3 sets of accounting ledgers: Diebold voting machines
Inside A U.S. Election Vote Counting Program By Bev Harris* * Bev Harris is the Author of the soon to be published book Black Box Voting: Ballot Tampering In The 21st Century http://www.blackboxvoting.com A Diebold touchscreen voting machine Makers of the walk right in, sit right down, replace ballot tallies with your own GEMS vote counting program. IMPORTANT NOTE: Publication of this story marks a watershed in American political history. It is offered freely for publication in full or part on any and all internet forums, blogs and noticeboards. All other media are also encouraged to utilise material. Readers are encouraged to forward this to friends and acquaintances in the United States and elsewhere. CONTENTS Introduction Part 1 - CAN THE VOTES BE CHANGED? Part 2 - CAN THE PASSWORD BE BYPASSED? Part 3 - CAN THE AUDIT TRAIL BE ALTERED? See Also Companion Article For Wider Background Sludge Report #154 Bigger Than Watergate! http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00064.htm * Introduction For both optical scans and touch screens operating using Diebold election systems, the voting system works like this: Voters vote at the precinct, running their ballot through an optical scan, or entering their vote on a touch screen. After the polls close, poll workers transmit the votes that have been accumulated to the county office. They do this by modem. At the county office, there is a host computer with a program on it called GEMS. GEMS receives the incoming votes and stores them in a vote ledger. But then, we found, it makes another set of books with a copy of what is in vote ledger 1. And at the same time, it makes yet a third vote ledger with another copy. The Elections Supervisor never sees these three sets of books. All she sees is the reports she can run: Election summary (totals, county wide) or a detail report (totals for each precinct). She has no way of knowing that her GEMS program is using multiple sets of books, because the GEMS interface draws its data from an Access database, which is hidden. And here is what is quite odd: On the programs we tested, the Election summary (totals, county wide) come from the vote ledger 2 instead of vote ledger 1. Now, think of it like this: You want the report to add up ONLY the ACTUAL votes. But, unbeknownst to the election supervisor, votes can be added and subtracted from vote ledger 2, so that it may or may not match vote ledger 1. Her official report comes from vote ledger 2, which has been disengaged from vote ledger 1. If she asks for a detailed report for some precincts, though, her report comes from vote ledger 1. Therefore, if you keep the correct votes in vote ledger 1, a spot check of detailed precincts (even if you compare voter-verified paper ballots) will always be correct. And what is vote ledger 3 for? For now, we are calling it the Lord Only Knows vote ledger. From a programming standpoint, there might be reasons to have a special vote ledger that disengages from the real one. From an accounting standpoint, using multiple sets of books is NOT OKAY. From an accounting standpoint, the ONLY thing the totals report should add up is the original votes in vote ledger 1. Proper bookkeeping NEVER allows an extra ledger that can be used to just erase the original information and add your own. And certainly, it is improper to have the official reports come from the second ledger, the one which may or may not have information erased or added. * Detailed Examination Of Diebold GEMS Voting Machine Security ( Part 1) CAN THE VOTES BE CHANGED? Let's go into the GEMS program and run a report on the Max Cleland/Saxby Chambliss race. (This is an example, and does not contain the real data.) Here is what the Totals Report will look like in GEMS: CLICK FOR BIG VERSION http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/images/gems/CLEL3.jpg As it stands, Cleland is stomping Chambliss. Let's make it more exciting. The GEMS election file contains more than one set of books. They are hidden from the person running the GEMS program, but you can see them if you go into Microsoft Access. You might look at it like this: Suppose you have votes on paper ballots, and you pile all the paper ballots in room one. Then, you make a copy of all the ballots and put the stack of copies in room 2. You then leave the door open to room 2, so that people can come in and out, replacing some of the votes in the stack with their own. You could have some sort of security device that would tell you if any of the copies of votes in room 2 have been changed, but you opt not to. Now, suppose you want to count the votes. Should you count them from room 1 (original votes)? Or should you count them from room 2, where they may or may not be the same as room 1? What Diebold chose to do in the files we examined was to count the votes from room2. Illustration: If an intruder opens the GEMS program in Microsoft Access, they will find that each
Robotic Singularity
http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm Robotic Nation by Marshall Brain I went to McDonald's this weekend with the kids. We go to McDonald's to eat about once a week because it is a mile from the house and has an indoor play area. Our normal routine is to walk in to McDonald's, stand in line, order, stand around waiting for the order, sit down, eat and play. On Sunday, this decades-old routine changed forever. When we walked in to McDonald's, an attractive woman in a suit greeted us and said, Are you planning to visit the play area tonight? The kids screamed, Yeah! McDonald's has a new system that you can use to order your food right in the play area. Would you like to try it? The kids screamed, Yeah! The woman walks us over to a pair of kiosks in the play area. She starts to show me how the kiosks work and the kids scream, We want to do it! So I pull up a chair and the kids stand on it while the (extremely patient) woman in a suit walks the kids through the screens. David ordered his food, Irena ordered her food, I ordered my food. It's a simple system. Then it was time to pay. Interestingly, the kiosk only took cash in the form of bills. So I fed my bills into the machine. Then you take a little plastic number to set on your table and type the number in. The transaction is complete. We sat down at a table. We put our number in the center of the table and waited. In about 10 seconds the kids screamed, When is our food going to get here??? I said, Let's count. In less than two minutes a woman in an apron put a tray with our food on the table, handed us our change, took the plastic number and left. You know what? It is a nice system. It works. It is much nicer than standing in line. The only improvement I would request is the ability to use a credit card. I will make this prediction: by 2008, every meal in every fast food restaurant will be ordered from a kiosk like this, or from a similar system embedded in each table. As nice as this system is, however, I think that it represents the tip of an iceberg that we do not understand. This iceberg is going to change the American economy in ways that are very hard to imagine. The Iceberg The iceberg looks like this. On that same day, I interacted with five different automated systems like the kiosks in McDonald's: I got money in the morning from the ATM. I bought gas from an automated pump. I bought groceries at BJ's (a warehouse club) using an extremely well-designed self-service check out line. I bought some stuff for the house at Home Depot using their not-as-well-designed-as-BJ's self-service check out line. I bought my food at McDonald's at the kiosk, as described above. All of these systems are very easy-to-use from a customer standpoint, they are fast, and they lower the cost of doing business and should therefore lead to lower prices. All of that is good, so these automated systems will proliferate rapidly. The problem is that these systems will also eliminate jobs in massive numbers. In fact, we are about to see a seismic shift in the American workforce. As a nation, we have no way to understand or handle the level of unemployment that we will see in our economy over the next several decades. These kiosks and self-service systems are the beginning of the robotic revolution. When most people think about robots, they think about independent, autonomous, talking robots like the ones we see in science fiction films. C-3PO and R2-D2 are powerful robotic images that have been around for decades. Robots like these will come into our lives much more quickly than we imagine -- self-service checkout systems are the first primitive signs of the trend. Here is one view from the future to show you where we are headed: Automated retail systems like ATMs, kiosks and self-service checkout lines marked the beginning of the robotic revolution. Over the course of fifteen years starting in 2001, these systems proliferated and evolved until nearly every retail transaction could be handled in an automated way. Five million jobs in the retail sector were lost as a result of these systems. The next step was autonomous, humanoid robots. The mechanics of walking were not simple, but Honda had proven that those problems could be solved with the creation of its ASIMO robot at the turn of the century. Sony and other manufacturers followed Honda's lead. Over the course of two decades, engineers refined this hardware and the software controlling it to the point where they could create humanoid bodyforms with the grace and precision of a ballerina or the mass and sheer strength of the Incredible Hulk. Decades of research and development work on autonomous robotic intelligence finally started to pay off. By 2025, the first machines that could see, hear, move and manipulate objects at a level roughly equivalent to human beings were making their way from research labs into the marketplace. These robots could not think creatively like human beings, but
Re: The Case for a Marriage Ammendment to the Constitution
At 06:19 PM 7/24/2003 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As will hardly surprise anyone, I could not possibly disagree more. By this logic, the Supreme Court should not have decided as it did in Brown vs Board of Education. If it were left up to states, there would still be legal discrimination in the deep South, almost 50 years after Brown. Rights are rights; they should not be at the mercy of transitory or even entrenched prejudiced majorities. It has been the province of the Supreme Court for 200 years to rule on the constitutionality of laws. A conservative, of all people, should respect that kind of established tradition. Uhhh except that laws banning gay marriage have existed for 200 years without *anyone* thinking that they violated the Constitution.Thus, it would be capricious and authoritarian for the Supreme Court to suddenly strike them down. Brown v. Board was a completely different example, involving an amendment that had been passed relatively recenty in history, and in the Supreme Court overturning its previous interpretion. In the case of gay marriage, the USSC has never even ruled on the subject whatsoever. Constitutional governance is not a permanent part of human civilization. For Constitutional governance to work, it must not be perceived that agreeing to a Constitution leaves the door open for bait and switch changes to the system of governance. For the USSC to legislate the introduction of gay marriage without the input of Congress would be akin to the USSC ruling that slavery was unconstitutional in 1850. It would have been the right thing to do humanitarianly, but the damage done to republics and consitutional governance for the rest of history would have been devastating. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct
At 01:38 AM 7/25/2003 -0400 Jon Gabriel wrote: Then again, CA Dems aren't coming across as geniuses in general these days. Did you see the report yesterday about the CA state legislators (Dems again) who were caught on tape suggesting that the state's fiscal crisis be extended over time for political gain? Do you have a link? JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Case for a Marriage Ammendment to the Constitution
At 01:44 PM 7/25/2003 -0400 Bryon Daly wrote: FYI, I'd love to see married and female priests, and yes, even a female pope. Note I didn't mention homosexual priests, because it's unnecessary as I already have seen them - there's quite a lot. I heard a seminarian state that gays far outnumber straights in the seminaries. John, if you're reading this, what's your take on this last bit above, given the church's stance on homosexuality? Take on what? I think that what you are driving at is this - I am solidly opposed to women priests, pretty opposed to married priests, and supportive of the current don't-ask-don't-tell policy on homosexual priests. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: When does it end? (RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words)
At 03:11 PM 7/24/2003 -0500 Horn, John wrote: I don't know. It is a scary proposition. We cannot defeat every terrorist in the world. We cannot? Then why is it that suicide bombing is almost unheard of almost everywhere in the world? It doesn't strike me that this problem is necessarily pervasive in humanity at all. We cannot stop every rogue state that wants to build a nuke or a biological bomb. I disagree with this as well. With intelligence, the US armed forces are likely to be able to launch successful preemptive strikes against any likely such rogue state for the next 100 years. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
At 01:08 AM 7/25/2003 -0400 David Hobby wrote: Why do you think that Osama bin Laden objects to the same things about American foreign policy that you do? That's not a fair tactic in an argument. Actually, I think that it is the most salient thing that Gautam has had to say in this argument. You have very clearly tied your objections to US foreign policy to the motivations behind terrorists - and that tie is definitely worth questioning. We aren't dealing with an opponent that wants rational things - we are dealing with a pathology. This isn't about giving them what they want so that they go away. It's about killing them before they kill us, because one of those two things is going to happen just as surely as the tides. But it's not one monolithic group! Some idiots want everyone in the world to adhere to their religion. Others are driven by more reasonable concerns. Let's deal with their concerns. Then all we have to do is fight the former faction. Please detail which of the Al Qaeda members who have attacked the US over the past 10 years you consider to have, quote, reasonable concerns, and what these concerns are. Thanks. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Arrgh!
--- Reggie Bautista [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bryon wrote: I think it'd be more fun to mount a jumbo AC fan on the side... :-) As long as either your hard drive or you fan motor are magnetically shielded well enough... :-) I have two computers that get used most frequently. One is a Clariion audio computer which is not the latest grates, but runs quite for studio recording. It has 1 (ONE) fan and never has heating problems. 845 chipset 2.2 Ghz. You cn't even tell that it's on. The micropone however still picks up a lot of noise so I wired keyboard, mouse, 2 monitors, audio breakout cable, midi switch cable, usb, and firewire to wall outlets and the computer sits in an un-airconditioned cclosed loset with soundproof lyning. The other machine is a game machine with a 2.4 Ghz HT (C) 12 fans total, radon 9800 pro with component hdtv video out via a dvi to component converter. 895p chipset, Giant aluminium case. The thing sounds like an air conditioning unit. My next project is to make the vieocentric computer more quit so I can actualy use it in a Qubase network. Even being on a differnt floor and the other side of the house form the studio I can't have it on while recording. Water cooled is definaly a possible first step. Anyone have any other ideas for keeping the video card cool? Anyone know of a 450W power supply with a quiet fan? = _ Jan William Coffey _ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 11:50 AM, The Fool wrote: From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The left is defunct only if we remain forever in a state of total war. And that's precisely why a vaguely defined, open-ended war on terrorism that suspends normal checks and balances for civil rights is as partisan as any policy ever has been. No, it's because that's what we've got. Only in paranoid fantasies do we have a war that suspends normal checks and balances for civil rights. If it did, you and The Fool would have been arrested already. When Ashcroft's jack-booted thugs come for you, give me a call - I'll be happy to protect you. Friday browncoat republicans in the house of representatives called the police to arrest and remove democratic representatives from a library in the house of representatives. The future is here and now. Never before has something so shocking happened in the history of the united states. Worse has happened. I would say the incident where Congressman Preston Brooks beat Senator Charles Sumner nearly to death on the Senate floor over Sumner's speech on Bleeding Kansas was worse. john ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
What is a homemaker worth?
