Re: CDR: Re: The End of the Golden Age of Crypto
Jim Choate wrote: Para-consistent logic is the study of logical schemas or systems in which the fundamental paradigms are paradoxes. It's a way of dealing with logical situations in which true/false can't be determined even axiomatically. Most paraconsistent logics deal with paradoxes, but I know of none whose fundamental paradigms are paradoxes. That barely makes sense to me, and is certainly not true. Paraconsistent logics often* allow some but not all sentences within the logic to be both true and false. In paraconsistent logics that have simple notions of true and false** it is usually (at least sometimes) possible to axiomatically determine whether a sentence is true or/and false - they wouldn't be much use if you couldn't! (not that they are much use anyway). * Many logicians would say they all do, according to Vasiliev and Da Costa's original definition. Some would say only some do. And some logician somewhere will disagree with almost anything you say about paraconsistent logics... ** Not all do, eg some have multi-value truths. Some have conditional truths, or truths valid only in some worlds. Some have true, false, both and neither. And so on. As usual, some logicians will disagree with this. For those who might care, paraconsistent logics are usually defined as non-explosive* logics. Ha! There is some argument (lots!**) about that, but it's the generally accepted modern definition (or at least the one most often argued about). * logics in which ECQ does not hold. ECQ = Ex Contradictione Quodlibet, anything follows from a contradiction. In most normal logics, if any single sentence and it's negation can both be proved, then _every_ sentence can be proved both true and false. This property is known as explosiveness. ** For instance, it has recently been shown that some logics traditionally known as paraconsistent, eg Sette's atomic P1 logic, are explosive, contrary to that definition. There are arguments about the meaning of negation as well, all of which confuse the issue. BTW, the name doesn't have anything to do with paradoxes, at least according to the guy who invented it. The para bit is supposedly from an extinct word (I forget the language, Puppy-something, really) for arising out of, coming from. Some say it's from the Greek para- beyond; but I've never heard the paradox story before. I hope this at least interested some, and was not just troll-food. -- Peter Fairbrother
Re: Torture done correctly is a terminal process
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, cubic-dog wrote: On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Major Variola (ret) wrote: At 07:40 PM 11/24/02 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: Bullshit. I (and several others) built a tank nearly ten years ago. No big deal. Note that psychoactives (at least if you have any experience with them) don't modify the experience a great deal either. Certainly not to upset anyone this much, this fast. The biggest threat is wrinkled skin and bacterial infections. You've been watching way too many movies, you won't morph into a proto-ape or glow like lave either ;) You were using the wrong psychoactives then. Indeed. Hardly. What I suspect is that the effect is more related to the mental hardiness of the subject. Their ability to step outside of their normal perceptions and beliefs. Are they driven by fear or curiosity. The fact is that most people (I'd say somewhere in the mid to high 90%'s) are driven by fear. Those who can't would seem to have a much harder time of it. I've also noted that females (no insult intended, just a non-scientific observation) tend to last a considerably shorter time than males. I found the experience interesting but after a few times rather boring because the experience wasn't that different after you'd built up some experience. When I was 12 I was in a shop accident and lost the sight in my L. eye. As a consequence I spent about six weeks with both eyes patched so I'm quite familiar with SD effects. Perhaps that had something to do with it shrug. Pretty light shows for the first couple of days, after that it was just an annoying pain in the ass. I also suspect that a lot of people expand upon the experience since they expect it to be 'wild' because that's what they've been told it would be. Don't think I turned into an ape, but for about 30hrs (reconstructed) I'm not sure what I was. PS, anything less than a full cycle in a tank (16 hrs at least) is a bad place from whence to judge. Spent way more than that in there, and more than one or two times. I operated that tank for about six months. We finally ended up using it on the back porch to put a couch in so it was protected from the rain. -- We don't see things as they are, [EMAIL PROTECTED] we see them as we are. www.ssz.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anais Nin www.open-forge.org
RE: Is the minder CDR down?
Igor Chudov[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: my cdr node algebra.com is up. It is perhaps the most aggressive node as far as antispam measures go. It uses a lot of filters, some homemade, some based on SpamAssassin (as of several days ago). It also refuses all mail from China, Korea and a couple of other spam friendly countries. It also does not carry any traffic that originates from ssz.com. I used to be a lot more tolerant of spam before, but not any more. igor Thanks, but no thanks. I picked minder because it does not filter. minder seems to be back up now. Peter On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 10:32:43AM -0800, Eric Murray wrote: On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 09:47:20AM -0500, Trei, Peter wrote: I'm subscribed thru minder, and have had no cypherpunks mail for nearly 24 hours. I can see that there is more recent traffic on the web archive. The last mail I got from them here was yesterday morning. But their majordomo did answer a ping this morning, so their server was up and sending and receiving at least some mail them. Eric
Re: Is the minder CDR down?
my cdr node algebra.com is up. It is perhaps the most aggressive node as far as antispam measures go. It uses a lot of filters, some homemade, some based on SpamAssassin (as of several days ago). It also refuses all mail from China, Korea and a couple of other spam friendly countries. It also does not carry any traffic that originates from ssz.com. I used to be a lot more tolerant of spam before, but not any more. igor On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 10:32:43AM -0800, Eric Murray wrote: On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 09:47:20AM -0500, Trei, Peter wrote: I'm subscribed thru minder, and have had no cypherpunks mail for nearly 24 hours. I can see that there is more recent traffic on the web archive. The last mail I got from them here was yesterday morning. But their majordomo did answer a ping this morning, so their server was up and sending and receiving at least some mail them. Eric
