<table><tr><th>From:</th><th>Joscha Bach</th></tr><tr><td>Sent:</td><td>Sunday, July 10, 2016 4:50 AM</td></tr><tr><td>To:</td><td>Jeffrey Epstein</td></tr><tr><td>Subject:</td><td>Forbidden Research</td></tr></table>

Joi tells me that Ramona (MIT's HR person) was not happy about the idea =o make a deal with the student. I suppose you discussed it. Did they =eel that MIT might look too shady if they tried that?

Wrt "Forbidden Research", here is a brainstorm I sent them a few weeks =go; perhaps you are interested.

1. Things we do not want to know, because they seem to be too horrible =nd paralyzing to contemplate

There is a significant probability (>50%) that the US and other =ountries will lose their coastal cities in the next 50-100 years due to =icing sea levels, and much of open air agriculture due to increasingly =rregular seasons and weather patterns, loss of arable land, shift of =egetation zones, and decreased availability of fertilizers.

These developments will create tension in our societies, especially if =ood scarcity leads to mass starvation. We are currently unprepared for =hese tensions, and for the possibility that our current forms of =dministration, infrastructure and civilization break down =atastrophically. We should make considerable investments into

- the management of societies under apocalyptic stress, as well as into =- post-apocalyptic science.

At the moment, practically all of our R&D and political science is =redicated on a continuation of the status quo. Most of the efforts that =tudy existential risk (the largest one being climate science) are =oncerned with generating and evaluating warnings *about• existential =isk, not how to deal with world when the risk manifests. The returns of = climate science that attempts to calculate more decimal digits of the =robability that we already passed a critical tipping point, or will do =o in the future, are diminishing. We need to explore what comes after =he tipping point. That is even true if the probability of apocalyptic =evelopments during the next century would be only 20%, or even 1%, and =uch more so since our best projections put it much higher.

2. Things we do not want to know, because they make us uncomfortable

- We frame most end-of-life care in terms of cost: most of the health =xpenses are racked up in the last year of a person's life, and how much =an we really afford to do? A more important question might be: What is =he most humane way of dying? During this last year, quality of life is =ften abysmally low. What is an acceptable tradeoff in quality of life =s. duration of life? It seems that most people would prefer to die a =ew weeks or months earlier, if they get to choose how and when, instead =f having to wait until most of their vital organs have given up. How =an we implement a culture and legal code of humane death?

- What is the most humane way of killing animals? Current methods =nclude painful electric stunning, suffocation with CO2 (usually =ainful/stressful), suffocation with argon (apparently painless, but =ore expensive and with averse effects on meat), stabbing and slicing =ith 1-5% of animals not being properly stunned etc. Can we develop cost =ffective, reliable and entirely painless methods of killing, and =rescribe their use, without religious or cost exemptions?

## 3. Things "they" do not want us to know

- History: can we open and fully access our government vaults after a =ew decades, to find out what was really going on behind the scenes? Can =e integrate and report on the things that accidentally become public =nowledge now (such as the background of Benghazi, the leaked US cables, =he organization of the Arab spring or the Orange Revolution in the =kraine) to get a more nuanced and accurate model of history, and better =rojections for present and future? Some topics are probably =eliberately and perhaps permanently obscured for policy reasons, such =s the death toll of Chernobyl. Can we start serious and objective =esearch efforts into such topics?

- Finance, wealth, ownership: It is debatable whether it is in the =nterest of society to have an accurate public model of wealth =istribution, of the actual dynamics of the monetary systems, the =ecision making hierarchies and responsibilities etc. However, it is =ertainly important to have such a model within the academic and policy =dvisory bodies.

- Administration, power dynamics and mass control: Democracy is an =mportant invention to stabilize societies, but the democratic narrative =s not well-aligned with how our societies actually work. (It is also =ot clear that a thoroughly democratic society could work beyond the =cale of a city state, like Iceland.) The techniques to control and =lign large groups of people seem to be largely informal, and the =ynamics that make leaders, popstars, gurus, ideas and ideologies =opular or hated appear mysterious, instead of being properly analyzed.

4. Things that are not well-aligned with scientific careers

Scientific paradigms develop specific methodologies and thereby diverge. =hen the methodology does not fit the question, we often need to start =ew paradigms, which threaten the investment of competing scientists =nto their existing methodology. As a result, many sciences stick with =ethodologies that make progress on their original question very hard: =sychology, neuroscience, sociology, parts of fundamental physics and =inguistics seem to be stuck, yet radical breaks with current =ethodologies are often seen as heresy. Paradoxically, the aversion is =arger when the science is under stress (i.e. unproductive), while a =roductive, successful field seems to have a high tolerance of novelty =nd diversity.

5. Things that are outside of the Overton Window

Every society has a range of acceptable opinions. Science tries to be =eutral, i.e. the value of statement is entirely given by the evidence =hat supports it, yet a science that explores statements that conflict =ith societal narratives puts researchers at risk. Genetics and la =ender and sexuality, markets vs. regulation, autism and nerdculture, =ome to mind.

In this category are also evidence based crime prevention (are prisons =n effective way to reduce crime? how can we establish a feedback loop =etween the legal code and its application, and the results they have on =ociety?), evidence based poverty reduction, evidence based treatment of =ddiction, and evidence based analysis of benefits of diversity in the =orkplace. In all these areas, our policies tend to be dictated by our =alues, not by the consequences of the implementation of the policies =ith respect to our preferred outcomes.

## 6. Things that are (relatively) harmless, but forbidden

Germline modification, cloning, extended PID etc. will likely not have =armful effects on the whole of society if they are studied at a very =mall scale, and have the potential for great progress in healthcare, =ognitive science, nutrition science and other fields. These studies =ause a visceral reaction in most people, because they are not only =utlawed, but seem to change our identity as a species. It is hard to =uantify this damage and to weight it against the benefits.

## 6. Things that are (relatively) harmless, but forbidden (cont.)

Psychedelics are outlawed in almost all forms in the US and most other =ountries, yet seem to be less risky substances than legal drugs =especially alcohol and many prescription medicines). They appear to =ave great therapeutic potential, and are consumed by Millions, but they =annot be scientifically studied.

Related and quite obvious: despite the gradual liberalization of the =onsumption of Marihuana, we have little solid data on its effects on =river safety, medical interactions, etc. Research into such effects =ust reflect the actual consumption of substances in society, not =hether we expect people not to consume them, because there are laws =gainst them

7. Things that are dangerous and forbidden

Here is where we can put CRISPR and other weapons of mass destruction.

People that might be interesting to invite may include (in no particular =rder) George Church, Steven Wolfram, Seth Lloyd, Michael Vassar, =iva-Melissa Tez, Scott Alexander Siskind, Rick Doblin, Terrence Tao, =obert Trivers, Steven Pinker, Jonathan Haidt, Robert Kegan, Noam =homsky, Meredith Patterson, Frank Rieger, Larry Lessig, Dan Novy, =tuart Kauffman, Paul Graham, Jeffrey Epstein, Reid Hoffman, Ben =oertzel, Demis Hassabis, Max Tegmark, Clayton Cubitt, Michel Gondry, =aurie Anderson.=?xml version=.0" encoding=TF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd">

<plist version=".0">

<dict>

<key>conversation-id</key>
<integer>75450</integer>
<key>date-last-viewed</key>
<integer>0</integer>
<key>date-received</key>
<integer>1468126191</integer>
<key>flags</key>
<integer>8590195717</integer>
<key>gmail-label-ids</key>
<array>
<integer>6</integer>
<integer>2</integer>
</array>
<key>remote-id</key>
<string>626408</string>
</dict>
</plist>