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/CollegeandFamily/P46800.asp What's a homemaker worth? The shocking truth The value of a stay-at-home spouse is priceless in many ways, but don't kid yourself: In economic terms, running a household is worth far less than we've been told. By Liz Pulliam Weston We all know that a stay-at-home spouse can be invaluable, and the wide-ranging estimates of the real value of the arrangement reflect that knowledge. Whether the figure is $90,000 or $125,000 or even $500,000, the numbers are meant to show how important is the unpaid work performed by a homemaker. Unfortunately, the statistics are codswallop. The economic value of a stay-at-home spouse is closer to $30,000 a year. Our society doesn't place a high dollar value on a homemaker's work, and those who choose to stay home do so at their own economic peril. No glamorous awards ceremony How I wish this weren't true. If it were up to me, the job of stay-at-home parent would come with retirement and health benefits, annual paid vacations and an award ceremony each spring to rival the Oscars. Since you've yet to elect me Queen of the World, however, we're stuck with the economic system we've got, and it does not work in favor of unpaid domestics. The numbers that purport to show otherwise are flights of the author's fancy. They're typically constructed from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics' average pay figures for a variety of occupations including: Child-care worker, $8.91 an hour Maid, $8.02 an hour Food preparation supervisor, $11.70 an hour Bookkeeper, $11.94 an hour Chauffeur, $8.67 an hour The formula is simple. Figure out how many hours, on average, a homemaker performs each task, multiply those hours by the appropriate wage and come up with an impressive and completely overblown annual figure. Economics and the real world Sometimes they don't even bother to determine working hours. Talk show host and investment adviser Ric Edelman decided that because mothers are constantly on call and perform all these functions, the appropriate figure was one that reflected the hourly rate for each of 17 occupations, performed simultaneously, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. That's how he came up with an annual worth figure of more than $500,000. That's not the way the value of homemaker is determined in the real world, however. The economists who make these calculations -- for wrongful death suits, airplane crash settlements and insurance purposes -- recognize that while homemaking has economic value, it's nowhere near the six-figure range. The reality is that many homemakers don't have the skills of, say, a professional bookkeeper, a licensed chauffeur or a recreational director, says economist Evan Schouten, vice president of the economic consulting firm Charles River Associates in Boston and an expert witness in many wrongful death trials. Painful truth about payouts And families who lose a stay-at-home spouse typically do not rush out to hire 17 professionals to take his or her place, let alone employ them 24/7. They may hire one or two people, usually for 50 hours a week or less, and pay them an hourly wage of $10 to $15. That's why the economic payout is typically less in wrongful death and other lawsuits when the victim is a stay-at-home spouse than when the victim is employed. The lifetime economic value of a female homemaker who dies at age 30 is currently about $300,000, Schouten said, based on statistics from a seminal study in this area, The Dollar Value of Household Work. Compare that to a 30-year-old who makes the average white-collar wage of $19.86 an hour. The present value of her lost after-tax compensation, Schouten said, using conservative assumptions, likely exceeds $1 million. Insurance coverage takes a holiday If you doubt the veracity of all this, just try to buy life or disability insurance on a stay-at-home spouse. If you use the most inflated statistics as a guide, and multiply the annual figure by the 10 years of care until the kids are grown, you could come up with an insurance need of $5 million. But unless your insurance agent has extraordinary pull, you're not going to get that coverage. That's because life insurers don't want you taking out policies that have no economic basis. Their theory is that it becomes way too tempting to snuff an overinsured spouse. (Interestingly, a high-income family with can generally justify a larger policy on a work-at-home spouse than a family with lower income, even though neither homemaker makes any money. Insurers presume those wealthier families will pay more for various replacement services, such as employing a nanny rather than using group day care.) Getting disability insurance -- in any amount -- is just as tough. Without an income, disability insurers won't write a policy, no matter how much a family would have to shell out to replace the unpaid services it would lose. And if that weren't enough . . . There are other significant
Re: Picking apart the Matrix - no spoilers
Well Brin-L is down, so I'm cleaning out a few old threads At 11:30 AM 6/8/2003 -0700 Jan Coffey wrote: Speaking of eye candy, anyone notice the distinct lack of hot women? What, Carrie Ann Moss isn't hot in your book? I'm guessing that you somehow didn't like Natalie Portman in Star Wars II either, eh? :-) JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Political Compass
At 01:50 PM 5/21/2003 -0700 Chad Cooper wrote: http://www.digitalronin.f2s.com/politicalcompass/index.html Very Cool! Tells it like it is... My score: Economic Left/Right: 5.25 Authoritarian/Libertarian: -3.13 My scores were +3.75 and +0.15. It would be interesting to see someone graph all of the reporter Brin-L'er results on a single graph. Its interesting that I came out as much more of a moderate many Brin-L'ers. :) JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Picking apart the Matrix - no spoilers
At 08:09 PM 6/7/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Using humans or any other animal as an energy source is of course foolish Wouldn't humans be a very efficient source of computing power? Or maybe consciousness has some QM properties the machines simply can't duplicate. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Computer Voting Is Open to Easy Fraud, Experts Say
At 01:23 PM 7/24/2003 -0500 The Fool wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/24/technology/24VOTE.html?ex=1059710400en= d989a69c518293a6ei=5062partner=GOOGLE Computer Voting Is Open to Easy Fraud, Experts Say By JOHN SCHWARTZ Wouldn't a fail-safe answer be to have each computer terminal print a paper receipt for each voter, which is then placed in a backup-system paper voting box?These receipts could then be used for any official recounts - or even frivolous recounts, which are billed to the challenging party.. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Just in case you thought you had the names of all the moons ofall the planets memorized . . .
PLANETARY SATELLITES NAMED At the 25th General Assembly of the International Astronomical Union, held from July 13-26 in Sydney, Australia, the Working Group for Planetary System Nomenclature announced the names of two dozen planetary satellites discovered since 2000. On the list were 11 Jovian moons, 12 Saturnian moons, and one around Uranus http://SkyandTelescope.com/news/article_1012_1.asp --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Paul Gigot on the Marsh Arabs
At 06:29 PM 7/23/2003 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm glad Saddam is gone, and if that was Bush's motive for the invasion - WHY THE HELL DIDN'T HE SIMPLY COME OUT AND SAY SO instead of building such a flimsy case that Saddam had WMD Because people like you would have opposed the war for tha reason? And because the WMD reason gave us a basis in international law for liberating Iraq - as well as the absolutely essential cooperation of nearby Arab states, and the human rights issue would not have provided either. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: When does it end? (RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words)
At 11:22 PM 7/25/03 -0400, John D. Giorgis wrote: At 08:09 AM 7/21/2003 -0700 Nick Arnett wrote: Perhaps we are at war, but under that definition, I'm having a very hard time imagining that we will ever NOT be at war. We are not going to remove evil from the world, I'm quite sure. Some likely conditions; 1) The establishment of a secure, viable and independent Palestine alongside Israel. 2) Regime change in Iran, Syria, Lybia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the DPRK If this is not the future we want to create, then shouldn't we return to normal political discourse, in which one is not branded a traitor for questioning the leadership. If we can't question and criticize our leaders today, what is going to change to allow us to question them tomorrow, or in 20 years? I don't think that we created the terrorist threat. Unfortunately, they (= the ones we call terrorists) do. They think they are defending their way of life against The Great Satan in the only way possible, given that The Great Satan is the world's only superpower and has overwhelming power both economically and militarily. We may not agree with that analysis or think that their way of life (keeping their populations subjugated in a culture which is several hundred years in the past) is worth defending, but that is how they feel. --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: TI interpreation of QM
At 10:55 PM 7/25/03 -0500, Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: Reggie Bautista [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 5:07 PM Subject: Re: TI interpreation of QM I wrote: I'd love to see your opinion of it when you get a chance. It's called the transactional interpretation, and John Cramer's paper on this interpretation can be found at: http://www.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/tiqm/TI_toc.html Dan replied: Its been kicking around since David Bohm in the '50s. It had some support before the work of Bell and Wagner. The key sticking point with this interpretation is that it requires real hidden backwards in time signals. These signals violate causality... [major snip] Thanks for the explanation, I appreciate you taking the time to cover the pros and cons. Did what I say make sense to you? Do my posts on QM make sense? Or are you just being polite? There are times I get very frustrated with my own ability to communicate ideas that are fairly clear to me. ;-) To quote Werner H., I'm uncertain. --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
At 09:24 AM 7/25/03 -0400, Erik Reuter wrote: On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 01:02:00PM +, Robert J. Chassell wrote: From what I have heard, US interrogators are contemptuous of old fashioned torture since almost everyone who knows anything will die first. Really? I have heard many people claim that everybody talks when tortured. In the movies, the tortures that are applied seem so tame and unimaginative. Possibly because there are limits on what can be shown in even R-rated movies, and with very few exceptions an NC-17 rating is economically disastrous. Perhaps I have an unusually sadistic imagination, but I can imagine tortures that I don't think anyone could possibly endure without talking. And could the movie audience endure them without barfing and walking out? Relax Kid: It's Only A Movie Maru --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Robotic Singularity
At 08:22 AM 7/26/03 -0500, The Fool wrote: http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm Robotic Nation by Marshall Brain [snip] The arrival of humanoid robots should be a cause for celebration. With the robots doing most of the work, it should be possible for everyone to go on perpetual vacation. Instead, robots will displace millions of employees, leaving them unable to find work and therefore destitute. I believe that it is time to start rethinking our economy and understanding how we will allow people to live their lives in a robotic nation. So what jobs will still be performed by humans in a robotic nation? --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Arrgh!
At 03:36 PM 7/26/03 -0700, Jan Coffey wrote: --- Reggie Bautista [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bryon wrote: I think it'd be more fun to mount a jumbo AC fan on the side... :-) As long as either your hard drive or you fan motor are magnetically shielded well enough... :-) I have two computers that get used most frequently. One is a Clariion audio computer which is not the latest grates, but runs quite for studio recording. It has 1 (ONE) fan and never has heating problems. 845 chipset 2.2 Ghz. You cn't even tell that it's on. The micropone however still picks up a lot of noise so I wired keyboard, mouse, 2 monitors, audio breakout cable, midi switch cable, usb, and firewire to wall outlets and the computer sits in an un-airconditioned cclosed loset with soundproof lyning. The other machine is a game machine with a 2.4 Ghz HT (C) 12 fans total, radon 9800 pro with component hdtv video out via a dvi to component converter. 895p chipset, Giant aluminium case. The thing sounds like an air conditioning unit. My next project is to make the vieocentric computer more quit so I can actualy use it in a Qubase network. Even being on a differnt floor and the other side of the house form the studio I can't have it on while recording. Water cooled is definaly a possible first step. Anyone have any other ideas for keeping the video card cool? Anyone know of a 450W power supply with a quiet fan? Um, one in a different room? --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
On Sat, Jul 26, 2003 at 06:04:49AM -, pencimen wrote: How about Dustin Hoffman getting holes drilled in his teeth in Marathon Man? I had forgotten about that one. Did he talk? I think he didn't know anything, right? -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Case for a Marriage Ammendment to the Constitution
On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 08:05:07PM -0400, John D. Giorgis wrote: Exactly. The point being that Erik is being wholly unproductive, uncivil, and unapologetic for equating prejudice against bigots with prejudice against Catholics and homosexuals. Actually, you were the one who just equated prejudice against bigots with prejudice against homosexuals. If anything, my satire was implying the opposite. -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Case for a Marriage Ammendment to the Constitution
On Sat, Jul 26, 2003 at 02:17:56PM -0400, John D. Giorgis wrote: I am solidly opposed to women priests, That is unnatural! There should be a Constitutional amendment banning such aberrant views! -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: link: Atlas of the Universe
Wow ... I zoomed through all the views and was amazed... Regards Armin -- From: Alberto Monteiro[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply To: Killer Bs Discussion Sent: Donnerstag, 24. Juli 2003 21:53 To: Killer Bs Discussion Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: link: Atlas of the Universe It shows the position of the Sun relative to the near stars and then zooms out to the whole observable Universe: http://www.anzwers.org/free/universe/ Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Arrgh!
On Sat, Jul 26, 2003 at 03:36:28PM -0700, Jan Coffey wrote: Water cooled is definaly a possible first step. Anyone have any other ideas for keeping the video card cool? Anyone know of a 450W power supply with a quiet fan? I think the ultimate in quiet and powerful would be to build a soundproof box to put the entire case inside. Of course, soundproof (plexiglass and foam box would work) probably also means thermally insulating. So you have to find a quiet way to get the heat out of the soundproof box. One way to do that would be to run two pipes or hoses through the box for coolant, with a big heatsink inside connected to the coolant. Then you have the problem of creating a quiet recirculating cooler. Or you could put the recirculating cooler outside the house, like a central air conditioning heat exchanger. Or if you don't mind using a lot of water, you could just run cold water constantly through the box and down the drain. Or you could just buy CPUs and graphics cards that are about 2 steps down from state of the art, they are usually more optimized for low power/low heat production. Then you could design a system that doesn't need forced air cooling at all (like many notebook computers before the P4). -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Robotic Singularity
On Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 04:51:55AM -0500, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: So what jobs will still be performed by humans in a robotic nation? I think a more useful question is, what will still be scarce in a robot economy? Well, I think the article probably overestimates the progression of computer power, absent any revolutionary breakthroughs. Most technologies follow a stylized S-curve of rapid growth, steady growth, then slow growth, and the article assumes the steady growth will continue for several more decades, which I doubt. My best guess is that things will stagnate in the next decade until a revolutionary technology is perfected (my wild guesses would be 3D microprocessors and/or quantum computing becoming practical for very high computational densities) Anyway, my point is that computational power may still be relatively scarce compared to what the article assumes. So, for example, creative thinking, which requires a great deal of knowledge and processing power, will be highly valued (more so if there is less incentive for people to do it). Energy will still be scarce, unless controlled fusion is perfected. Land will surely still be scarce (it will probably be a long time before we colonize other Earth like planets or are as comfortable living in space habitats as on the Earth). Maybe this combination will make land with lots of sunlight for solar energy power generation plants much more valuable (the robots will need a lot of power). I think the article asks a good question, which is how the economy can be modified to deal with these sorts of things. One solution was outlined in _Beggars in Spain_ by Nancy Kress, with the donkeys and the livers. For me, that is something of a nightmare scenario, but it does seem to be a likely outcome. But I'd much rather see most children acquiring an education despite the fact that an education is not REQUIRED in order to live. But how to motivate people to learn? The only answer I can come up with is to continue to balance cooperation with competition. Don't give the livers everything they want. Provide a minimum safety net for free (nutritious but not desirable food, minimalist housing and clothing, basic medical care, etc.) and set up an economy where people must still compete if they want more than the minimum. Medium of exchange would be based on whatever is still scarce (land, energy, creative thinking, etc.) -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: I have returned from paradise
I would propose Irfanview, which has a nice Batch Process utility and is freeware for private use (I use it for my shkrinking of images for the website)... Regards Armin -- From: Ronn!Blankenship[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply To: Killer Bs Discussion Sent: Freitag, 25. Juli 2003 23:54 To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: RE: I have returned from paradise ... I have to figure out how to shrink the pics we took, though. My wife ... And if Jon can't help you with that, I can make some suggestions for freeware programs you can download from the 'net which will do the ... ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
I would agree, if I thought you were saying that the government should never be entirely, or even mostly, in the hands of the Left. I'd say the same about the Right. It seems quite clear to me that diversity and criticism (of the positive kind) have been proven to be the most effective means of achieving fair and just government. And I do believe that's what the founders of this country were aiming to put in place. And thus I'm not pleased at all with the current situation, in which the government is dominated by one faction, even though quite a few of them claim to be liberal. -- Nick Arnett Phone/fax: (408) 904-7198 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John D. Giorgis Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 7:28 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words At 07:52 AM 7/24/2003 -0700 Nick Arnett wrote: Setting aside sarcasm now... I think that you may be mistake in *expecting* the left to come up with a coherent war plan against terrorism. I think that's Gautam's point. If, as you seem to agree, the Left is simply incapable of coming up with a coherent war plan against terrorism, then the Left is inherently unqualified and unworthy to hold high political office in the United States for the future as far as we can see. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Robotic Singularity
While there is an element of hysteria in this article, I too find the American fascination with automating *everything* disturbing. However, I find it disturbing for an additional reason. First off, I agree that it seems that no one has really thought this automation thing through. I still think the author of this essay is a little over the top, but I wonder what's going to happen to the people in this country that lack the intelligence and skills to do anything but low wage jobs here as we autmate everything. This may tag me as some kind of Luddite, but I find it appalling that people can't wait to excise as much human contact from their lives as possible. I know people that would rather eat nails than actually have to go to the bank for three whole minutes. No one's time is really that important, is it? Jim ___ Express Yourself - Share Your Mood in Emails! Visit www.SmileyCentral.com - the happiest place on the Web. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: SC2 Music (was Re: I have returned from paradise)
I tried to play the MOD files in my WinAmp 2.81 and I'm not sure if all sounds are as they should be but I heard some songs... Sounded rather synthetic but that's probably as designed? Regards Armin -- From: Jim Sharkey[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply To: Killer Bs Discussion Sent: Samstag, 26. Juli 2003 04:10 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: SC2 Music (was Re: I have returned from paradise) Bryon Daly wrote: http://home.comcast.net/~bryon.daly/M4win240.zip http://home.comcast.net/~bryon.daly/SC2_MODS.ZIP The installer for M4win20 doesn't seem to be working. Any suggestions? Jim ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
Erik Reuter wrote: On Sat, Jul 26, 2003 at 06:04:49AM -, pencimen wrote: How about Dustin Hoffman getting holes drilled in his teeth in Marathon Man? I had forgotten about that one. Did he talk? I think he didn't know anything, right? No, he was completely in the dark. Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: SC2 Music (was Re: I have returned from paradise)
Armin Freiberg wrote: I tried to play the MOD files in my WinAmp 2.81 and I'm not sure if all sounds are as they should be but I heard some songs... Sounded rather synthetic but that's probably as designed? Yeah, that's how they are supposed to sound. I actually got the MOD player up and running after I made that post; sometimes I give up and ask for assistance too easily. It's a character flaw I'm still trying to hammer out. Jim ___ Express Yourself - Share Your Mood in Emails! Visit www.SmileyCentral.com - the happiest place on the Web. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SC2 Music (was Re: I have returned from paradise)
On 25 Jul 2003 at 22:10, Jim Sharkey wrote: Bryon Daly wrote: http://home.comcast.net/~bryon.daly/M4win240.zip http://home.comcast.net/~bryon.daly/SC2_MODS.ZIP The installer for M4win20 doesn't seem to be working. Any suggestions? I'm guessing that's Mod4Win referenced there. Working link to Mod4Win unlimited: http://pjeantaud.free.fr/mod4win/m4w-2_40.exe I think the one referenced there is a bad install, as it's what 800K, the correct one is 2.4MB. Andy Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: SC2 Music (was Re: I have returned from paradise)
On 27 Jul 2003 at 17:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I tried to play the MOD files in my WinAmp 2.81 and I'm not sure if all sounds are as they should be but I heard some songs... Sounded rather synthetic but that's probably as designed? WinAmp is an awful MOD player. But basically think of a MOD file as a MIDI with it's instruments embedded rather than relying on those on the sound card. Before MP3's came in, I liked them because they allways sounded the same on any system (unlike MIDI's), and are small compared to WAV's. Many can sound synthetic (many deliberately so), but I have a few great .s3m (Screamtracker 3) files which don't. Andy Regards Armin -- From: Jim Sharkey[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply To: Killer Bs Discussion Sent: Samstag, 26. Juli 2003 04:10 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:SC2 Music (was Re: I have returned from paradise) Bryon Daly wrote: http://home.comcast.net/~bryon.daly/M4win240.zip http://home.comcast.net/~bryon.daly/SC2_MODS.ZIP The installer for M4win20 doesn't seem to be working. Any suggestions? Jim ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: TI interpreation of QM
- Original Message - From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 10:55 PM Subject: Re: TI interpreation of QM - Original Message - From: Reggie Bautista [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 5:07 PM Subject: Re: TI interpreation of QM Thanks for the explanation, I appreciate you taking the time to cover the pros and cons. Did what I say make sense to you? Do my posts on QM make sense? Or are you just being polite? There are times I get very frustrated with my own ability to communicate ideas that are fairly clear to me. ;-) Actually, even I was able to follow that kind of explanation. And I don't have much of a physics or mathematics background. (I find most physics concepts digestible even without the math concepts, though I understand the maths lead to a more cogent understanding.) What I have a hard time understanding is the (real long term) problem with backwards in time signals. I see it repeated that you cannot violate causality, but most of the examples I've seen given (perhaps they were oversimplifications) seem to illustrate what amounts to an optical illusion. (In discussions about FTL) I understand the principle that states that cause cannot precede effect. *That* is quite easy to understand. And I seem to recall that there is some axiom that says there are no privileged frames or points of view. But couldn't it be that backwards in time signals are part of an underlying backbone or framework that underlies reality, normally unobservable? And that, like in most of the QM I have read, observation would change those signals, therefore they would be inaccessible? I guess my real question is why cant there be a channel for backwards in time signals? And I suppose my proposal is if the simpler explanations have not worked, perhaps trying a higher level of complexity might. I really wish I had a greater understanding of QM and how it differs from relativistic theory. xponent Ignorant Savage Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Computer Voting Is Open to Easy Fraud, Experts Say
From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 01:23 PM 7/24/2003 -0500 The Fool wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/24/technology/24VOTE.html?ex=1059710400en = d989a69c518293a6ei=5062partner=GOOGLE Computer Voting Is Open to Easy Fraud, Experts Say By JOHN SCHWARTZ Wouldn't a fail-safe answer be to have each computer terminal print a paper receipt for each voter, which is then placed in a backup-system paper voting box?These receipts could then be used for any official recounts - or even frivolous recounts, which are billed to the challenging party.. Which is exactly the point I'm making. Thes machine do not print or other wise provide a paper trail, and republicans from several states have crafted laws that prohibit the use of machines that provide paper trails. And some of these machines keep several accounting books, that different programs access. These machines were designed for fraud. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
[Listref] Space Elevators Maybe Closer To Reality Than Imagined
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/materials-03w.html Space elevators have an image problem, mainly due to two prominent science fiction novels. They appear either ungainly impossible, or so potentially dangerous to the planet itself you would never dream of building one. With the science now indicating that they are potentially near-term transport systems, it's time to review the fiction in relation to the possible reality. Three publications by Pearson in 1975/6/7 and work done by Moravec and published in the Journal of the Astronautical Sciences in 1977 were enough to prompt Arthur C Clarke to write The Fountains of Paradise and Charles Sheffield The Web Between the Worlds - both published in 1979. Clarke wrote of a world developed to a point where the weather systems could be controlled to produce designer-sunsets. A lone architect designs a 40,000km elevator consisting of four tubes. With a pair each for up and down travel, and regenerative breaking used to minimize the power losses. The first attempt to lower a wire to Earth fails when it gets entangled, and the design is changed to that of an inverted square tower. A small iron asteroid is moved into Earth orbit to act as a counterweight. The four sides of the track will feature superconducting cables backed by fusion power generators. Ultimately, the tower stands for 1500yrs, growing to be 500m on a side with a city built at the 1500km level. Half a billion people eventually settle in orbit for a zero-g lifestyle. In a later printing, Clarke claims his inspiration came from much earlier articles from 1966, but the resurgence of interest and writing prior to 1979 was timely. He also says that he may have been too conservative, and that the tower may be a 21st century achievement. The latest research proposes 'early' 21st century. Red Mars The next great opinion-forming novel was Red Mars, by Kim Stanley Robinson in 1992. A captured asteroid is mined using nanotechnology to extend a graphite cable 37,000km down to the surface. Elevator cars take several days to make the journey, and are thirty stories high. But the main image from this incarnation is when the cable is brought down by revolutionary action. It twists around the planet at 21,000km per hour, with horrific consequences. Red Mars was part of a trilogy. In Green Mars, a replacement cable is made using Carbon Nanotubes from another captured asteroid. Cars travel up and down the cable at the same time to minimize energy losses. It's no coincidence that both these cables are called 'Clarke'. The The Fountains of Paradise elevator is used to promote the concept that many people would wish to travel to, and even live-in, low Earth orbit. In Red Mars, the cable is the main transport system, and seen as an essential 'umbilical cord' for the new colony. Tower of Babel Space tethers have been discussed in international workshops annually since 1983, and by the time that Red Mars was written had identified the issues of material strength and production. However, even as late as 1999, these workshops were becoming confused in their own clouds of science and fiction. The Advanced Space Infrastructure Workshop on Geostationary Orbiting Tether Space Elevator Concepts, held in June 1999 at the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, for instance. The history section of the conference report tries to claim that the origins of space elevators could be traced back to Genesis 11.3 and references to the Tower of Babel. They also concentrated on the non-fixed tethers, which do not go all the way to the Earth's surface and consequently require mach 16 aircraft vehicles to reach them. Even more worryingly, they considered the idea of building tall towers - up to 50km in height. The significant point here is that as late as 1999, the materials issue had been acknowledged, but the thought processes had been allowed to dream back into 1950's style fiction. Basic desk research shows that the Tower of Babylon dates back to the time of King Nebuchadnezzar II who lived from 605-562 BC and rebuilt it to stand 295 feet high. It was nothing more then a ziggurat, honoring the god Marduk. Clearly, the scientific thinking on space elevators had broken down and a more rational appraisal of the technology was long overdue. Tapes and Lifters The NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts (NIAC) commissioned Dr Bradley C Edwards to study all aspects of the construction and operation of a space elevator, and Phase I of the report was published in late 2002. The report very specifically addresses design and operations, which had until then escaped close scrutiny. Firstly, the elevator would not be a cable. It starts as a 1-micron thick piece of tape 91,000km long, tapering from 5cm wide at the Earth's surface to 11.5cm wide near the middle. This tape would be taken up by shuttle together with some booster rockets. It would then be 'flown-down' to the surface whilst the booster rockets provide the required counterbalance beyond
Re: Computer Voting Is Open to Easy Fraud, Experts Say
