Inquisiton are a little too easy to make, so he is not used in the same way so much.

    A.J.P.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 4th, 2016 at 8:16 pm Reply | Quote
  • Xoth Says:

    Let us hypothetically say Germany had refused to take 1000000 refugees. The penalty for this would be 250bn euro, or 7% of 2015 GDP. In the same vein, Sweden would pay 40bn euro to refuse its refugees, or again roughly 7% of its GDP. In other words, a fine bit of soaring politico-bureaucratic insanity which would more or less ensure Le Break-Up.

    The Mandate of Heaven is somewhere over there, I think.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 4th, 2016 at 9:48 pm Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    “The European Commission has given its support to a visa-free travel deal with Turkey after Ankara threatened to back out of a landmark migration deal. It is proposed to lift visa requirements by the end of June.”

    Turkey housing biggest IS training camps, if approved IS operatives can travel visa free to anywhere in EU.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 5th, 2016 at 4:25 am Reply | Quote
  • D. Says:

    There’s a danger to the Cathedral if the number of “refugees” — especially jihadists — becomes too high relative to local population in one country. As has already been demonstrated, this leads to mass incidents of violent outbursts that are difficult to explain away to the public. In the longer-term, a higher concentration of jihadists leads to sporadic but increasing levels of terrorism, and a higher concentration of third worlders in general leads to a degradation of living standards in various aspects.

    It would be a very good thing if a relatively small country, like Sweden, took in the lion’s share of the “refugees” as this would greatly accelerate demographic change and allow other countries a glimpse into their possible future, providing a cautionary example that might lead their citizens to rebel against the Cathedral’s desires. However, the Cathedral does its best to smooth out the inflow of immigrants proportional to population, at least among the wealthier EU members, so that no one country is particularly worse in this regard than a number of other countries, and the people are compelled to accept this demographic change as part of Progress.

    This recent push by Germany is interesting in that it appears to be the first attempt at spreading immigrants over the ex-communist EU states, which are still much poorer than those that had been on the free side of the Iron Curtain. I wonder if this is in fact the goal, or if this is a ploy aimed at moving “refugees” from Germany and Sweden to recalcitrant wealthy EU countries.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 5th, 2016 at 6:50 am Reply | Quote
  • John Says:

    A fine of 250000 Euros is a bargain. Can we pay the EU that sum for every Mexican, Somali, and other non-European type that we put on a plane from the US to Cologne?

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 6th, 2016 at 7:35 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment