Re: The coming Singularitarian
Jonathan Gibson wrote: I read Cassini Division over the few quiet times I found at Burning Man last week (...) The first time I heard about this Burning Man was in a Malcolm-in-the-Middle episode. It sounds like Brazilian Carnival, but tamer :-P Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Soldiers Die, CEOs Prosper
On Sep 8, 2006, at 2:50 PM, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote:
Jonathan Gibson wrote:
Who's arguing absolute pacifism?
I operate on the Fight end of the Spectrum and not Fear, but that
doesn't mean I need to reduce everything to fisticuffs. I simply face
my fears head on. It's the only way that works for me.
I don't understand your ref to atomic material...
Because the USA may be the target of nuclear terrorism. OTOH,
nuclear terrorists might explode a bomb anywhere they can, just
to show they have it.
OK.
How does this make any difference? We faced nuclear megadeath of
enormous proportions for decades w/o erosion of our rights - well,
actually we have, but that's another topic - or, at least the ones we
curtailed are a comfortable pain we are already long familiar with.
I fail to see what scale of boogeyman is acceptable when North Korea
has become a growing and real nuclear threat, while GwB and that crowd
chase snipes they damn well knew weren't real. I followed the debriefs
of Saddam's defecting in-laws and follow-on UN reports which all track
a reality that BushCo denied in order to make a case for their
pet-projects. This was a world-class canard although I did expect to
find a few nerve and gas casings as we went in. I never thought Saddam
would deploy them on our troops as our retribution would have been
mighty righteous.
do you still believe
Saddam had nukes or even anywhere near to this?!?
I believe that this is irrelevant. We _know_ now that Saddam had no
nukes _then_. We know that Saddam wanted to have nukes - he
would buy nuclear stuff from anyone.
As would others, but this was true BEFORE the fall of the Soviets.
Following more than Fox News and AEI/Heritage flacks will remove a lot
of the mystery from world politics.
I fail to see how everything changed as people like to proffer as
some sort of newthink incantation. This is just cage-rattling to keep
our emotions on edge and our frontal lobes from operating at
full-speed.
BushCo would be touting the rad-counts and beakers-residues high and
low if they could find any. Apparently, your willing to throw your
own family {maybe a better way to phrase this is, you are willing to
sacrifice Somebody Else's family} on a sacrificial alter at the mere
mention of skeery-monster boogeyman of nuclear fire without rationally
assessing facts. I don't even have to raise this issue since you
think
a Drug War is justification enough to lose your family to local
crossfire.
Life is cheap{er}, for some, apparently.
I didn't say that - I said that my family _is right now_ in the
crossfire
of a drug war. I also said that your family is right now in the
crossfire
of another war.
I'd call it something other than a war.
To me it looks more like a provocative set of actions to make
mountains out of mole-hills. It's designed to make our defense
industry an Immovable Object to bill against the Irresistible Force of
the brownskins, well, everywhere... These hind-brain dinosaurs we call
a defense industry need to lean against something or they can't stand
up and w/o a Cold War, etc, they seek justification for the megabucks
they seek.
I've been a US Defense Contractor and know what I speak of.
What if this nice round conceptually dead-simple number of
100K isn't enough dead and the battles continue decades,
and numbers reach millions? When is enough dead enough?
When all you and yours lay at your feet? Are you prepared
for that, because this is a logical {and time-tested!}
course of action your apparently willing to embrace.
Obviously, there's a limit to how many people should die
to prevent a tyrant to have his wishes. It would be wrong
to start a nuclear war to prevent a nuclear war.
So, still no quantification? What exactly is your measure for success
of this effort?
Ok, you want numbers. How many people could die to prevent how
many deaths? How many (precious-to-me) lives could die to
prevent (not-precious-to-me) deaths?
On a first estimation, I don't care how many supporters-of-a-tyranny
die if their deaths prevent just a single innocent death. Call me
callous, but people who chose to support a tyrant have no sympathy.
OTOH, if once far-away innocent person must die to prevent one
friendly person, I will accept this equation - I am no hypocrite that
will say that all lives are equally precious to me.
Now, let's make the inverse count. How many precious-to-me
lives I would sacrifice to save strangers? I don't know, but
here the count is certainly not 1:1!
I fail to see why the criminal elements would pursue ever-more violent
crimes in the face of these profit drains... seems like it's when the
profits soar that they break out weapons.
Is there some study of the Dutch aftermath you are aware of and can
share?
No, there's no such study. I am just extrapolating from the behaviour
of criminals in my home city. When one profitable way is cut down,
they switch to another kind of
Re: FW RE: Fly The Flag
Robert, I agree whole-heartedly. I'll fly mine in defiance... and upside-down in accordance with a Ship In Distress rules of the open sea. - Jonathan - On Sep 8, 2006, at 7:27 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote: Ann Holland wrote: Remember to honor those who have served and this great country we have the privilege to live in!!! God Bless America! Earlier today I was informed that I would be working at Chase Tower on Monday and Tuesday. Later it dawned upon me that on 9/11 (Monday) I would be working in the tallest building west of the Mississippi. Tha..rilling! Ah well...I'm a child of the Cold War, I was well schooled in how to put my head between my legs and kiss my ass goodbye. We called it Duck and Cover. It all likelihood 9/11 will pass just like any other day and the only trouble I will find will be for not kissing the boss' ass. (I'm a firm believer that ones own hind end leaves less of a crappy aftertaste and fewer emotional scars) I too recommend flying the flag on 9/11. Not so much for patriotism's sake, but as an act of defiance! I want to tell the world that no matter who the president is, no matter who the enemy is, we will spit in your eye if you think to harm us. You might knock us down, but there is no way you can make us stay down. And our greatest strength, absolutely the source of our greatness, is that while you may be our enemy today, you can be our friend tomorrow. And if you doubt that, then look through the history books at all who were our enemies in the past and see who are our allies today. We are not better than you, we just operate under a better system, and you'd better believe we believe in all those pretty words we repeat with great frequency. Everyone is born equal, with inalienable rights, and you don't kiss the butt of Kings or Dukes because the rich and powerful are an immoral lot, likely to be carriers of STDs and nobody wants to get AIDS. So fly your flag proudly and keep your lips out of dark places (at least until that pharmaceutical breakthrough) and pray that Osama's ilk have not looked west of the Mississippi.at least for my sake.G xponent Kissassins Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Jonathan Gibson www.formandfunction.com/word ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The coming Singularitarian
On Sep 11, 2006, at 4:24 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Jonathan Gibson wrote:
I read Cassini Division over the few quiet times I found
at Burning Man last week (...)
The first time I heard about this Burning Man was in
a Malcolm-in-the-Middle episode. It sounds like Brazilian
Carnival, but tamer :-P
Alberto Monteiro
Heya,
Burning Man IS a bit like Carnivale, but is much more freeform. Mucho.
Styles of dress and vehicles can range from wild Brazilian peacocks
strutting up from SF's Castro district to the turgid black tones of the
Mad Max-ish DeathGuild. \Radical self-expression is the rule of thumb.
Most of us regulars out there are very wary of media portrayals as they
almost always put a mocking and derogatory tone to the reports. That
Malcolm-in-the-Middle episode was a touching and funny take on it and I
don't know any Burners who saw it that didn't think highly of it. I'd
even seen a few of the art cars roaming in the background and suspect
their owners are based in the LA area where they film. There was too
much shrubbery in those shots, but that can be forgiven. The hapless
suburban RV chef-grilling father figure as studied art performance was
a potent metaphor and had me in stitches.
I'm back in the desk-saddle and riding hard. I've finally posted my
Burning Man recap late last night, if your interested in following some
of those notions further. It's a remarkable phenomena I am proud to
promote. In fact, I'm coming to the opinion that this eclectic little
gathering just might have an effect on the world. It's running 40K
strong now and regional Burns are planned on a continent near you. I
first went out there when a mere 90 people signed up {friends mostly}
and it's kept that flavor to a remarkable degree in spite of the
scale-up.
Consider yourself invited - maybe we can debate in person!
- Jonathan -
www.formandfunction.com/word
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: unholy OS wars
My, AndrewC, you are a prickly one aren't you?
You come out all fire and scorching brimstone from the get-go on this
topic.
Expect push-back.
