Re: HOW MANY LIST MEMBERS DOES IT TALE TO CHANGE A LIGHT BULB?
In a message dated 4/29/2007 2:33:14 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Per Judith Hanford: HOW MANY LIST MEMBERS DOES IT TALE TO CHANGE A LIGHT BULB? Would it not be better to potty train the light bulb so it never again needs to be changed? And just where do you find light bulb diapers? Viyehm ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: HOW MANY LIST MEMBERS DOES IT TALE TO CHANGE A LIGHT BULB?
Robert G. Seeberger wrote: Three to tell a funny story about their cat and a light bulb. That whole post was funny. This bit brings to mind a question: What is it with Internet people and cats? Growing up, I didn't know one kid who liked cats better than dogs, but a majority of my Internet friends have cats. I've never quite figured it out. Jim The truth about cats and dogs Maru ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Fake Sci-Fi Heroics 1979-1980
- Original Message - From: Bryon Daly [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 11:18 PM Subject: Re: Fake Sci-Fi Heroics 1979-1980 On 4/28/07, Robert G. Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is an amazing story and is purportedly true. I've seen some corroborating evidence that supports the story from other sources. Amazing story. Definitely seems true, because a quick google search turned up this: https://www.cia.gov/csi/studies/winter99-00/art1.html This is a CIA historical study, written by Mendez himself. It's very readable and it adds a lot of details not covered in the Wired article. One fun tidbit: An ironic coda: by the time Studio Six folded several weeks after the rescue, we had received 26 scripts, including some potential moneymakers. One was from Steven Spielberg. I suppose I am in a strange mood this morning, but something occurs to me. If we accept this story as factual, not only in the general sense, but in it's particulars; then I believe it has to effect the way we filter conspiracy theories. This story is pretty far out there. (he he, he he, he he, he said far out) And it remained, not secret, but under the radar for over 25 years. Both of those facts are worthy of remark. To be fair, I don't think it effects the arguments against 911 conspiracies to any great degree, but I do think the current controversy over the firings of US Attorneys and similar controversies that seed conspiracy theories *can* be effected by such revelations. A lot of Time/Money/Manpower went into pulling off this scam and making it successful, not to mention keeping it quiet until the greater series of events (The Hostage Crisis) was resolved. I imagine that the question of how many of such operations are pulled off successfully and without drawing public scrutiny occur, as compared to those that fail and/or are leaked publicly before completion, is a variable that must be posited. But overall, this story changes my perception of the potential success rate of conspiracies and the ability to keep them out of the public consciousness for long periods. xponent Sekrits 101 Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Star Trek apartment, with Voyager refit
This is very cool, but unless this guy lives near a Star Trek convention center of some sort, I bet he doesn't get very many dates. Star Trek apartment, with Voyager refit: http://tinyurl.com/2mdkns original link: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=290101222818 item=290101222818 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
conspiracy theories [was Fake Sci-Fi Heroics 1979-1980]
Robert Seeberger wrote If we accept this story as factual, not only in the general sense, but in it's particulars; then I believe it has to effect the way we filter conspiracy theories. Yes. Clearly, in a police state, the only way to cause change unwanted by the tyranny is to conspire. Otherwise, the police will get you. Inside a tyranny, people may move around considerably. Especially if they believe in some sort of Destiny, they may think of themselves as sufficiently free for their purposes. It all depends on how far and in what direction they want to move the country and and how far the others permit change. Over the past half century, as far as I know, most of the really big ones have involved changes in many people's belief. An example is Iran's change from the Shah to Khomeini. Smaller conspiracies, like the one involving the escape of six US embassy employees, involve a lot of money. You may not have to persuade thousands of people over 30 years, but you have to persuade many over 30 days. In a country in which ordinary people take part in a public government, and all believe it is sufficently public, conspiracy is not seen. In a positive-sum world, such as one in which education, research, development, and innovation are pushed, so technology advances, more change is available. In a zero sum world, the have-nots must take from the haves. As a practical matter, the haves will fight to keep what they have. That is natural. Mostly, of course, they will first do what is cheapest, which is to change the beliefs of thousands of people. Only later will they act more expensively. On the other side, a person such as David Brin will write a book against conspiracy (I don't remember whether he mentions the word, but The Transparent Society is clearly against conspiracy). He will continue speaking, as he has, for modernism (and its concomitant education, research, development, and innovation) and against feudalism, post-modernism, and other zero-sum belief systems. As far as I know, none of the Moslem countries of the Middle East has what white, middle-class Americans of the 1930s would consider a `wide' belief system. Iran may have the widest ... -- Robert J. Chassell GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rattlesnake.com http://www.teak.cc ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Fake Sci-Fi Heroics 1979-1980
