On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, John Williams wrote:
>
>
> Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> How long is Anathem?
>
> 890 pages + about 40 pages of supplementary material at the back. I'm on page
> 72.
>
>> If it's under, say, 800 pages, I might pick up a
>> copy at FenCon and have it read by Christ
Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> How long is Anathem?
890 pages + about 40 pages of supplementary material at the back. I'm on page
72.
> If it's under, say, 800 pages, I might pick up a
> copy at FenCon and have it read by Christmas
Ah, well.
On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, John Williams wrote:
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> , I'm going to ask some questions that others interpret as setting
>> strawmen.
>
> I'm not saying don't ask, but I won't guarantee an answer. Although you
> wouldn't
> know it from my posts, I actually wan
On 12 Sep 2008, at 18:21, John Williams wrote:
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> , I'm going to ask some questions that others interpret as setting
>> strawmen.
>
> I'm not saying don't ask, but I won't guarantee an answer. Although
> you wouldn't
> know it from my posts, I actuall
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>, I'm going to ask some questions that others interpret as setting
> strawmen.
I'm not saying don't ask, but I won't guarantee an answer. Although you wouldn't
know it from my posts, I actually wanted to discuss science fiction when
I joined this list (
-- Original message --
From: John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>
> > Well, my mom seems to have a trouble with new things. She has a far
> > different
> > way of looking at things, and when I try to explain them, she keeps on
> > asking
> > q
Ronn! Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> That said, it's hard to see how this forced change is about anything
> else but money:
No, it is not hard to see. A lot of people appreciate the benefits of HDTV,
as evidenced by the number of people with cable who are willing to pay
extra for HD servic
At 07:54 PM Wednesday 9/10/2008, John Williams wrote:
>Ronn! Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Whether I am aware of it is less the point than whether little old
> > ladies living alone on Social Security need something else technical
> > to bother with.
>
>So, you think elderly women are too
> Liberal loud :-). Nice description!
reactionary conservatives loud, sarcastic and obnoxious!~)
jon
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Well, my mom seems to have a trouble with new things. She has a far
> different
> way of looking at things, and when I try to explain them, she keeps on asking
> questions that don't lead to understanding.
> She isn't stupid, but at 88 she doesn't adap
-- Original message --
From: John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> Ronn! Blankenship
>
> > Whether I am aware of it is less the point than whether little old
> > ladies living alone on Social Security need something else technical
> > to bother with.
>
> So, y
Andrew Crystall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> It's certainly something I'd want to know about (and returns on the
> voucher? No, not allowed so sorry) given that there are $50-60 boxes
> which give a perfectly good image output.
Sure, I'd certainly pay $10 or $20 for a better box. Which model would yo
On 10 Sep 2008 at 18:47, John Williams wrote:
>
>
> Andrew Crystall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Yes, and you get what you pay for - in reviews, that box scored
> > considerably lower than analogue TV.
>
> Yeah, don't you hate it when free things are of poor quality? I always
> demand my money
Andrew Crystall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Yes, and you get what you pay for - in reviews, that box scored
> considerably lower than analogue TV.
Yeah, don't you hate it when free things are of poor quality? I always
demand my money back.
___
h
On 10 Sep 2008 at 10:03, John Williams wrote:
> Ronn! Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > Is it digital-ready? As I've mentioned before,
> > one way of looking at that is as a way that the
> > manufacturers of the equipment and the providers
> > of programming have come up with to get so
Ronn! Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Whether I am aware of it is less the point than whether little old
> ladies living alone on Social Security need something else technical
> to bother with.
So, you think elderly women are too stupid to plug in a cable and a
power cord? Good thing they h
At 12:03 PM Wednesday 9/10/2008, John Williams wrote:
>Ronn! Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > Is it digital-ready? As I've mentioned before,
> > one way of looking at that is as a way that the
> > manufacturers of the equipment and the providers
> > of programming have come up with to get s
> Is it digital-ready?
i dunno, i have to have cable to get reception, though.
> It's nice that you do that voluntarily to
> conserve resources, but what about those of us
> who have had to do many of those things for years
> because of the economy, which continues to get
> worse?
i ch
John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>(I think the deal may be over now,
> but you can check with a web search). I remember at one
> point there was a converter box that sold for $40, so with
> the rebate people could get the box for no out-of-pocket
> cost.