On Sep 8, 2006, at 1:48 AM, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 7 Sep 2006 at 20:04, Gibson Jonathan wrote:
As an artist hovering around the computer industry since High School I
find it amazing that AndrewC initially claims to be a non-expert, yet
sells computers he regularly builds. Andrew, you undercut yourself on
Go back and actually read it. What I said is I'm not a technophile. I
don't get caught up in the wow factor, the tech for the sake of
itself. What the tech does, the end result, is all I'm interested in.
That I'm fully conversant with how to handle the tech relates to the
fact that it's a useful skill which I've maintained because it's seen
of value - I frequently do simple stuff like driver changes at work
for the less technically inclined when the IT department as too busy.
It's years since I was a professional coomputer tech. I design games
these days.
how else does one troubleshoot? I do not understand what is gained
from such a pre-loaded frame on the conversation. That you bluster
with rudeness and intended insults reveals an arrogance I find
irresistible - where's my pile of throwing rocks and favorite sling?
By the standards of clerks, teachers, bus drivers, cooks, you sir, are
a technophile. Let's call them Normals for this conversation. Your
hip deep in it by Normal standards and I have no reason to retract my
initial call. Your knowledge of arcane digital substrates is huge
compared to most grandmothers and although you may feel you still feel
there are vast technical reaches remain unexplored - you are in fact in
that specialized subspecies known as the Game Developer.
I simply found your claim of ignorance odd and wondered why.
As you couldn't even be bothered to properly read what I wrote, and
have put your own ignorant misunderstandings forwards purely so that
you could bash me, bluntly I'd of prefered it if you'rd of stayed
busy. And personally I prefer an axe.
And I couldn't care less about the aesthetics of the case, for
example. My current PC's best features are not that it's blue and
grey, but that the power button is on the top front and that it has a
carry handle on top.
Some people think an enormous HVAC system hanging on the outside off
building is an engineering solution whereas I'd call it an eyesore that
reflects poor planning and design.
that irked so many, myself included. For instance, do you really care
if your iPod Nano isn't expandable {yet}? Damn things even look a tad
I don't have a MP3 player. There's nothing wrong with my minidisk
recorder (which I was given ages back for recording lectures in
University, since I'm dyslexic) for listening to music on the go.
Tender spot rubbed wrong?
Hey, stop jumping at shadows. I love mini-disc, but you have to admit
No Moving Parts makes more sense long term. Welcome to the new
millennia!
Ask your
mother writing letters, sister ripping CD's, or cousin working at the
car repair what machine perks their interest and more often than not
they point at a Mac
The asethetics have zero to do with function. Sure, most PC cases are
ugly. It's a case. I really could't care less on the topic.
In reality you, Andrew, are heir to the mainframe and mini support
class of technicians who migrated out of the air conditioned
I'm a games designer. To quote an overused phrase, The medium is not
the message.
You're heir to the entire technophile snob legacy, the entire It
looks good so it must be superior class who are either gamers who go
for the PC with the blue LED's or the non-gamers who go for Mac's.
Rubbish. I'll thank you to not project your own shadows upon me. I
save my admiration for those designs that are the best of both worlds.
Anybody can, and they do, design swiss army knife dood-ads hastily
attached to a box trying to grab attention, but getting multiple uses
out of a single feature simplifies the overall design, makes for
greater product longevity, and fewer COG parts or repairs.
You do user testing of that game your working on don't you? Or, do you
let the programmers self-test in a vacuum
employed and users grateful to get them running, again. Macs simply
didn't require such overhead, and still don't - relatively speaking.
'Course not, you can support more 'NIX-based computers than you can
Windows with the same staff. Been known for ages. There's nothing
magical about Apple in that respect.
Even under the old Mac OS it was rare I had to do a fresh install
{even
as a developer} and since the advent of OS X it's even better as I've
only installed from discs when Apple issues a major upgrade - about
once a year.
So more frequently than I'm forced to reach for the Windows disks
then (24-30 months).
'Cept I don't have to do it even as often as your example.
I install fresh when I want a feature
Re: Soldiers Die, CEOs Prosper
Jonathan Gibson wrote: Because the USA may be the target of nuclear terrorism. OTOH, nuclear terrorists might explode a bomb anywhere they can, just to show they have it. OK. How does this make any difference? We faced nuclear megadeath of enormous proportions for decades w/o erosion of our rights - well, actually we have, but that's another topic - or, at least the ones we curtailed are a comfortable pain we are already long familiar with. Nuclear Islamic Terrorism is far more dangerous than Nuclear Communism. They had something to lose, while the islamic fanatics don't - not even if the retaliation would reduce every sacred islamic place to radioactive dust. I fail to see what scale of boogeyman is acceptable when North Korea has become a growing and real nuclear threat, while GwB and that crowd chase snipes they damn well knew weren't real. But what is the solution to North Korea's problem? There's no simple solution. Not even starving the kp-ians to death does any good. Maybe offering a huge bribe to kp's dictator, making sure he will spend the rest of his life in some tropical paradise and nobody will ever touch him or his fortune could solve that problem, but this would establish a predecent that would make every dictator try to get the same bonus. This was a world-class canard although I did expect to find a few nerve and gas casings as we went in. I never thought Saddam would deploy them on our troops as our retribution would have been mighty righteous. It's surprising that he didn't. Maybe the war was too quick for his thought processes conclude that he would be really deposed, instead of just another 1991 bundle. As would others, but this was true BEFORE the fall of the Soviets. Following more than Fox News and AEI/Heritage flacks (...) If you think Fox News is biased, you don't know Rede Globo :-) I didn't say that - I said that my family _is right now_ in the crossfire of a drug war. I also said that your family is right now in the crossfire of another war. I'd call it something other than a war. Ok, it's not a war, but people are still in the crossfire. To me it looks more like a provocative set of actions to make mountains out of mole-hills. It's designed to make our defense industry an Immovable Object to bill against the Irresistible Force of the brownskins, well, everywhere... These hind-brain dinosaurs we call a defense industry need to lean against something or they can't stand up and w/o a Cold War, etc, they seek justification for the megabucks they seek. I've been a US Defense Contractor and know what I speak of. Yes, Fear is a great motivation for the military industry. No, there's no such study. I am just extrapolating from the behaviour of criminals in my home city. When one profitable way is cut down, they switch to another kind of crime. If suddenly they would lose the huge profit from drug trade, they might use their formidable arsenal to rob homes or mass kidnapping. Thanks, I wanted some thoughts on this to try and get past the handy labels and notions that get bandied. I don't think there is anything to resolve here as your opinion rates casual life-taking too cavalierly for my notions of a stable solution... I am not _that_ callous about life-taking! It's just that I live in fear _now_: I change my routine all the time to chose safer routes, my wife quitted jobs that would expose her when crossing danger zones, my kids can't get in the streets alone, etc. This is a warzone, and we are losing it :-/ BTW, I didn't have data when I wrote, but this Sunday's newpaper had a study showing that the drug dealers are losing income from Coke and Marijuana, and they are compensating it with bank robbery and flash kidnappings - just as I said. I am reminded of the callous adolescent writings of Aynn Rand where she gladly smites innocent children if they've been fed the honey corrupt parents bring home. I am not trying to paint you this way, Alberto, but this conversation hangs in my mind as an echo of Atlas Shrugged. Ayn Rand is in my to-read-list, just after the Gor Masterpiece :-) Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Soldiers Die, CEOs Prosper
On Sep 11, 2006, at 9:51 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Jonathan Gibson wrote:
Because the USA may be the target of nuclear terrorism. OTOH,
nuclear terrorists might explode a bomb anywhere they can, just
to show they have it.
OK.
How does this make any difference? We faced nuclear megadeath
of enormous proportions for decades w/o erosion of our rights -
well, actually we have, but that's another topic - or, at least
the ones we curtailed are a comfortable pain we are already
long familiar with.
Nuclear Islamic Terrorism is far more dangerous than Nuclear
Communism. They had something to lose, while the islamic fanatics
don't - not even if the retaliation would reduce every sacred
islamic place to radioactive dust.
Nonesense. Why do the puppetmasters pushing suicide bombers have less
to lose than the soviet aparatchniks did? There are any number off
technical, political, cultural, etc, reasons for a ffoolish leadership
to intentionally, or by blender, trigger nuclear bombs. The scale of
mistakes is obviously much worse under the old Cold War than an
isolated nuke going off here or there. Losing Morder, er Washington
DC, to an attack would be bad, but nothing compared to globe-straddling
nuclear winter after a typical US-v-USSR script.
The scale is obvious and one you don't address.
I fail to see what scale of boogeyman is acceptable when
North Korea has become a growing and real nuclear threat,
while GwB and that crowd chase snipes they damn well knew
weren't real.
But what is the solution to North Korea's problem? There's no
simple solution. Not even starving the kp-ians to death does
any good. Maybe offering a huge bribe to kp's dictator, making
sure he will spend the rest of his life in some tropical
paradise and nobody will ever touch him or his fortune could
solve that problem, but this would establish a predecent that
would make every dictator try to get the same bonus.
Well, invading Iraq certainly didn't slow them down now did it?
Additionally, we now lack a sharp military instrument to enforce our
disagreements with them. Simple solutions sold grandly and to a war
drumbeat rarely work and are never really simple.
Engage them. Infiltrate and subvert with hugs and kisses that win over
their people as you disarm their installations. It's a patience game.
One this administration is congenitally unable to process. It doesn't
fit the branding they've pushed lately as uber-macho.
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Thanks, I wanted some thoughts on this to try and get past the handy
labels and notions that get bandied. I don't think there is
anything to resolve here as your opinion rates casual life-taking
too cavalierly for my notions of a stable solution...
I am not _that_ callous about life-taking! It's just that I live
in fear _now_: I change my routine all the time to chose safer
routes, my wife quitted jobs that would expose her when crossing
danger zones, my kids can't get in the streets alone, etc.
This is a warzone, and we are losing it :-/
I feel for you and yours. Your agitation for action is understandable.
I advocate drying up the weaponry funds by taking out the profits.
Clearly the war on drugs as it has been waged since... Nixon {!} are
failing whereas Holland has an actual working system that minimizes
harm.
BTW, I didn't have data when I wrote, but this Sunday's newpaper
had a study showing that the drug dealers are losing income from
Coke and Marijuana, and they are compensating it with bank robbery
and flash kidnappings - just as I said.
Well, then the correct procedure is to harden those areas and beef up
enforcement. You can't just shrug and say there is no winning, because
there are victories. You just cited one, but industries like gangs
demand feeding and until the machinery is starved into downscaling it
will grow like a cancer. Marginalizing this crowd is the only way to
make them into mere nuisances instead of dire threats.
Is it starve a cold and feed a fever, or other way around?
- Jonathan -
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: unholy OS wars
On 11 Sep 2006 at 9:49, Gibson Jonathan wrote:
My, AndrewC, you are a prickly one aren't you?
You come out all fire and scorching brimstone from the get-go on this
topic.
Expect push-back.
It's called reason, applied, and a defence of a tolerant view. And
Except what I'm getting from you isn't push-back, it's mudslinging.
By the standards of clerks, teachers, bus drivers, cooks, you sir, are
a technophile. Let's call them Normals for this conversation. Your
Absolute rubbish. A lot of them these days have digital cameras, have
digiboxes, have ipods. I don't have any camera, I don't have a TV
whatsoever, I don't have a MP3 player. None of these things are
USEFUL to me.
Tech is a pure tool - that I have kepy skills as a tech is because
those skills are purely useful, it gets me cheaper PC's and is
considered a useful skill by others.
there are vast technical reaches remain unexplored - you are in fact in
that specialized subspecies known as the Game Developer.
There is no subspecies called Game Developer when it comes to views
of technology. The vast majority are technophile, I am not. Games are
just ONE medium, and the medium is not the message.
I simply found your claim of ignorance odd and wondered why.
Interest, not ignorance.
Some people think an enormous HVAC system hanging on the outside off
building is an engineering solution whereas I'd call it an eyesore that
reflects poor planning and design.
That's nice. I don't care - if it works better than the other
soloutions, then aesthetics can take the back seat. Again, function
and not flash is what I care about.
that irked so many, myself included. For instance, do you really care
if your iPod Nano isn't expandable {yet}? Damn things even look a tad
I don't have a MP3 player. There's nothing wrong with my minidisk
recorder (which I was given ages back for recording lectures in
University, since I'm dyslexic) for listening to music on the go.
Tender spot rubbed wrong?