At 11:07 AM 7/27/2003 -0500, you wrote: From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 01:23 PM 7/24/2003 -0500 The Fool wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/24/technology/24VOTE.html?ex=1059710400en = d989a69c518293a6ei=5062partner=GOOGLE Computer Voting Is Open to Easy Fraud, Experts Say By JOHN SCHWARTZ Wouldn't a fail-safe answer be to have each computer terminal print a paper receipt for each voter, which is then placed in a backup-system paper voting box?These receipts could then be used for any official recounts - or even frivolous recounts, which are billed to the challenging party.. Which is exactly the point I'm making. Thes machine do not print or other wise provide a paper trail, and republicans from several states have crafted laws that prohibit the use of machines that provide paper trails. And some of these machines keep several accounting books, that different programs access. These machines were designed for fraud. So your name is John Schwatz? I agree with you about the problem, but I don't think John's solution is perfect and wonder about all schemes. Let me back up ten steps. Are we going to assume that the 100% best method would have the voter mark a dot on a large print paper ballot? And the voter has access to an unlimited supply of paper ballots, until he marks one correctly? See there can already be problems. What if the vote counters get a paper ballot with two candidates selected with the same mark? Same marks, one with an X through it, or one circled. Different marks, but obviously both marked? Make up your own situation, but my point is, if you are looking for problems you can find them. I'm not making a snide remark, isn't there a saying Only a fool thinks he has a foolproof system? With John's separate paper receipt. It has to be big enough for the voter to know his votes were marked correctly, it can't just be a bar code. Assuming the voter puts it in a separate box: it may be easy for the poll workers to see that the voter only puts in one receipt, but how to know it's the correct receipt, that he didn't pull a false one out of his pocket? Enough people do this by targeting a polling place, then challenge the results and demand a re-vote when their side doesn't win. You can say: the printout comes from the back or side of the machine pre-folded. The voter has to get the paper slip, check it, or not, and put it into the box in front of all the poll workers. It would take a select group of magicians to perform a slight of hand to stuff in bad receipts, but we only need it to happen once for the whole system to be questioned. Kevin T. - VRWC ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct
At 07:51 AM 7/25/2003 -0700, you wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of pencimen ... Enron _and_ the Bush administration. Or is that what you meant? Sort of. Except that there's some superset that they're both part of, which I dare not name. ;-) Nick But the problem is, Bush accepted Enron's money and did not give them anything in return,while Clinton gave them concessions. The state's energy problems didn't suddenly appear Jan 2001. And I truly don't know about this: were there energy problems last year, or so far this year? Yes the price may still be astronomical, but supply should be the more pressing concern. I may have this completely wrong, that the 2001 energy problems weren't supply, but was from California not willing to pay for the energy it needed, and this is directly related to an Enron deal. Kevin T. - VRWC I'll stick to COBOL and beer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Tarr Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 1:40 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: RE: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct At 02:13 PM 7/26/2003 -0400, you wrote: At 01:38 AM 7/25/2003 -0400 Jon Gabriel wrote: Then again, CA Dems aren't coming across as geniuses in general these days. Did you see the report yesterday about the CA state legislators (Dems again) who were caught on tape suggesting that the state's fiscal crisis be extended over time for political gain? Do you have a link? JDG http://www.sfgate.com/cgi- bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/07/22/MN309441.DTL Demos caught in budget gaffe Open mike picks up faction's talk of profiting from a crisis Thanks Kevin. I saw it on a local newscast a couple of nights ago. Jon Le Blog: http://zarq.livejournal.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:brin-l- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Tarr Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 1:49 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: RE: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct At 07:51 AM 7/25/2003 -0700, you wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:brin-l- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of pencimen ... Enron _and_ the Bush administration. Or is that what you meant? Sort of. Except that there's some superset that they're both part of, which I dare not name. ;-) Nick But the problem is, Bush accepted Enron's money and did not give them anything in return,while Clinton gave them concessions. The state's energy problems didn't suddenly appear Jan 2001. I don't like Alternet because they're very biased, but they did have an interesting article about this here: http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=13281 The short version: some concessions were given, even though the Bush administration stopped short of doing anything overt. And I truly don't know about this: were there energy problems last year, or so far this year? I don't know if it was the result of an energy crisis or not, but 1,200 people in Hollywood were without power for a while on Friday: http://www.nbc4.tv/news/2359076/detail.html Yes the price may still be astronomical, but supply should be the more pressing concern. I may have this completely wrong, that the 2001 energy problems weren't supply, but was from California not willing to pay for the energy it needed, and this is directly related to an Enron deal. A more accurate assessment seems to be that Enron used exorbitant, unfair fees to blackmail California consumers and threatened to withhold power if they weren't paid. From an article in the SF Chronicle, quoted on corpwatch.org: http://www.corpwatch.org/news/PND.jsp?articleid=2530 Excerpt: SACRAMENTO, California -- Energy traders for Enron used elaborate schemes with nicknames like Death Star and Get Shorty to manipulate California's electricity market and boost profits, according to internal company memos released by federal regulators Monday. The memos -- jaw-dropping in their frank descriptions of how a sophisticated operation exploited California for financial gain -- enraged consumer advocates and state officials and prompted Sen. Dianne Feinstein to call for a federal criminal investigation of the company's behavior as the lights went out in California. A state senator who has spent a year investigating the energy crisis called the documents tremendous proof that California's power debacle had been caused by companies looking to make money and not by energy shortages. Jon Le Blog: http://zarq.livejournal.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What is a homemaker worth?
Robert Seeberger wrote: Insurance coverage takes a holiday If you doubt the veracity of all this, just try to buy life or disability insurance on a stay-at-home spouse. We did. Dan could get life insurance for me fairly cheaply through his job. So he did. I'm not sure what I'm insured for, I just know it's at least $100,000 and I believe it's not as much as $300,000. (But then again, where we can, we tend to self-insure, or take higher deductibles; the exception on that is *his* life insurance, which is geared towards paying off the house and letting me be home for kids without any income for awhile, and then reduced income later.) We could not buy disability insurance on me. We tried. I don't know if it was state law or the insurance company, but I couldn't be insured for disability. So if something happens to me that doesn't kill me, we'll be looking to friends and relatives for more help and spend less money hiring people to do various things I'd otherwise do. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
John D. Giorgis wrote: At 01:08 AM 7/25/2003 -0400 David Hobby wrote: Why do you think that Osama bin Laden objects to the same things about American foreign policy that you do? That's not a fair tactic in an argument. Actually, I think that it is the most salient thing that Gautam has had to say in this argument. It is a form of ad hominem attack. And we do not object to the same things. He seems to object to most of our constitution, while I do not. BUT he probably also objects to large amounts of US meddling in the Middle East, from installing the Shah of Iran on. On these issues, I do agree with him. Now would you two stop mischaracterizing my position and attacking strawmen? ... We aren't dealing with an opponent that wants rational things - we are dealing with a pathology. No. We are dealing with a pathological minority, backed up by a large sector of public opinion in the Middle East. If we clean up our act, public opinion there will change. When it does, most of the support for Al Qaeda will dry up. Please detail which of the Al Qaeda members who have attacked the US over the past 10 years you consider to have, quote, reasonable concerns, and what these concerns are. JDG Oh, they all had some, all mixed together with the rest of their craziness. But this is a silly way to argue about this issue. We would do much better discussing the concerns of moderate Arabs (most of which are of course shared by the crazies). ---David ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
On Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 03:28:08PM -0400, David Hobby wrote: If we clean up our act, public opinion there will change. When it does, most of the support for Al Qaeda will dry up. That's an interesting fantasy world you are describing. -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
A Murder of Crows.....(mild list reference)
It is 100 degrees outside. What else is there to do but sit at the computer and have the TV on. I did not know what the movie A Murder of Crows was about. Spoiler -yawn- After the talk on this list.well,... .as soon as Cuba's character put his name to a novel he didn't write, that character became a Barry Lyndon: I couldn't care less what happens to him. A perfectly constructed movie about a smuck is still a movie about a smuck. William Taylor - That which is rotten to the core, is rotten even to The Core. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct
A more accurate assessment seems to be that Enron used exorbitant, unfair fees to blackmail California consumers and threatened to withhold power if they weren't paid. From an article in the SF Chronicle, quoted on corpwatch.org: http://www.corpwatch.org/news/PND.jsp?articleid=2530 Jon Right, so the people who want to blame the current federal government are...surprise!...wrong. Kevin T. - VRWC but don't let that stop you ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Genetic fractions, was Re: The Case for a Marriage...
David Hobby wrote: Julia Thompson wrote: David Hobby wrote: The above would have been easier to state if we had general kinship terms based on degrees of genetic relatedness. Sibling, parent and child are all halves. Grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, half-sibling, and so on are quarters. And you know you're really a redneck if you need fractions which aren't negative powers of two! Oh, like 17/2^N for some N? I think that number (not sure what N is) describes my kinship relation to a particular someone. Details available upon request. (Anyone wanting details to actually calculate the mess, ask!) Julia whose kinship relation to her sister is actually slightly over 1/2, and details on *that* are available upon request, as well, for anyone either interested or wanting to calculate *that* particular mess If you go back far enough, that happens to everyone. So the value of N is relevant. : ) I don't have a good enough geneology to come near that, though. I know all my grandparents. On my father's side, that's about it. So I don't have any known extra relationships between my mother and father--my brother will have to stay at exactly 1/2 from me. I know parts of my mother's side going back to the 1500's, and there are a few circuits that I know of in those family trees. So there might be a 17/2^N for me too, I'd have to look. Anyway, N would be 12 or so, and the individual I was related to by that much would have been dead for 200+ years. Most of their descendants would also be 17/2^N from me, for various values of N. Some serious research would let me name a living one, but by then N is around 20. So you probably win! ---David I'm not sure that I have the courage to ask for your details. This stuff can get messy fast. But I bet that your 17/2^N is of the form 1/2^k + 1/2^(k+4), since that seems easiest. OK, case 1, of the guy related to me where I believe it's 17/2^N: He is my third cousin from one pair of ancestors; my fourth cousin from a second pair of ancestors; my fourth cousin from a third pair of ancestors; and my sixth cousin from a fourth pair of ancestors. My uncle calculated the degree of relation (all his children are related to him through the same sets of ancestors), and he's slightly more closely related to me than a second cousin would be. If we know what k is for saying the second-cousin fraction is 1/2^k, then the relation degree is as you give above. (1/2^k for 2nd cousin, 1/2^(k+4) for sixth cousin. At least, that's what it ought to be, yes? Or am I off? If so, please correct me!) Case 2, myself, I am my own sixth cousin through the pair of ancestors by which I'm that cousin's sixth cousin (that one was a marriage of second cousins) and I am my own ninth cousin through a pair of ancestors on the other side (that one was a marriage of first cousins). So I am sixth cousin and ninth cousin to my sister, as well as being her sibling. The extra fraction of relation in that case is small enough to be trivial, but possibly of interest. Julia who knows how many ancestors she has in common with that cousin at the generation where you'd expect to have 128 ancestors; it's 34. (And she herself only has 126 there.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Robotic Singularity
The Fool wrote: http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm Robotic Nation by Marshall Brain great snippage The Vision Thing One of the key capabilities limiting robotic expansion at the moment is image processing -- the ability of robots to look at a scene like a human does and detect all the objects in the scene. Without general, flexible vision algorthms, it is hard for a robot to do much. For example, it is hard for a blind robot to clean a bathroom or drive a car. Part of the problem is raw CPU power, but that problem will be solved over the next 20 ro 30 years because of Moore's law. The other part is a software problem. We don't have really good algorithms yet. My prediction is that we will see significant progress in the image processing field over the next 20 years. How much progress has been made on the visual processing problem in the last 20 years? What is the current rate of progress? How many people are working on this? This is the biggest stumbling block to the problem. Also, how much longer will Moore's Law hold? It gets to where part of what's making things faster is that the size of components on a chip are shrinking; there's some finite limit to that beyond which shrinking is impossible. Then we have to use other methods on the same hardware to increase speed, or go in a totally different direction with it. I'm just wondering where the technology is now and at what rate it's improving. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Robotic Singularity
Jim Sharkey wrote: This may tag me as some kind of Luddite, but I find it appalling that people can't wait to excise as much human contact from their lives as possible. I know people that would rather eat nails than actually have to go to the bank for three whole minutes. No one's time is really that important, is it? Social phobia of some sort? Given my druthers for how to interact with someone I don't know well: 1) through the internet 2) face-to-face 3) phone If there's a reasonable way to have a face-to-face interaction, rather than deal with a total stranger over the phone, I'll take the extra hour to do the face-to-face interaction. My mom is worse than *I* am in this respect, even. If there's no way to do something except by phone and I'm around, sometimes she'll have me do it in her name. (Although I think the last time she had me do that for her was when she was still living in New Hampshire in 1998) I used to prefer going into the bank to using the drive-through, but once you've taken an 18-month-old into the bank and had to wait in line, the drive-through seems a lot nicer. I'm also reluctant to go to a new location for doing thing X. I prefer to be in a more familiar environment with more familiar people. The most annoying thing is figuring out the exact configuration of a new grocery store. Unfamiliar bookstores I can handle a little better than unfamiliar stores of any other type that I frequent. I guess I'm saying a) there's a limit as to how much change I can handle at once, and b) I prefer the various cues and the human contact that come with a face-to-face meeting as long as I actually have to *talk* to someone. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Case for a Marriage Ammendment to the Constitution
Erik Reuter wrote: On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 03:51:27PM -0500, Reggie Bautista wrote: 2) You condone a law that would prevent 62 million American citizens from being able to get married and have children? How ironic. Apparently you only support freedom of speech, not freedom of thought or freedom of religion. You underestimate me, sir. I don't just want to prevent Catholics from having children. I have a list of people who should not be allowed to marry or reproduce: fundamentalists, Mormons, Jews, Muslems, Hindis, young people, old people, people who drink alcohol, people who smoke, people who own SUVs, government workers, philosophers, lawyers, and last, but not least, conservatives. Wow! That's quite a list! Now, who *should* be allowed to reproduce, in your opinion? And what happens if someone reproduces and *then* gets an SUV in order to be able to haul children stuff around safely, and drives carefully so as not to get into an accident with the precious cargo of small people carrying their genes? Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