On 4/29/07, Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But overall, this story changes my perception of the potential success rate of conspiracies and the ability to keep them out of the public consciousness for long periods. Not for me. Per the Mendez version, the press were already hot on the trail of the existence of the 6 free in Iran. It took a promise of an post-rescue exclusive to a reporter to hold things back. And after the rescue, Canada's large role was immediately and widely acclaimed. So the who (the Canadians and the 6 trapped Americans), the what (the americnas exfiltrated under the noses of the Iranians with enormous Canadian help), and a significant part of the how (Canadians provided authentic passports to help them walk past security). What's left makes for a very interesting story and perhaps a made for TV movie, but is hardly a conspiracy-class secret. Aside from someone wanting to cash in on the story in some minor way, I don't see much motivation for people to spill the beans. Compare that to a 9-11 class conspiracy theory, in which people theoretically betrayed their own country and people, and where coming out with the truth in a credible way could literally topple the highest reaches of the goverment. All it would take is one guilty conscience, belated bout of patriotism, or disgruntled insider looking to make amends, become famous, or get revenge to blow it open. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Cost of conservation
wry Time to up the ante? I also: - shower only on days I'll be in public (that might be daily in summer, but only 3 days/week in winter) - wash only large loads of laundry, mostly in cold, occ. in warm, but never hot water - run my dishwasher once/week, fully loaded only - combine driving trips, ie grocery/bank/library/etc. (which is why I haven't been posting as often; in winter weeks I may drive on 3 days, although in summer it's as much as 6 or 7) - turn off all lights except in the room I'm using - reuse various containers (like plastic water bottles) until they're worn out - recycle what I can (paper, aluminum, etc) - use ~ 2 styrofoam cups/year (when traveling) - use passive solar heat in winter when able (when the sun is shining, thermal blinds are open, when it isn't, they're closed) - use a bucket/pitcher to save water while waiting for it to get warm (goes to flush toilet or water plants) - etc, etc I really do try to think about what I'm doing WRT energy consumption; I'll bet that if everyone did the same or more (and there are those who make me look like a glutton!), it *would* make a significant impact. Significant as in slowing down the rate of increase in greenhouse gasses, probably. But I don't think that it's as straightforward as it might appear to be on the surface. The costs/repercussions inherent in people cutting down energy use is not clear when we just look at one person doing it...isolated from everyone else. I think it would be worthwhile to analyze what we are discussing in terms of what choices will tend to be made as the price of energy rises, and the repercussions of these choices. You might want to argue against using tax/price as the means for cutting energy usage. I think that it has been shown to have two tremendous advantages over other means: such as laws requiring the reduction of energy usage and moral appeals. Let me give a quick explanation of why I favor increasing the price. I will do this by looking at the problems with the other analysis. Doing it by legal restrictions has two significant problems: 1) Even the best informed and intentioned committee cannot find optimum tradeoffs in millions of different cases. Millions of decisions based on the true cost of energy will result in more efficient use of energy. 2) Loopholes are always found. The popularity of the Suburban turning into the SUV craze is an example of this. It was exempt from the mileage requirements for cars because it was a truck...as are SUVs. Closing all such loopholes would require very complicated legislation, which would also apply in unforeseen waysoften working against conservation. Moral appeals can be a component of the action, but nothing real can be based on what if everyone did the right thing. For example, we cannot fund schools, highways, and Medicare by free will offerings. The tax plan does have problems...One obvious problem with an energy tax is that it is regressive. The regressive nature can be countered by taxes/government payments to lower. There is a cost to this, maybe a 10% surcharge on the cost of the entire program. But, this cost will be far smaller than the cost of the vast bureaucracy generated by regulating energy use while keeping energy inexpensive and, even more so, the generation of a useless industry of finding loopholes in the law. Having set this up, let's think of the cut that would be required to stop global warming. Elsewhere you suggested boycotting China until they have a more environmentally friendly policy. If I were Chinese, I'd counter that this is an unreasonable and hypocritical action for the West, since their per capita carbon emission is less than that of any Western country. It's less than half of that of the UK, and less than 20% of the US. The numbers that I've seen is that the US and Europe, and other developed countries have to drop to, essentially, the per capita carbon consumption of China...and China and India, etc. have to hold their consumption at or below that level. I'll stop here for now, I'm not sure if anyone is interesting in replying. But, if there interest, I think I could argue that even Debbie's lifestyle would be all but impossible in a no global warming world. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: conspiracy theories [was Fake Sci-Fi Heroics 1979-1980]
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert J. Chassell Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 3:20 PM To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: conspiracy theories [was Fake Sci-Fi Heroics 1979-1980] On the other side, a person such as David Brin will write a book against conspiracy (I don't remember whether he mentions the word, but The Transparent Society is clearly against conspiracy). He will continue speaking, as he has, for modernism (and its concomitant education, research, development, and innovation) and against feudalism, post-modernism, and other zero-sum belief systems. Except that David Brin put forth his own conspiracy theory for the Iraq war: that Bush is controlled by Saudi Arabia. :-) Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