Hey, stop jumping at shadows. I love mini-disc, but you have to admit
No Moving Parts makes more sense long term. Welcome to the new
millennia!
No, welcome to a waste of cash. As long as the minidisk recorder
works, it makes absolutely zero sense to waste cash on something
which can't even record, has battery life issues compared and are
extremely fragile.
YOU'RE the one jumping because I don't share your technophile
outlook. This is normal.
You're heir to the entire technophile snob legacy, the entire It
looks good so it must be superior class who are either gamers who go
for the PC with the blue LED's or the non-gamers who go for Mac's.
Rubbish. I'll thank you to not project your own shadows upon me. I
save my admiration for those designs that are the best of both worlds.
There's one technophile world, and your snobbery is the so-called
shadow which is entirely your own..from your nose, as you look down
at me for not sharing your views.
Anybody can, and they do, design swiss army knife dood-ads hastily
attached to a box trying to grab attention, but getting multiple uses
out of a single feature simplifies the overall design, makes for
greater product longevity, and fewer COG parts or repairs.
Multi-uses can make something more complex, generalising is worse
than useless. Look at the IBM PS/2 for a good example of that. Also,
longevity is utterly unrelated to multi-use, a single use tool in
many cases is more robust since it only has to be designed for the
stress of that single use, and so on.
You do user testing of that game your working on don't you? Or, do you
let the programmers self-test in a vacuum
Of course I do. This has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Router with comprehensive firewall (on a linux core), check. Free
antivirus, check. Free anti-spyware, check. There we go! (Oh, there's
spam, but I haven't used Outlook in a decade at home)
Nice. Apple's is pretty good out the box as well.
And if it was the majority system it would have a lot of attacks as
well. You know fullwell it's a pure self-generated popularity issue.
Tech-as-a-tool is NOT popular in todays society, as you prove. Shrug,
that doesn't bother me either.
AndrewC
Dawn Falcon
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Soldiers Die, CEOs Prosper
Some of it seems to be -- the Wiki piece has claims that could easily pass 100K already. The info at http://iraqbodycount.org/ seems to be about half that. But that's current numbers, and I think Nick was projecting through to the end of the war. It wasn't me, it was the article I quoted... but I have an idea of what that number means. It is from a comparison of death rates before and after the invasion, without regard to direct cause. Thus, it is intended to include those who have died due to destruction of the infrastructure, lack of police, etc., in addition to those directly killed by the war. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Morality of Killing Babies
On 9/7/06, The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: E. You know nothing. You are a Fvcking idiot and a troll. And you have made an unambiguously personal attack there... which is contrary to our community's guidelines. I'm inclined to be less tolerant of personal attacks by people who participate via an obvious pseudonym, since that is also contrary to our guidelines. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: unholy OS wars
At 11:49 AM Monday 9/11/2006, Gibson Jonathan wrote: My, AndrewC, you are a prickly one aren't you? You come out all fire and scorching brimstone from the get-go on this topic. Expect push-back. [...] By the standards of clerks, teachers, bus drivers, cooks, you sir, are a technophile. Let's call them Normals for this conversation. Since Mundanes is such an overworked term . . . [...] I love mini-disc, but you have to admit No Moving Parts makes more sense long term. Like the format will last long enough for the hardware to wear out. Welcome to the new millennia! All of them? [...] do you let the programmers self-test in a vacuum If so, you probably go through a _lot_ of testers that way. And you have to wonder about the reports they gasp out in the last stages of hypoxia. [...] Evangelism of any particular platform for anything but price/performance and functionality makes me roll my eyes. Does compatibility with other people whose stuff you have to be able to read and run fit in there somewhere? -- Ronn! :P Professional Smart-Aleck. Do Not Attempt. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Soldiers Die, CEOs Prosper
At 12:24 PM Monday 9/11/2006, Gibson Jonathan wrote: Nonesense. Why do the puppetmasters pushing suicide bombers have less to lose than the soviet aparatchniks did? 'Cuz a cave somewhere in Afghanistan or Pakistan is harder to program into the nav system of a cruise missile than the GPS coordinates for the men's room window of the Kremlin? Is it starve a cold and feed a fever, or other way around? And if you have a cold _with_ fever, should you binge and purge? -- Ronn! :P Professional Smart-Aleck. Do Not Attempt. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Morality of Killing Babies