- Original Message - From: David Hobby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 2:28 PM Subject: Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words No. We are dealing with a pathological minority, backed up by a large sector of public opinion in the Middle East. If we clean up our act, public opinion there will change. I'm in the middle and I have questions to ask of both sides of the arguement. Your's just happens to be the easiest to ask. What is the basis of this? What horrid things have we done in the Middle East. You mention supporting the Shah in the 50s. I'll agree with you that this definately was interfering with internal affairs, but 1) It was 50 years or so ago 2) I don't know enough about the other parties in the conflict to know if the statement that they were likely to be allies of the USSR was correct. But, we facilitated the change of government when the Shah was deposed, about 25 years ago. The main things we have done in the Middle East between that time and 9/11 was 1) Buy a bunch of oil 2) Roll back Hussein's attempt to overtake the Middle East 3) Work for Arab oil companies 4) Support Israel's right to exist. 5) Sell military equipment to less extreme governments in order to decrease their obvious vulnerability to other countries, such as Iraq and Iran #2 has some correlation with AQ, as does #4. But, I really don't see what horrid exploitive things we've done in the Middle East. Now, if it were South America or Central America that was the source of terrorism, this arguement would have had a bit more versimilitude. I've been in the Middle East twice, and I've talked to a number of expats. Americans and Europeans are definately the hired hands in the Middle East. While our status ranks above the unskilled laborers, we are supposed to know our place. Oh, they all had some, all mixed together with the rest of their craziness. But this is a silly way to argue about this issue. We would do much better discussing the concerns of moderate Arabs (most of which are of course shared by the crazies). I've worked with a number of folks from the Middle East, many for years. Unlike my South American friends, I cannot provide a list abuses involving the US government and US companies that they have outlined for me. I know that they are less than thrilled with the Israeli/Palestinian situation and blame Israel for everything. I also know that many are unhappy with the government in the Middle East, and think the US can do more. Finally, there is one other point worth thinking about. Via both schools and the media, the citizens of the Arab world have been taught a pack of lies about the US and Jews. A good example of this is the multiple presentations of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as history. It is everywhere from being presented as a top rated television series on Egyptian television to being taught in Palestinian schools. Why aren't these lies more critical to Arab public opinion than any errors the US may have committed in dealing with Arab governments? Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Tarr Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 4:26 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: RE: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct A more accurate assessment seems to be that Enron used exorbitant, unfair fees to blackmail California consumers and threatened to withhold power if they weren't paid. From an article in the SF Chronicle, quoted on corpwatch.org: http://www.corpwatch.org/news/PND.jsp?articleid=2530 Jon Right, so the people who want to blame the current federal government are...surprise!...wrong. No, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission under the Bush administration tried to stop California from fighting Enron with price caps and we can safely assume that this was in part because Enron was lobbying the Bush administration to do so as reported in AP: (http://www.nctimes.net/news/2002/20020131/53224.html) Consumers definitely got screwed because of that and the general attitude at the time from the administration seemed to be 'blame the victim', which was simply inappropriate once the truth about Enron's business practices was made public. Some googled sites: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/utilities/pr/pr002556.php3 http://www-irps.ucsd.edu/irps/innews/sdut-040401.html http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/story1c020601.html If this were a normal situation, price caps would have been a terrible idea that would have made the situation worse over time. Economists publishing in Fortune, the National Review and the Wall Street Journal all gave very clear and impassioned arguments as to why caps would encourage corporate disinterest in increasing supply or making upgrades to current equipment in CA. But afaik, they did so before the truth about Enron's price gouging was revealed. Since Enron was deliberately creating a crisis by boosting energy prices through the roof, price caps weren't just appropriate in this case, they were an absolute necessity. Kevin T. - VRWC but don't let that stop you Don't worry, I won't. :-) I'm curious about Brad DeLong's opinion on this. Brad, you around? Jon Le Blog: http://zarq.livejournal.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Case for a Marriage Ammendment to the Constitution
John D. Giorgis wrote: At 02:32 PM 7/25/2003 -0500 Julia Thompson wrote: Erik Reuter wrote: You just insulted all bigots while trying to insult me! Personally, I'm prejudiced against bigots. Exactly. The point being that Erik is being wholly unproductive, uncivil, and unapologetic for equating prejudice against bigots with prejudice against Catholics and homosexuals. Actually, *my* point was I thought that Erik was being a bit cheeky, and I was trying to be cheeky right back at him. I think Erik got my post better than you did. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 07:52 AM 7/24/2003 -0700 Nick Arnett wrote: Setting aside sarcasm now... I think that you may be mistake in *expecting* the left to come up with a coherent war plan against terrorism. I think that's Gautam's point. If, as you seem to agree, the Left is simply incapable of coming up with a coherent war plan against terrorism, then the Left is inherently unqualified and unworthy to hold high political office in the United States for the future as far as we can see. JDG Like what high offices? President? Senator? Representative? blatant exageration I suppose that you would suggest that Democrats, Libertarians, and Green party candidates shouldn't be allowed to even run on any ballots in the next election. Or better yet, we should arrest people outside the polls who voted for any left party candidates and fly them to cuba, locking them up as enemy combattants. /blatant exageration The war on Iraq wasn't about liberating Iraq, it wasn't about weapons of mass destruction or terrorism. It was entirely politically motivated. The republicans saw their approval failing after Osama Bin Laden evaded capture, and, wanting some sort of evil figurehead detained or killed as a trophy that people in the US can applaud, they chose to attack our most recent war enemy Saddam Hussain (sp?). He was painted as having possible ties to Osama Bin Laden (even though evidence of that is blatantly lacking) and was turned into a scapegoat. He was chosen probably because he seemed an easier target to hit (and by golly, the military took every shot they could when they even just had questionable evidence that he was at a given location... at least three attempts to kill him using missle strikes, at least one of those on a civilian target, all missed killing the intended person). This was was politically motivated to try to boost aproval ratings in the site of a struggling economy and bad environmental policy. Iraq posed no significant threat to us. There was no good reason to go to war with them. There is no reason to make a war plan for a war on terror, because a war on terror is simply not necessary. Should we have gone into Afghanistan to get Al Quida after what they did? Hell yeah. Damn skippy. They committed a very criminal act that resulted in the deaths of thousands of people and retribution was called for. What did Iraq do though? Nothing. They had no proven ties to the attacks of September 11th. Should we wait for them to attack us or one of our allies before we attack them? Damn right we should. Otherwise it is we who are the terrorists, it is we who are the criminals. If this war really was about weapons of mass destruction, why aren't we going to war against Isreal and North Korea for their illegal nuclear weapons programs? Case and point: it simply isn't about that, it is all about politics. Disgusting. Let me illustrate the blatant lack of perspective that the majority of this country has. All of the following are more likely to kill someone in the U.S. than a terrorist attack: Heart disease; lung cancer; breast cancer; prostate cancer; aids; the flu; etc. That's right ladies and gentlemen, you are more likely to die from the flu than from a terrorist attack. How much is spent on medical reasearch each year? All together, about a couple billion dollars. That is to cover all these things as well as other medical research, which, even in 1991, when the most deadly terrorist attack took place in the U.S, each were at least 7 times more likley to kill someone in the U.S. than a terrorist attack. How many tens of billions of dollars were spent thusfar in the war on terror. Over thirty billion dollars spent on efforts in Afghanistan. How much has been spent in Iraq? Unknown, but conservative costs estimates before the war were above eighty billion dollars. A *preemptive* war on terror simply does not make any sense from any standpoint, and demostrates considerable bad judgement in foriegn policy from the standpoint of foriegn relations. Moreover, the blatant discarding of the constitution over this problem is a paranoid knee-jerk over-reaction to a problem that just simply does not warrant that kind of action yet. Do we issolate people with the flu or AIDS to prevent these deseases from spreading? No. Yet each is a greater threat to human life than terrorism. Should we tighten security on planes and airports because of what happened? Deffinately. Should we blatantly disregard the constitution and basic human rights? No. Issolating people that we have no proof commited any crimes and blatantly disregarding the constitution and their rights in the process is deplorable. If we have proof they committed a crime, charge them with one, if not, release them. Your suggestion that the left's inability to form an effective war plan against terror is a demonstration of bad leadership is not just wrong (as a war plan is entirely
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
In a message dated 7/24/2003 11:43:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Didn't they used to duel on the floors of Congress? Sounds like classic ingomious political chicanery to me. Sounds more like republican arrogance to me. Now the perpetrator (chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee) has since apologized but this does reveal the thinking of the republican leadership. Might makes right. Anything we do is ok because we are god's party. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
In a message dated 7/24/2003 11:47:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If your criticism is that Bush said learned instead of informed us that they believe, then who is being pedantic and mincing words here? The criticsm is that this is a weasally way of saying something that our own intelligence community could not confirm and had in fact serious doubts about. The criticsm is that this was a cleaver deception (aka a lie) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Case for a Marriage Ammendment to the Constitution
On Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 04:06:42PM -0500, Julia Thompson wrote: Wow! That's quite a list! Now, who *should* be allowed to reproduce, in your opinion? Did I miss someone? And what happens if someone reproduces and *then* gets an SUV They have a choice: SUV or junior? Could be a tough choice for some... -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Robotic Singularity
On Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 03:59:52PM -0500, Julia Thompson wrote: How much progress has been made on the visual processing problem in the last 20 years? What is the current rate of progress? How many people are working on this? I can't answer most of this, but I do know that computer vision is regularly used in many areas of manufacturing today in specialized applications. But it is still far from being able to work in a general purpose way as human visual recognition does. -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
In a message dated 7/25/2003 1:08:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Uh, didja forget? Gore *did* win -- the vote, anyway. Just not the office that usually goes with it. I am not one who thinks that Gore won. The popular vote does not determine the final result and therefore candidates do not attempt to win it. We do not know the result of a popular vote in which every vote would count. Under those outlandish circumstances (each individual's vote counts the same regardless of where it was cast) Bush might have gone after votes in populous states like NY and Cal where he had no chance of gaining the electoral votes. Bush won (Not fair and square but he won with the help of his friends on the court). ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: [Listref] Space Elevators Maybe Closer To Reality Than Imagined
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Seeberger Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 12:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Listref] Space Elevators Maybe Closer To Reality Than Imagined http://www.spacedaily.com/news/materials-03w.html Space elevators have an image problem, mainly due to two prominent science fiction novels. They appear either ungainly impossible, or so potentially dangerous to the planet itself you would never dream of building one. With the science now indicating that they are potentially near-term transport systems, it's time to review the fiction in relation to the possible reality. Three publications by Pearson in 1975/6/7 and work done by Moravec and published in the Journal of the Astronautical Sciences in 1977 were enough to prompt Arthur C Clarke to write The Fountains of Paradise and Charles Sheffield The Web Between the Worlds - both published in 1979. snip Red Mars The next great opinion-forming novel was Red Mars, by Kim Stanley Robinson in 1992. A captured asteroid is mined using nanotechnology to extend a graphite cable 37,000km down to the surface. Elevator cars take several days to make the journey, and are thirty stories high. But the main image from this incarnation is when the cable is brought down by revolutionary action. It twists around the planet at 21,000km per hour, with horrific consequences. Red Mars was part of a trilogy. In Green Mars, a replacement cable is made using Carbon Nanotubes from another captured asteroid. Cars travel up and down the cable at the same time to minimize energy losses. It's no coincidence that both these cables are called 'Clarke'. Minor Nitpick: The asteroid that the cable was attached to was named 'Clarke'. The cable itself had no name except perhaps 'the cable'. Jon Le Blog: http://zarq.livejournal.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
John Garcia wrote: On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 11:50 AM, The Fool wrote: Friday browncoat republicans in the house of representatives called the police to arrest and remove democratic representatives from a library in the house of representatives. The future is here and now. Never before has something so shocking happened in the history of the united states. Worse has happened. I would say the incident where Congressman Preston Brooks beat Senator Charles Sumner nearly to death on the Senate floor over Sumner's speech on Bleeding Kansas was worse. I'd have to agree with John here. There's a definite difference in degree, if not kind, between trying to have someone arrested and actually inflicting that kind of bodily damage. Not to say that the Republicans look all that good in this, but it could have been worse. (And then the backlash would have been that much more, as well.) Julia who still thinks that Gov. Perry needs a proctocraniectomy, and that he's not doing anything to make Republicans terribly popular in Texas right now ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: I have returned from paradise
That would have been #1 on my list . . . Here's the address for info and to find out how to download it: http://www.irfanview.com/ The function we are describing is found under Image | Resize/Resample. At 04:08 PM 7/27/03 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would propose Irfanview, which has a nice Batch Process utility and is freeware for private use (I use it for my shkrinking of images for the website)... Regards Armin -- From: Ronn!Blankenship[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply To: Killer Bs Discussion Sent: Freitag, 25. Juli 2003 23:54 To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: RE: I have returned from paradise ... I have to figure out how to shrink the pics we took, though. My wife ... And if Jon can't help you with that, I can make some suggestions for freeware programs you can download from the 'net which will do the ... --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Robotic Singularity
On 27 Jul 2003 at 15:59, Julia Thompson wrote: Also, how much longer will Moore's Law hold? It gets to where part of what's making things faster is that the size of components on a chip are shrinking; there's some finite limit to that beyond which shrinking is impossible. Then we have to use other methods on the same hardware to increase speed, or go in a totally different direction with it. Some other directions ARE being explored. For example, IBM has purely optical chips in development. I seem to remember them demonstrating one running at ~200Mhz about a year back. And there are other things as well as optic paths on motherboards, evolveware and so on. I think we're going to see things handed off more to specalist sub-CPU's and for massively enhanced bus bandwidths. Could be wrong of course, but we'll see. Andy Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Robotic Singularity