The rebate is still available.
https
Ronn! Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Is it digital-ready? As I've mentioned before,
> one way of looking at that is as a way that the
> manufacturers of the equipment and the providers
> of programming have come up with to get some more
> money out of those who have been living too long
At 02:22 PM Tuesday 9/9/2008, Jon Louis Mann wrote:
>[snip for brevity]
>
>Sarcasm is the lingua franca of the internet, John.
As I noted a few hours ago on another list, on
one of the lists I am on there is one prolific
poster who frequently claims that he speaks
sarcasm as a second languag
Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> You might have problems with the part where you bury yourself
Good point. I doubt there would be a shortage of volunteers to help me
with the problem, however. "We will bury you".
___
http://www.mccm
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, John Williams wrote:
> But you have helped to break my connection to the marketplace! I gave up
> all my evil ways. Now if I only had 40 acres of land to live on, I could
> go bury myself in it and stop consuming altogether!
You might have problems with the part where you
Jon Louis Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sarcasm is the lingua franca of the internet, John. It is the signature of
> your
> suppressed hostility, and allows you to be critical without actually exposing
> or
> defending your own reactionary opinions (or actually refuting your
> opponents).
> > you don't get it john, the market is fixed; it is
> rigged by the plutocrats.
> Thank you, Jon! I've been so naive, but you have opened
> my eyes. Those
> evil plutocrats have really kept me down, but I won't
> stand for it any more!
> > they don't care what all this capitalism is doing
> t
Jon Louis Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> you don't get it john, the market is fixed; it is rigged by the plutocrats.
Thank you Jon! I've been so naive, but you have opened my eyes. Those
evil plutocrats have really kept me down, but I won't stand for it any more!
> they don't care what all this
> > the way i see it is focusing on cash returns is a BAD
> thing no matter how
> > efficient it makes the market:
> Good point. If the market were less efficient, almost no
> one would be able to
> afford computers or Internet access. Then no one would need
> to listen
> to crazies spouting n
At 03:25 PM Monday 9/8/2008, John Williams wrote:
>Jon Louis Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > the way i see it is focusing on cash returns is a BAD thing no matter how
> > efficient it makes the market:
>
>How would you allocate resources among all the people who say "if I only had
>this" then I co
Jon Louis Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> the way i see it is focusing on cash returns is a BAD thing no matter how
> efficient it makes the market:
Good point. If the market were less efficient, almost no one would be able to
afford computers or Internet access. Then no one would need to listen
Jon Louis Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> the way i see it is focusing on cash returns is a BAD thing no matter how
> efficient it makes the market:
How would you allocate resources among all the people who say "if I only had
this" then I could accomplish ___?
___
> The way I see it, a short-term focus on cash returns is a
> good thing for all
> but the most proven and talented forward thinkers. It keeps
> the market
> moving towards greater efficiency.
the way i see it is focusing on cash returns is a BAD thing no matter how
efficient it makes the marke
From: Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'm not sure that all that many people have learned not to be greedy and
> short-term focused.
No doubt. But some have learned that house prices don't always go up.
> My posting was ironically predictive, as my job fell victim to the market's
> obsession
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 8:33 PM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>
> Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > Look at what has happened in a traditionally
> > low-risk marketplace -- real estate -- lately. Even there, investors
> > started having crazy expectations. And yes, the market i
At 09:50 AM Tuesday 9/2/2008, John Williams wrote:
>Waste is not something that can be efficiently identified and
>reduced by politicians.
Indeed even casual observation suggests that the opposite is the more
common outcome.
. . . ronn! :)
___
At 11:41 PM Monday 9/1/2008, John Williams wrote:
>Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > What is important is that a leader take responsibility for his
> > administration. It is important that I am able to distinguish between
> > someone that has done a good job and someone that hasn't when I c
At 10:03 PM Monday 9/1/2008, John Williams wrote:
> Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > So who can we blame for poor leadership and the complete lack of a
> > comprehensive energy policy?
>
>The same one we blame for poor humanity leadership and complete lack
>of a comprehensive intelligent-d
At 08:20 PM Monday 9/1/2008, Doug Pensinger wrote:
>Ronn! wrote:
>
>The "4% inflation is unacceptable" statement was the Democrat's
>ridicule of Ford's "Whip Inflation Now!" campaign and it's "WIN"
>buttons. I'm sure they picked the worst figure they could find, just
>as whoever from the other si
Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For public companies, the "long run" is anything more than a year or two,
What is it for politicians?
> Who cares if the company will run out of trees, as long as it isn't going to
> happen until long after the current senior management and board are gone?
I
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:25 PM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>
> Sorry, I did not mean the groups to be mutually-exclusive or
> all-encompassing.
> Some posts seem to fit into both, some neither. But is was interesting to
> see how similar some posts appeared as far as faith in a pater
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:16 PM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> > Anyway, do you think that
> a logging company that clear cuts its forests will be the most profitable,
> in the long run, in a competitive market?
Well, I do... if by clear-cutting it drives the competition out of busine
Kevin B. O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> If the problem were not urgent, if we had the luxury of reducing CO2
> emissions by 30% over the next hundred years, I would probably agree
> with you. Tweaking market incentives would probably be a very good way
> to address that sort of problem. But
John Williams wrote:
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>> It is clear that climate change is not something
>> the market can handle in any effective manner. Only government action has
>> any
>> possibility of tackling this problem.
>>
>
> I do not have blind faith in governm
Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> If not, then somebody has successfully re-framed our conversations in an
> unfortunate way.
Sorry, I did not mean the groups to be mutually-exclusive or all-encompassing.
Some posts seem to fit into both, some neither. But is was interesting to
see how similar
Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'd say that the American free market is an illusion
> anyway.
I'd agree that the United State's market is far from free. I did not
intend to compare countries. Indeed, the more global the market,
the better, as far as I am concerned.
> So allowing a loggin
On 03/09/2008, at 6:58 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 9:41 PM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >wrote:
>
>>
>> My impression is that this list has an ongoing debate between
>> religous
>> people,
>> with faith in their gods, and government people, with faith in their
>> pol
On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 9:41 PM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> My impression is that this list has an ongoing debate between religous
> people,
> with faith in their gods, and government people, with faith in their
> politicians.
Eh? Is that sarcasm? I hope.
If not, then somebody
On 03/09/2008, at 12:50 AM, John Williams wrote:
>
>
> Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> Yes - regulations should be about putting a brake on waste and
>> environmental damage, unethical practices and exploitation.
>
> I don't understand the "yes", since what follows the yes does not
> agre
On Sep 2, 2008, at 9:28 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It is clear that climate change is not something the market can
> handle in any effective manner. Only government action has any
> possibility of tackling this problem.
That's been well established. The government does best when it
pr
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> It is clear that climate change is not something
> the market can handle in any effective manner. Only government action has any
> possibility of tackling this problem.
I do not have blind faith in government to solve difficult problems. The only
way
Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Yes - regulations should be about putting a brake on waste and
> environmental damage, unethical practices and exploitation.
I don't understand the "yes", since what follows the yes does not agree with
what
I wrote. Waste is not something that can be effici
Better to keep government as small as possible, not put our
politicians on a pedestal, and instead rely on ourselves and competition of
ideas
in a marketplace to determine solutions to problems. If the "gene-pool" of
ideas
is sufficiently diverse, then natural-selection in a free-market will
On 02/09/2008, at 2:41 PM, John Williams wrote:
> My impression is that this list has an ongoing debate between
> religous people,
> with faith in their gods, and government people, with faith in their
> politicians.
I'm neither of those. I'm not sure how long you've been lurking, but
this
Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> What is important is that a leader take responsibility for his
> administration. It is important that I am able to distinguish between
> someone that has done a good job and someone that hasn't when I cast my
> vote.
>
> So in that case, yea, blame is pretty
John wrote:
>
> > So who can we blame for poor leadership and the complete lack of a
> > comprehensive energy policy?
>
> The same one we blame for poor humanity leadership and complete lack
> of a comprehensive intelligent-design policy?
>
> Sorry for the sarcasm, but is blame so important?
No
Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So who can we blame for poor leadership and the complete lack of a
> comprehensive energy policy?