On 9/8/06, Jim Sharkey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are we suspending the guidelines when our dedicated atheists and devout theists get into the ring to slug it out now? If we are, I can bring popcorn if someone else will bring the beers! We had a serious shortage of list managers starting Friday morning... I'm trying to catch up now. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: unholy OS wars
On 11 Sep 2006 at 12:47, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: [...] Evangelism of any particular platform for anything but price/performance and functionality makes me roll my eyes. Does compatibility with other people whose stuff you have to be able to read and run fit in there somewhere? If it's not compatible, then it's not performing is it? AndrewC Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Morality of Killing Babies
At 12:52 PM Monday 9/11/2006, Nick Arnett wrote: On 9/7/06, The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: E. You know nothing. You are a Fvcking idiot and a troll. And you have made an unambiguously personal attack there... which is contrary to our community's guidelines. I'm inclined to be less tolerant of personal attacks by people who participate via an obvious pseudonym, since that is also contrary to our guidelines. Nick FWIW, I am still hoping that The Fool will respond to my request for specific quantified answers to points A through D, viz., At 01:55 AM Friday 9/8/2006, The Fool wrote: [...] A. I know more about 'scripture' than you do. Much more. Perhaps hard to briefly quantify, but perhaps you can try. B. I've read the bible, more times than you will for the entire rest of life. Approximately how many times? 5? 10? 13? 20? 25? . . . ?? C. I've read more about the bible than you ever will. Approximately how much would that be? D. I Own more translations of the Bible than there are regulars on this list. Approximately how many? 5? 10? 13? 20? 25? . . . ?? (Though one might note that there is a possible difference between own and have read . . . ) -- Ronn! :P Not Being A Smart-Aleck This Time. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Soldiers Die, CEOs Prosper
On Sep 11, 2006, at 10:24 AM, Gibson Jonathan wrote: Nonesense. Why do the puppetmasters pushing suicide bombers have less to lose than the soviet aparatchniks did? There are any number off technical, political, cultural, etc, reasons for a ffoolish leadership to intentionally, or by blender, trigger nuclear bombs. Now we won't be able to take blenders on airplanes. Damn it. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Soldiers Die, CEOs Prosper
On 11 Sep 2006 at 10:39, Nick Arnett wrote: Some of it seems to be -- the Wiki piece has claims that could easily pass 100K already. The info at http://iraqbodycount.org/ seems to be about half that. But that's current numbers, and I think Nick was projecting through to the end of the war. It wasn't me, it was the article I quoted... but I have an idea of what that number means. It is from a comparison of death rates before and after the invasion, without regard to direct cause. Thus, it is intended to include those who have died due to destruction of the infrastructure, lack of police, etc., in addition to those directly killed by the war. Yes, and you know what the actual figure in the 2004 Lancet study was, right? 98,000 (95% confidence interval: 8000 to 194000) *Including* combatants. A commentry on their methodology: http://www.slate.com/id/2108887/ There appears to be no 2006 or even 2005 study. AndrewC ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Soldiers Die, CEOs Prosper
On Sep 11, 2006, at 10:24 AM, Gibson Jonathan wrote: Is it starve a cold and feed a fever, or other way around? I believe the old saying is starve a cold, feed a fever. The logic is that by starving a cold, you don't give it a bunch of gunk from which to make mucous (Mmm, tasty) and by feeding a fever, you fuel your body's attempt to fry the bugs. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Morality
On 9/8/06, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In normal binary logic (true/false) these are equivalent since ~true (NOT true) = false (and ~false = true). And in normal SQL logic, there is NULL, TRUE and FALSE. But if you imagine we are just computers, no wonder you won't make room for faith. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Morality
Nick said: And in normal SQL logic, there is NULL, TRUE and FALSE. But if you imagine we are just computers, no wonder you won't make room for faith. NULL values are the work of the Devil! Rich GCU One Line Reply ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Morality
On Sep 11, 2006, at 1:30 PM, Nick Arnett wrote: On 9/8/06, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In normal binary logic (true/false) these are equivalent since ~true (NOT true) = false (and ~false = true). And in normal SQL logic, there is NULL, TRUE and FALSE. But if you imagine we are just computers, no wonder you won't make room for faith. And you completely ignore truthiness. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Jobs, not trees! (Collapse, Chapter 2)