At 11:24 AM 7/27/03 -0400, Jim Sharkey wrote: While there is an element of hysteria in this article, I too find the American fascination with automating *everything* disturbing. However, I find it disturbing for an additional reason. First off, I agree that it seems that no one has really thought this automation thing through. I still think the author of this essay is a little over the top, but I wonder what's going to happen to the people in this country that lack the intelligence and skills to do anything but low wage jobs here as we autmate everything. This may tag me as some kind of Luddite, but I find it appalling that people can't wait to excise as much human contact from their lives as possible. I know people that would rather eat nails than actually have to go to the bank for three whole minutes. No one's time is really that important, is it? One answer is that the three minutes you mention do not include the fifteen to thirty minutes waiting in line for everyone else to do their three minutes' worth before you get your chance to do your three minutes' worth. Add that to the time required to drive to the bank during lunch hour when everyone else and his brother is also trying to drive to the bank to do his three minutes' worth during the same lunch hour, and some people would indeed rather eat nails, or at least decide that having their paycheck direct deposited¹ into their account and getting cash when they need some from an ATM is a better use of their time than going through the above process every (weekly/semimonthly/monthly/whatever) payday. _ ¹Also, some employers now no longer give you a choice of getting a paper paycheck and taking it to the bank and standing in line (or idling in line at the drive-thru), but will only pay you through direct deposit into your bank account. While convenient, this also can cause problems if they screw up something and that ends up screwing up your bank account. --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct
At 07:51 AM 7/25/03 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of pencimen ... Enron _and_ the Bush administration. Or is that what you meant? Sort of. Except that there's some superset that they're both part of, which I dare not name. ;-) Politicians? Human beings? --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
In a message dated 7/25/2003 8:54:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Eh, probably not. I have an almost reflexive need to point out the truth - and ultimately I consider this growing urban legend that the USSC somehow changed the outcome of the 2000 election to be most damaging to our country. I wonder if the republicans in congress would have really elected bush if a recount of the vote in florida showed that Gore had won by a few thousand votes. I think some would have correctly viewed this act as an abrobation of their resonsibilities to americans. I doubt that Bush could have governed effectively under these circumstances. He would have gotten no cross over dem votes. He would have been viewed by Americans as illegtimate. It might have seriously damaged the republican party in the future (I think it still may). ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
In a message dated 7/25/2003 9:09:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The fact that a Committee Chairman in the House is making that tradeoff in a way that the minority disagrees with is hardly new. Thus, I know that I am not a hypocrite, as you accuse, because Democratic Committee Charimen in the House most certainly have rammed bills through Committee in the past - and I know that I have never complained terribly loudly about it. Unless I missed the point, the problem was that the republican sent the capital police to arrest (or do something else nasty) to the dems who were trying to meet about the bill. In addition, the dems had not actually seen the changes they were being asked to vote on. So it is a bit more than trying to ram something through. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
In a message dated 7/25/2003 9:28:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think that's Gautam's point. If, as you seem to agree, the Left is simply incapable of coming up with a coherent war plan against terrorism, then the Left is inherently unqualified and unworthy to hold high political office in the United States for the future as far as we can see. So it really depends on who the left is. If you are talking about moderate democrats and liberals, their plan would have been much the same as Bush's sans the alienation of the rest of the world and the war on Iraq this year (maybe not; Some in Clinton's white house wanted to take Sadaam out so with a changed political climate this might have happened anyway). If you are talking about the real left (not just the left of center liberals), who cares? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: When does it end? (RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words)
In a message dated 7/25/2003 10:22:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1) The establishment of a secure, viable and independent Palestine alongside Israel. 2) Regime change in Iran, Syria, Lybia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the DPRK We would then be at war for at least a decade. Does that mean we can't criticize bush or the gop for that long? Golly ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
QUESTION 1) The British inform us that they have learned that Iraq has recently tried to acquire significant quantities of intelligence in Africa. The Bush Administration naturally tries to verify this claim, but cannot do so. They tell the British that we can't verify their claim. The British respond that they cannot reveal their intelligence sources on this, but they assure us that the intelligence is of the highest quality. At this point, do you; a) Call the British liars since our intelligece services have such strong reservations about it? b) Call the British incompetent for giving us intelligence that our own intelligence services has not verified, and indeed has strong doubts about? c) Ignore the British intelligence as questionable? d) Accept that the British intelligence services may have access to sources our own do not, particularly in Africa, and that the British intelligence services are generally considered among the best and most reliable in the world, and BELIEVE the British intelligence report? Your choice. What do you do? I look forward to your, Nick's, and Ritu's answers to this question. YOU LEAVE OUT OF THE STATE OF THE UNION MESSAGE. YOU DO NOT USE IT TO TRY TO CONVINCE AMERICANS THAT WE MUST GO TO WAR UNTIL YOU CAN AT LEAST CONVINCE YOUR OWN INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY THAT THE STATEMENT IS TRUE ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
QUESTION 1) The British inform us that they have learned that Iraq has recently tried to acquire significant quantities of intelligence in Africa. The Bush Administration naturally tries to verify this claim, but cannot do so. They tell the British that we can't verify their claim. The British respond that they cannot reveal their intelligence sources on this, but they assure us that the intelligence is of the highest quality. At this point, do you; a) Call the British liars since our intelligece services have such strong reservations about it? b) Call the British incompetent for giving us intelligence that our own intelligence services has not verified, and indeed has strong doubts about? c) Ignore the British intelligence as questionable? d) Accept that the British intelligence services may have access to sources our own do not, particularly in Africa, and that the British intelligence services are generally considered among the best and most reliable in the world, and BELIEVE the British intelligence report? Your choice. What do you do? I look forward to your, Nick's, and Ritu's answers to this question. YOU LEAVE OUT OF THE STATE OF THE UNION MESSAGE. YOU DO NOT USE IT TO TRY TO CONVINCE AMERICANS THAT WE MUST GO TO WAR UNTIL YOU CAN AT LEAST CONVINCE YOUR OWN INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY THAT THE STATEMENT IS TRUE ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
At 04:48 PM 7/27/2003 -0500 Julia Thompson wrote: I'd have to agree with John here. There's a definite difference in degree, if not kind, between trying to have someone arrested and actually inflicting that kind of bodily damage. And its unclear that arrest is even the proper word to describe what the Chairman tried to do - since I don't think that even if the Chairman's request had been carried out that the Democratic Representatives would have been detained, placed in jail, or had charges filed against them. At any rate, caning another Congreesman, literally nearly to death, on the floor of Congress is far worse. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
At 05:43 PM 7/27/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We do not know the result of a popular vote in which every vote would count. Under those outlandish circumstances (each individual's vote counts the same regardless of where it was cast) Bush might have gone after votes in populous states like NY and Cal where he had no chance of gaining the electoral votes. Bush won (Not fair and square but he won with the help of his friends on the court). Ahem, how exactly did Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy become friends George W. Bush?(I'm not aware any friendship between Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas and GWB - but I suppose its possible, and in those cases you could at least imagine an ideological affinity.) Additionally, how exactly did the actions of the USSC impact the eventual outcome of the 2000 Presidential election? Lastly, if Al Gore had won the 2000 election, would you be bitterly complaining that he did so thanks to his partisans on the Florida Supreme Court? JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
At 06:33 PM 7/27/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if the republicans in congress would have really elected bush if a recount of the vote in florida showed that Gore had won by a few thousand votes. You can wonder all you want - except that we now know that no such result would have ever happened. the only recount that would have even produced the slightest of Gore wins was a recount that both the Gore campaign and the FLSC rejected. Indeed, it was the FLSC's rejection of that exact recount that got the FLSC's-mandated recount ruled unconstitutional by the USSC. Yes Virginia, the *only* people in the Florida recount affair who made a decision that would have produced a Gore victory were the five Republicans on the USSC. History is full of ironies. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
At 06:40 PM 7/27/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Uhhh because finding WMD's was considered a very nice way of deterring criticism of the war? so in your mind it is ok to use WMD to deter criticsm even if the threat of WMD (at least nuclear) was unsubstantiated. Good grief, you really do have an unlimited ability to twist things to criticize Republicans. If you at all paid attention to the context of the discussion, it is clear as to what I am referring to. Someone asked me why we were searching for WMD's in Iraq if it was unlikely that we could keep them all out of the hands of the retreating/disappearing Baathists. I noted that if you justify a war by claiming that country isn't disarming itself of WMD, and critics of the war argue that that country really didn't have any WMD, then finding at least a few WMD's is an important part of the political process of justifying the war - since the US is a republic after all, and wars have to be justified - even if you prefer not to. :) incoherent nonsequitur rant snipped JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
In a message dated 7/27/2003 5:48:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Not to say that the Republicans look all that good in this, but it could have been worse. (And then the backlash would have been that much more, as well.) Worse in what way in 21st Century USA? Had them beaten? Had them lead from the Capitol in chains and sent to Quantanamo with the rest of the enemies of the US? The 19th century was, well the 19th century. Has anything remotely like this happened in the 20th or 21st century except in Texas (hey that was another republican adventure wasn't it?) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
At 06:49 PM 7/27/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: QUESTION 1) The British inform us that they have learned that Iraq has recently tried to acquire significant quantities of intelligence in Africa. The Bush Administration naturally tries to verify this claim, but cannot do so. They tell the British that we can't verify their claim. The British respond that they cannot reveal their intelligence sources on this, but they assure us that the intelligence is of the highest quality. At this point, do you; a) Call the British liars since our intelligece services have such strong reservations about it? b) Call the British incompetent for giving us intelligence that our own intelligence services has not verified, and indeed has strong doubts about? c) Ignore the British intelligence as questionable? d) Accept that the British intelligence services may have access to sources our own do not, particularly in Africa, and that the British intelligence services are generally considered among the best and most reliable in the world, and BELIEVE the British intelligence report? Your choice. What do you do? I look forward to your, Nick's, and Ritu's answers to this question. YOU LEAVE OUT OF THE STATE OF THE UNION MESSAGE. YOU DO NOT USE IT TO TRY TO CONVINCE AMERICANS THAT WE MUST GO TO WAR UNTIL YOU CAN AT LEAST CONVINCE YOUR OWN INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY THAT THE STATEMENT IS TRUE The State of the Union is irrelevant to this example.Leaving it out of the State of the Union is an action that is consistent with actions a, b, c, and d above. So, which is it, Bob?Before you decide whether or not to include it in the State of the Union, you have to make the more fundamental determination of a, b, c, or d. JDG - Tough Decisions, Maru - but he is the POTUS after all ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Justifying the War Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
At 03:14 PM 7/27/2003 -0600 Michael Harney wrote: The war on Iraq wasn't about liberating Iraq, it wasn't about weapons of mass destruction or terrorism. It was entirely politically motivated. The republicans saw their approval failing after Osama Bin Laden evaded capture, and, wanting some sort of evil figurehead detained or killed as a trophy that people in the US can applaud, they chose to attack our most recent war enemy Saddam Hussain (sp?). This is nonsense, Michael. President Bush declared that Iraq was a member of the axis of evil in January of 2002 when his approval ratings were sky-high. Try another theory. (and by golly, the military took every shot they could when they even just had questionable evidence that he was at a given location... at least three attempts to kill him using missle strikes, at least one of those on a civilian target, all missed killing the intended person). So, the US should not have tried to kill Saddam and using missile strikes to try and do so was wrong? Are you serious They committed a very criminal act that resulted in the deaths of thousands of people and retribution was called for. Do you really believe that the liberation of Afghanistan was justified solely by retribution?I mean, I don't even consider retribution to be in the Top Ten of reasons for the US to liberate Afghanistan and indeed, I'm not sure that it is a reason at all. What did Iraq do though? Nothing. They had no proven ties to the attacks of September 11th. Should we wait for them to attack us or one of our allies before we attack them? Damn right we should. Otherwise it is we who are the terrorists, it is we who are the criminals. Actually, on 2 August 1990 Iraq suddenly attacked Kuwait.In early 1991, Iraq signed a cease-fire with the United States, a cease-fire whose terms they have never abided by. Case closed. If this war really was about weapons of mass destruction, why aren't we going to war against Isreal and North Korea for their illegal nuclear weapons programs? Case and point: it simply isn't about that, it is all about politics. Disgusting. What's disgusting Michael is your inability to comprehend that an attack on a country that already has a nuclear weapon would very likely result in the incineration of hundreds of thousands of people - to say nothing of the hundreds of thousands of civillians that would die in Seoul thanks to DPRK artillery shells. Once Iraq gets a nuclear weapon, Michael its game over - unless of course you advocate direct confrontations between nuclear powers. Let's consider for a moment what might have happened had Iraq waited to attack Kuwait until 2 August 1992. We now know that Saddam Hussein would likely have shocked the world by successfully testing a nuclear weapon at this time. Thus a nuclear-armed Saddam rolls into Kuwait and begins pushing on into Saudi Arabia - and he declares that if the US sends troops to Saudi Arabia that he will lob a couple nuclear weapons into Tel Aviv and Haifa.*Now* what, Michael? You have argued that it is terrorist and criminal to attack a country that has not attacked you or one of your allies so, you simply wait for that country to build nuclear weapons and *then* attack your allies? By the way - of the recent developments in the nuclear programs of the DPRK, India, Pakistan, Iran, and Iraq over the past 15 years - how many occurred with the knowledge of US intelligence sources? I'll give you a hint - the answer is a very round number so I wouldnt count on being able to know when a successful test is imminent if that is your plan. Let me illustrate the blatant lack of perspective that the majority of this country has. All of the following are more likely to kill someone in the U.S. than a terrorist attack: Only because Iraq has so far been successfully prevented from developing nuclear weapons and selling them to the highest bidder. Michael, a nuclear bomb going off in NYC would kill millions of people... so that statistic of yours is absolutely meaningless. Your suggestion that the left's inability to form an effective war plan against terror is a demonstration of bad leadership is not just wrong (as a war plan is entirely uncalled for IMNSHO), it disgusts me that you beleive that the republican style of the war on terror is neccessary. How many civilians has our war in Iraq killed? I'm glad you brought this up, Michael, because the answer is between 100,000 and 200,000.Meanwhile, according to UNICEF, Saddam Hussein was kiilling around 5,000 people a day. Of course, the Left only cares about people killed by Americans thus if you get killed in Zimbabwe, don't expect ANSWER to start rallying international support to stop the killing. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the