The same one we blame for poor humanity leadership and complete lack
of a comprehensive intelligent-design policy?
Sorry for the sarcasm, but is blame so impor
Ronn! wrote:
The "4% inflation is unacceptable" statement was the Democrat's
ridicule of Ford's "Whip Inflation Now!" campaign and it's "WIN"
buttons. I'm sure they picked the worst figure they could find, just
as whoever from the other side who came up with the "Carter said 4%
inflation was una
At 06:17 PM Friday 8/29/2008, Doug Pensinger wrote:
> Ronn! wrote:
>
> >
> > Being there.
> >
> > A faulty memory is a poor cite.
That is an obvious statement with which anyone would have to agree. ;)
> Not only wasn't inflation anywhere near
>20% during the Carter administration,
Some
> > I'm pretty sure it never got into the 20s for any sustained period.
>
> I am having a hard time finding good numbers, but one reference on the
> web (http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/H/1990/ch8_p21.htm) put it above 20% in
> 1980.
>
> Dave
Well, IIRC, the primary source for this is the Bureau of La
Ronn! wrote:
>
> Being there.
>
> A faulty memory is a poor cite. Not only wasn't inflation anywhere near
20% during the Carter administration, it wasn't anywhere near 4% immediately
prior to his election.
Here's another cite to go with the ones already posted:
http://inflationdata.com/inflati
At 11:29 AM Friday 8/29/2008, Doug Pensinger wrote:
>Ronn! wrote:
>
> >
> > Or just remember the Carter administration.
> >
> >
> > He Said During The Campaign That Four Percent Inflation Was
> > Unacceptable So When He Got Into Office He Made It Twenty-Plus Percent Maru
> >
> >
> > Cite?
>
>Doug
> > I am having a hard time finding good numbers, but one reference on the
> > web (http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/H/1990/ch8_p21.htm) put it above 20% in
> > 1980.
> >
>
> http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-carterreagan.htm
The US Bureau of Labour Statistics places CPI inflation at 13.5% in 1980.
ftp:
On 29 Aug 2008, at 18:34, Dave Land wrote:
>
> I am having a hard time finding good numbers, but one reference on the
> web (http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/H/1990/ch8_p21.htm) put it above 20% in
> 1980.
>
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-carterreagan.htm
Second Hand Maru
--
William T Goodall
Mai
On Aug 29, 2008, at 10:14 AM, Dave Land wrote:
> On Aug 29, 2008, at 9:29 AM, Doug Pensinger wrote:
>
>> Ronn! wrote:
>>
>>> Or just remember the Carter administration.
>>>
>>> He Said During The Campaign That Four Percent Inflation Was
>>> Unacceptable So When He Got Into Office He Made It Twent
On Aug 29, 2008, at 9:29 AM, Doug Pensinger wrote:
> Ronn! wrote:
>
>> Or just remember the Carter administration.
>>
>> He Said During The Campaign That Four Percent Inflation Was
>> Unacceptable So When He Got Into Office He Made It Twenty-Plus
>> Percent Maru
>>
>> Cite?
Might Ronn! be conf
Ronn! wrote:
>
> Or just remember the Carter administration.
>
>
> He Said During The Campaign That Four Percent Inflation Was
> Unacceptable So When He Got Into Office He Made It Twenty-Plus Percent Maru
>
>
> Cite?
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/ma
At 07:30 AM Friday 8/29/2008, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
>I was just checking the evolution of PPI (PPI and CPI measure inflation
>in the USA), and noticed that _this year_ the accumulated inflation
>is about 10% (!!!)
>
>Welcome to Hyperinflation. If you want any hints on how to survi
Zimbabwe inflation rate is around 810% **per month**
!
c
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Alberto Monteiro
Sent: 29 August 2008 14:31 PM
To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
Subject: Welcome to Hyperinflation!
I was just checking
I was just checking the evolution of PPI (PPI and CPI measure inflation
in the USA), and noticed that _this year_ the accumulated inflation
is about 10% (!!!)
Welcome to Hyperinflation. If you want any hints on how to survive
and prosper under hyperinflation, just ask me. Brazil had it for
68 matches
Mail list logo