jdiebremse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip ...You mention that it was critical that they conserve these resources - and perhaps I am being a bit of a devil's advocate to ask why? So that they would be able to continue to build moai into the future? O.k. obviously the loss of the trees resulted in a demonstrable loss in quality of life for all Easter Islanders.I wonder, however, if the decline in quality of life would be an almost inevitable consequence of a society on such a small and isolated piece of land at that technology. No. In later chapters he cites a couple of other Polynesian islands that avoided ecological collapse by (1) strict population regulation and (2) cultivation of useful trees. (Japan was also cited for its top-down approach to reforestation, but you were specifically talking about Polynesians, IIRC.) These are Tikopia and the New Guinea highlands, Chapter 9. Tikopia is reported to be 1.8 sq. miles in surface, and to have been occupied [by humans] continuously for almost 3000 years. pg. 286, hardback copy. The methods used for population control varied from contraception through abortion, infanticide, and suicide-by-sea-voyaging -- not what I'd call ideal, although it seemed to work for them. :P Their use of a tiered forest for food and wood, however, was/is quite clever. Would it really have been possible for such a civilization to develop sustainable forestry technology? Yes - see the Tikopia solution. Although that island also has the favorable factors he listed for productivity (soil renewal by volcanism/dust, decent rainfall, etc.); Easter was poor in these IIRC. And if so, wouldn't this just make the moai construction an irrelevant detail of an otherwise almost inevitable outcome? No. Anytime a culture squanders its resources, it runs the risk of destroying itself; it may be made worse by the natural environment (like Greenland) or climatic change (frex the little ice age). An aside: has anyone proposed that part of what led to the downfall of Egypt was its resource depletion by building monuments to/for the dead? Although they certainly survived many centuries - and of course had a very large area to exploit, with neighbors to plunder and so forth. Debbi who got to recheck the book out, 'cause it wasn't on hold! :) __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
A great 9/11 surprise for me
I just blogged about a great surprise I had on the way home from the office this afternoon. http://www.mccmedia.com/cismblog/ I stopped for gas today at a station near my house. While I was kneeling next to the car to check my tires' air pressure, I heard something that sounded like a bagpipe. I looked up and sure enough, there was a piper, standing on the apron of Santa Clara's fire station across the street. I finished getting gas and went over there. The piper, who was wearing Scottish regalia with a Fremont Police patch on the shoulder, finished playing Amazing Grace and the hugs started. He said he had to get going because he was trying to get to every firehouse today. I talked to the firefighters about why 9/11 has extra significance for me... -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Jobs, not trees! (Collapse, Chapter 2)
At 04:10 PM Monday 9/11/2006, Deborah Harrell wrote: Japan was also cited for its top-down approach to reforestation I really would like to see them growing trees from the top down . . . -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Jobs, not trees! (Collapse, Chapter 2)
On 9/11/06, Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: .. No. Anytime a culture squanders its resources, it runs the risk of destroying itself; it may be made worse by the natural environment (like Greenland) or climatic change (frex the little ice age). An aside: has anyone proposed that part of what led to the downfall of Egypt was its resource depletion by building monuments to/for the dead? Although they certainly survived many centuries - and of course had a very large area to exploit, with neighbors to plunder and so forth. Debbi who got to recheck the book out, 'cause it wasn't on hold! :) I'm not sure the pyramids and other funerary things can really explain much of the ancient Egyptians. I mean, the big pyramids were Old Kingdom predominantly, and the interregnums, Middle and New Kindgoms were more inclined to rock tombs, and it was during those periods that Egypt reached its zenith and approached its nadir, no? Also, would the pyramids have had all that much of an economic effect? The farmers were not all that busy in the periods they were conscripted, and I don't think there would be much of an opportunity cost - if the farmers weren't working on various infrastructural improvement projects and vanity projects like pyramids and temples, what enduring gains could they have made? Not much; it's nowhere comparable to today where any nation that forced a sizable proportion of its populace to do manual labor on vanity projects would be eaten alive by the opportunity costs. ~maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