Re: The Case for a Marriage Ammendment to the Constitution
At 02:32 PM 7/25/2003 -0500 Julia Thompson wrote: Erik Reuter wrote: You just insulted all bigots while trying to insult me! Personally, I'm prejudiced against bigots. Exactly. The point being that Erik is being wholly unproductive, uncivil, and unapologetic for equating prejudice against bigots with prejudice against Catholics and homosexuals. Actually, *my* point was I thought that Erik was being a bit cheeky, and I was trying to be cheeky right back at him. I think Erik got my post better than you did. In that case, I think that I got Erik's post (both the cheeky and the serious content) better than you did. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Case for a Marriage Ammendment to the Constitution
On Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 07:34:35PM -0400, John D. Giorgis wrote: In that case, I think that I got Erik's post (both the cheeky and the serious content) better than you did. No, you did not, JDG, based on your earlier comment which was exactly opposite. -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Arrgh!
--- Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 03:36 PM 7/26/03 -0700, Jan Coffey wrote: --- Reggie Bautista [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bryon wrote: I think it'd be more fun to mount a jumbo AC fan on the side... :-) As long as either your hard drive or you fan motor are magnetically shielded well enough... :-) I have two computers that get used most frequently. One is a Clariion audio computer which is not the latest grates, but runs quite for studio recording. It has 1 (ONE) fan and never has heating problems. 845 chipset 2.2 Ghz. You cn't even tell that it's on. The micropone however still picks up a lot of noise so I wired keyboard, mouse, 2 monitors, audio breakout cable, midi switch cable, usb, and firewire to wall outlets and the computer sits in an un-airconditioned cclosed loset with soundproof lyning. The other machine is a game machine with a 2.4 Ghz HT (C) 12 fans total, radon 9800 pro with component hdtv video out via a dvi to component converter. 895p chipset, Giant aluminium case. The thing sounds like an air conditioning unit. My next project is to make the vieocentric computer more quit so I can actualy use it in a Qubase network. Even being on a differnt floor and the other side of the house form the studio I can't have it on while recording. Water cooled is definaly a possible first step. Anyone have any other ideas for keeping the video card cool? Anyone know of a 450W power supply with a quiet fan? Um, one in a different room? to claify it's 875p chipset not 895. and the computer is, as I said (but perhaps not in a way that was understood) the loaud comuter is in a comleatly different room on a differnt level of the house. Still it's so loaud that I have to turn it off when recording (upstairs in a different part of the house). I tried getting a quiter power supply, but it simply heated the case to the point where the heat alarm went off. I'm begingin to consider how long ata cards can be made. put the computers in the basement and the run the drives etc. up to the house :). = _ Jan William Coffey _ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Arrgh!
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Jul 26, 2003 at 03:36:28PM -0700, Jan Coffey wrote: Water cooled is definaly a possible first step. Anyone have any other ideas for keeping the video card cool? Anyone know of a 450W power supply with a quiet fan? I think the ultimate in quiet and powerful would be to build a soundproof box to put the entire case inside. Of course, soundproof (plexiglass and foam box would work) probably also means thermally insulating. So you have to find a quiet way to get the heat out of the soundproof box. One way to do that would be to run two pipes or hoses through the box for coolant, with a big heatsink inside connected to the coolant. Then you have the problem of creating a quiet recirculating cooler. Or you could put the recirculating cooler outside the house, like a central air conditioning heat exchanger. Or if you don't mind using a lot of water, you could just run cold water constantly through the box and down the drain. If you believe that propa.just kidding :) The Carillion audio computer is just that soundproof case. They use a very very quiet fan and as you say below, a couple of steps back from the state of the art, so that there are less thermal issues. My neigbot built a supper overclocked computer but to keep it fan he had to run an industrial fan on the case. The fan was the same size as the case. He then tried to build a a water cooler for it with a fishtank pump. The pump wonder ful design, supper neat to watch it go, but the pump was louder than the industrial fan. He is considering putting the pump in the basement or garage and pumping the water from there. I want to go the other way and move the computer to the basement and run wireing up to the house. I don't think ata cable will have that kind of reach though. Anyone know? Or you could just buy CPUs and graphics cards that are about 2 steps down from state of the art, they are usually more optimized for low power/low heat production. Then you could design a system that doesn't need forced air cooling at all (like many notebook computers before the P4). -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l = _ Jan William Coffey _ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
Erik wrote- Really? I have heard many people claim that everybody talks when tortured. In the movies, the tortures that are applied seem so tame and unimaginative. Perhaps I have an unusually sadistic imagination, but I can imagine tortures that I don't think anyone could possibly endure without talking. (They could give false information, of course, but the torturer would make it clear that their information would be spot-checked and if it did not check out the torturer would be back) Having met a few people that have been through SEER. (Search, Escape, Evasion and Resistance as best I can recall), torturers have imagination. Soldiers who go through training learn to plan to survive- what I recall participants saying is to try to survive 24-48 hours is the critical time. You learn a story close enough to your own that you won't get tripped up, and you give the info you have to protecting what you can. Dee ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct
Jon Gabriel wrote: No, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission under the Bush administration tried to stop California from fighting Enron with price caps and we can safely assume that this was in part because Enron was lobbying the Bush administration to do so as reported in AP: (http://www.nctimes.net/news/2002/20020131/53224.html) Consumers definitely got screwed because of that and the general attitude at the time from the administration seemed to be 'blame the victim', which was simply inappropriate once the truth about Enron's business practices was made public. Some googled sites: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/utilities/pr/pr002556.php3 http://www-irps.ucsd.edu/irps/innews/sdut-040401.html http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/story1c020601.html If this were a normal situation, price caps would have been a terrible idea that would have made the situation worse over time. Economists publishing in Fortune, the National Review and the Wall Street Journal all gave very clear and impassioned arguments as to why caps would encourage corporate disinterest in increasing supply or making upgrades to current equipment in CA. But afaik, they did so before the truth about Enron's price gouging was revealed. Since Enron was deliberately creating a crisis by boosting energy prices through the roof, price caps weren't just appropriate in this case, they were an absolute necessity. Also worth considering are the extremely close ties Bushco has to the company. I believe I remember reading that Enron CEO Kevin Lay and the Shrub attended each others family functions on a regular basis, and that the Bush administration recruited something like a dozen Enron employees for top-mid level positions so it isn't as if these people were strangers to one another. Doug Beyond suspicious. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So it really depends on who the left is. If you are talking about moderate democrats and liberals, their plan would have been much the same as Bush's sans the alienation of the rest of the world and the war on Iraq this year (maybe not; Some in Clinton's white house wanted to take Sadaam out so with a changed political climate this might have happened anyway). If you are talking about the real left (not just the left of center liberals), who cares? Do you seriously believe that if any person other than Bush were President we would have taken out Saddam by now? Really? Also, the goal of international relations is not _popularity_. The world is not a high school. Bush _used_ the sympathy 9/11 generated to make possible something that would not have been possible without it - the removal of Saddam Hussein, something that was clearly not in the interest of anyone in the region or in Europe (save England). His ability to do that was diplomatic skill of the highest order. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: When does it end? (RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words)
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We would then be at war for at least a decade. Does that mean we can't criticize bush or the gop for that long? Golly Which, of course, no one is saying, except those making indefensible criticisms and they trying to hide their partisan motivations behind a smokescreen of protested innocence. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Justifying the War Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 03:14 PM 7/27/2003 -0600 Michael Harney wrote: The war on Iraq wasn't about liberating Iraq, it wasn't about weapons of mass destruction or terrorism. It was entirely politically motivated. The republicans saw their approval failing after Osama Bin Laden evaded capture, and, wanting some sort of evil figurehead detained or killed as a trophy that people in the US can applaud, they chose to attack our most recent war enemy Saddam Hussain (sp?). This is nonsense, Michael. President Bush declared that Iraq was a member of the axis of evil in January of 2002 when his approval ratings were sky-high. Try another theory. Unneccesary, many countries were named in the axis of evil. It was the choice to go to war with them that was politically motivated. (and by golly, the military took every shot they could when they even just had questionable evidence that he was at a given location... at least three attempts to kill him using missle strikes, at least one of those on a civilian target, all missed killing the intended person). So, the US should not have tried to kill Saddam and using missile strikes to try and do so was wrong? Are you serious Firing on a civilian target when your intelligence is as sketchy as someone thinking they heard someone over a phone who sounded like Saddam. Yes, bad thing. He obviously wasn't there, and civilians were killed in the attack. Didn't the intelligence also say his two sons were there too? That was (obviously) wrong as well. They committed a very criminal act that resulted in the deaths of thousands of people and retribution was called for. Do you really believe that the liberation of Afghanistan was justified solely by retribution?I mean, I don't even consider retribution to be in the Top Ten of reasons for the US to liberate Afghanistan and indeed, I'm not sure that it is a reason at all. I never said *solely* by retribution now did I? Give me the Letterman top ten. Tell me that September 11th isn't one of the reasons people in this country said go kick Al Quida's butt. Your living in a dream world if you think it wasn't reason Number 1. For sure, there were other reasons, but those reasons weren't adequate before the September 11th attacks. What did Iraq do though? Nothing. They had no proven ties to the attacks of September 11th. Should we wait for them to attack us or one of our allies before we attack them? Damn right we should. Otherwise it is we who are the terrorists, it is we who are the criminals. Actually, on 2 August 1990 Iraq suddenly attacked Kuwait.In early 1991, Iraq signed a cease-fire with the United States, a cease-fire whose terms they have never abided by. Case closed. Hardly, the U.S. broke proper channels when it acted outside the U.N. Other countries would have liked a stronger inspection regime before invading Iraq, and really, Saddam was less of a threat to us then than he was in 1991 after the cease fire. What damage would it have done to wait another 4 months, or, if as you might argue, the summer weather would be prohibitive, a year? You yourself said we never had a majority of the security council support, France's veto be damned, we didn't even have the majority. If this war really was about weapons of mass destruction, why aren't we going to war against Isreal and North Korea for their illegal nuclear weapons programs? Case and point: it simply isn't about that, it is all about politics. Disgusting. What's disgusting Michael is your inability to comprehend that an attack on a country that already has a nuclear weapon would very likely result in the incineration of hundreds of thousands of people - to say nothing of the hundreds of thousands of civillians that would die in Seoul thanks to DPRK artillery shells. Once Iraq gets a nuclear weapon, Michael its game over - unless of course you advocate direct confrontations between nuclear powers. Let's consider for a moment what might have happened had Iraq waited to attack Kuwait until 2 August 1992. We now know that Saddam Hussein would likely have shocked the world by successfully testing a nuclear weapon at this time. Thus a nuclear-armed Saddam rolls into Kuwait and begins pushing on into Saudi Arabia - and he declares that if the US sends troops to Saudi Arabia that he will lob a couple nuclear weapons into Tel Aviv and Haifa.*Now* what, Michael? Your scenario is flawwed. U.S. intelligence suggested that Saddam had enough anthrax, VX gas, and other agents to kill every person on the planet at least a couple of times. Of course that would require perfect dispersal, but it wouldn't have been a stretch to say that if U.S. intelligence was correct, Saddam could easily have killed millions in Iraq and neighboring nations with such an arsenal. Yet he didn't, and you contend that the weapons really were there, so why didn't it happen? And if
Re: Justifying the War Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
--- John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm glad you brought this up, Michael, because the answer is between 100,000 and 200,000.Meanwhile, according to UNICEF, Saddam Hussein was kiilling around 5,000 people a day. Of course, the Left only cares about people killed by Americans thus if you get killed in Zimbabwe, don't expect ANSWER to start rallying international support to stop the killing. JDG Where did those numbers come from? 200,000? Not a chance. There hasn't even been _time_ for that. Direct civilian casualties seem to have been on the order of 1000. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Robotic Singularity
Erik wrote- I think the article asks a good question, which is how the economy can be modified to deal with these sorts of things. I think one of the deficits of this article is the potential population decline in the future. If you look at the trend of lack of replacement rate in many civilized countries, this might dovetail fairly well with the fear many industries have of losing an employment pool. One solution was outlined in _Beggars in Spain_ by Nancy Kress, with the donkeys and the livers. For me, that is something of a nightmare scenario, but it does seem to be a likely outcome. Haven't read this yet. But I'd much rather see most children acquiring an education despite the fact that an education is not REQUIRED in order to live. But how to motivate people to learn? The only answer I can come up with is to continue to balance cooperation with competition. Don't give the livers everything they want. Provide a minimum safety net for free (nutritious but not desirable food, minimalist housing and clothing, basic medical care, etc.) and set up an economy where people must still compete if they want more than the minimum. Medium of exchange would be based on whatever is still scarce (land, energy, creative thinking, etc.) Cooperation and competition do drive people to work together. Here in the South, many companies are finding a lack of suitable technically trained workers. First the initiative was started to bring local community colleges in line with industrial needs for CAD training, etc. People know they can get local training if they want a job or if they are out of work. The local universities have helped to create partnerships with lesser developed areas to raise the general level of education by strong community based needs research and corporate involvement/committment. Dee ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Case for a Marriage Ammendment to the Constitution
Julia Thompson wrote: Actually, *my* point was I thought that Erik was being a bit cheeky, and I was trying to be cheeky right back at him. I think Erik got my post better than you did. I can't remember seeing such obvious sarcasm whoosh over people's heads the way Erik's comments did. Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Arrgh!
Jan Coffey wrote: He then tried to build a a water cooler for it with a fishtank pump. The pump wonder ful design, supper neat to watch it go, but the pump was louder than the industrial fan. There are plenty of specifically designed watercooling systems designed for overclocked PCs, which just replace the heatsink/fan unit with a coupler, and run the pump and radiator separately. If you need to get serious, these can be in an enclosure, but they're not particularly large or noisy (or expensive). Cheers Russell C. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Religion based ethics
Dan Minette wrote: But doesn't the randomness of evolution begin to recede once you are actually aware of the evolutionary process and actively abet it? Then, its not really evolution. So once we become aware we are evolving, we stop evolving? As I pointed out, the aberrant behavior of the Iriquois allowed them the greatest power for the greatest time with respect to the Europeans of any native group. The 6 nations were afforded some respect by the Europeans because of their power. But, as someone else pointed out, their behavior put them in a poor position to compete with the Europeans. In turn, behaviors that eventually prove to be more successful may have appeared and failed one or more times before they succeeded. Evolution. That only works if you are taking a snapshot of about 50 years of history and calling it the culmination of history. The US is somewhat unique in that morality is actually the third priority of foreign policy (after national security and economic self interest). The US winning the Cold War was not a certainty. I was thinking of stuff like the emergence of a form of democracy in ancient Greece... What you appear to be saying is that the system that ends up the dominant system is, by definition, moral. If totalitarian systems had won, or eventually win, will that make individual freedom immoral? But that's a non sequitur because that type of system, though it continues to emerge, continues to fail. It's like saying in biological evolution, if, under normal circumstances, a clearly inferior design had won over an inferior one. This isn't to say that there are extraordinary cases where a less moral system has advantages over a more moral one - suspending rights during (a real) war might be an example, but those are the exceptions, not the rule. If your worst nightmares come true, and a US theocracy is formed, will that make you immoral if you are not Christian. Does might make right? You see, you are trying to foist moral relativism on me and that isn't what this argument is about. Looking at one particular system that may or may not be dominant at any given time doesn't determine what is moral and what is not. It is the trend over time _what_works_ that determines our morals. The argument given above indicates that this is true. My argument is, that some things are immoral, even if they prove successful. It was wrong to treat the Native Americans as we did, even though the power of our country is at least partially founded on that immoral behavior. Would you argue, by definition, it was right? You aren't looking at the big picture. I don't think that you would argue that any successful system in our past was free of immoral elements would you? What I see and you apparently don't is that the morals of a thousand years ago and the systems that used them are clearly inferior to those of today. Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Conservative psychology
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/07/22_politics.shtml Four researchers who culled through 50 years of research literature about the psychology of conservatism report that at the core of political conservatism is the resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and that some of the common psychological factors linked to political conservatism include: * Fear and aggression * Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity * Uncertainty avoidance * Need for cognitive closure * Terror management ... The researchers said that conservative ideologies, like virtually all belief systems, develop in part because they satisfy some psychological needs, but that does not mean that conservatism is pathological or that conservative beliefs are necessarily false, irrational, or unprincipled. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs. -- Robert Firth ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Justifying the War Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
At 06:24 PM 7/27/2003 -0700 Gautam Mukunda wrote: --- John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm glad you brought this up, Michael, because the answer is between 100,000 and 200,000.Meanwhile, according to UNICEF, Saddam Hussein was kiilling around 5,000 people a day. Of course, the Left only cares about people killed by Americans thus if you get killed in Zimbabwe, don't expect ANSWER to start rallying international support to stop the killing. JDG Where did those numbers come from? 200,000? Not a chance. There hasn't even been _time_ for that. Direct civilian casualties seem to have been on the order of 1000. Didn't the Iraqi Information Minister say that the total number of casualties was 100,000?Given Michael's procliviites, I was using that as something of an upper bound. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
America in the Middle East, was: Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: David Hobby [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... No. We are dealing with a pathological minority, backed up by a large sector of public opinion in the Middle East. If we clean up our act, public opinion there will change. I'm in the middle and I have questions to ask of both sides of the arguement. Your's just happens to be the easiest to ask. What is the basis of this? What horrid things have we done in the Middle East. You mention supporting the Shah in the 50s. Yes. This is the argument that I want to be having. I might lose it, but it will at least be more sensible. I'm getting tired of having my words twisted on me. So we're thinking that American misdeeds should be those in the Arab world? That sounds fair--I imagine the average Middle Easterner doesn't even know what we did in Chile, say. (As the world gets more global this might change, and our reputation in one area would have more of an effect on our reputation in others.) I mentioned the Shah because I believe that the Iranian Theocracy came to power partially because of resentment to his rule. But let me do some research... ---David But, we facilitated the change of government when the Shah was deposed, about 25 years ago. (I wouldn't really call it that--we didn't seem to be doing much facilitating at the time.) The main things we have done in the Middle East between that time and 9/11 was 1) Buy a bunch of oil 2) Roll back Hussein's attempt to overtake the Middle East 3) Work for Arab oil companies 4) Support Israel's right to exist. 5) Sell military equipment to less extreme governments in order to decrease their obvious vulnerability to other countries, such as Iraq and Iran ... Finally, there is one other point worth thinking about. Via both schools and the media, the citizens of the Arab world have been taught a pack of lies about the US and Jews. A good example of this is the multiple presentations of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as history. It is everywhere from being presented as a top rated television series on Egyptian television to being taught in Palestinian schools. Why aren't these lies more critical to Arab public opinion than any errors the US may have committed in dealing with Arab governments? Dan M. Yes, and our friends the Saudis are some of the worst. It might have made sense to uncritically ally with them during the Cold War, but now it is time to insist on some changes there. ---David ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Goodbye.
I'm sorry, I can't stay here anymore. I took an afternoon nap and had a nightmare. It was the last straw that pushed me over the edge. I've had many dreams about dolphins over the course of my life. Many pleasant, many unpleasant, but every dream I've had about dolphins since I rejoined has been unpleasant. Judging by content and context of the dreams I've had, I would say that a part of me that I care a great deal about feels like it is dying here, and I feel powerless to stop it. I can't take the nightmares anymore, I have to leave. Goodbye. Any replies to this message should be sent directly to me as I will unsubscribe once I get confirmation that it was sent to the list. Michael Harney [EMAIL PROTECTED] Good bye, so long, and thanks for all the fish. - Douglas Adams ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Justifying the War Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John D. Giorgis Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 7:31 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Justifying the War Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words big snip Your suggestion that the left's inability to form an effective war plan against terror is a demonstration of bad leadership is not just wrong (as a war plan is entirely uncalled for IMNSHO), it disgusts me that you beleive that the republican style of the war on terror is neccessary. How many civilians has our war in Iraq killed? I'm glad you brought this up, Michael, because the answer is between 100,000 and 200,000.Meanwhile, according to UNICEF, Saddam Hussein was kiilling around 5,000 people a day. Of course, the Left only cares about people killed by Americans thus if you get killed in Zimbabwe, don't expect ANSWER to start rallying international support to stop the killing. John, do you have a cite for that statistic? According to Iraqometer, the number of civilians killed is 6105. I haven't seen anything that suggested more than 100,000 civilians have been killed. Jon Le Blog: http://zarq.livejournal.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Pensinger Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 9:16 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Re: Gray Davis Recall Election Set for Sep-Oct Jon Gabriel wrote: No, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission under the Bush administration tried to stop California from fighting Enron with price caps and we can safely assume that this was in part because Enron was lobbying the Bush administration to do so as reported in AP: (http://www.nctimes.net/news/2002/20020131/53224.html) Consumers definitely got screwed because of that and the general attitude at the time from the administration seemed to be 'blame the victim', which was simply inappropriate once the truth about Enron's business practices was made public. Some googled sites: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/utilities/pr/pr002556.php3 http://www-irps.ucsd.edu/irps/innews/sdut-040401.html http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/story1c020601.html If this were a normal situation, price caps would have been a terrible idea that would have made the situation worse over time. Economists publishing in Fortune, the National Review and the Wall Street Journal all gave very clear and impassioned arguments as to why caps would encourage corporate disinterest in increasing supply or making upgrades to current equipment in CA. But afaik, they did so before the truth about Enron's price gouging was revealed. Since Enron was deliberately creating a crisis by boosting energy prices through the roof, price caps weren't just appropriate in this case, they were an absolute necessity. Also worth considering are the extremely close ties Bushco has to the company. I believe I remember reading that Enron CEO Kevin Lay and the Shrub attended each others family functions on a regular basis, and that the Bush administration recruited something like a dozen Enron employees for top-mid level positions so it isn't as if these people were strangers to one another. However to play devil's advocate, the administration could have bailed Enron out and opted not to do so. Just because members of the current administration were close to the Enron execs didn't mean those execs were above the law. Jon Le Blog: http://zarq.livejournal.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Justifying the War Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John D. Giorgis Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 10:50 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Re: Justifying the War Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words At 06:24 PM 7/27/2003 -0700 Gautam Mukunda wrote: --- John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm glad you brought this up, Michael, because the answer is between 100,000 and 200,000.Meanwhile, according to UNICEF, Saddam Hussein was kiilling around 5,000 people a day. Of course, the Left only cares about people killed by Americans thus if you get killed in Zimbabwe, don't expect ANSWER to start rallying international support to stop the killing. JDG Where did those numbers come from? 200,000? Not a chance. There hasn't even been _time_ for that. Direct civilian casualties seem to have been on the order of 1000. Didn't the Iraqi Information Minister say that the total number of casualties was 100,000? Hilarious! Should we expect your next 'unimpeachable' source to be the Jon Lovitz' Tommy the Liar character from SNL? :-D Jon I'm kidding Maru! Le Blog: http://zarq.livejournal.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
