From extropians-request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Mon Jul 5 11:10:39 1993 Return-Path: Received: from usc.edu by chaph.usc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+ucs-3.0) id AA17914; Mon, 5 Jul 93 11:10:35 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: from geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu by usc.edu (4.1/SMI-3.0DEV3-USC+3.1) id AA02687; Mon, 5 Jul 93 11:10:31 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: by geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (5.65/4.0) id ; Mon, 5 Jul 93 13:59:14 -0400 Message-Id: <9307051759.AA27312@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> To: ExI-Daily@gnu.ai.mit.edu Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 13:58:52 -0400 X-Original-Message-Id: <9307051758.AA27305@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> X-Original-To: Extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu From: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Subject: Extropians Digest V93 #0375 X-Extropian-Date: Remailed on July 5, 373 P.N.O. [17:59:13 UTC] Reply-To: Extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Status: OR Extropians Digest Mon, 5 Jul 93 Volume 93 : Issue 0375 Today's Topics: (fwd) Fermat's Reported Proved 3 Years Ago [1 msgs] AIT VirtSem: AIT & Physics [1 msgs] AIT VirtSem: Does a String Have an Intrinsic AIT Value? [1 msgs] Citizenship [1 msgs] Fermat's Reported Proved 3 Years Ago [1 msgs] Ginseng Anyone? [2 msgs] Ginseng Anyone? (fwd) [1 msgs] HUMOUR: the anti-newage flame to end all flames (FWD) [1 msgs] JURRASIC PARK: truth stranger than fiction [2 msgs] MATH/HELP: curved analytic geometry? [1 msgs] META: List Statistics [1 msgs] META: anonymous list mail [1 msgs] META:anonymity and list rules [3 msgs] Meta: The new software [1 msgs] Nightly Market Report [1 msgs] PAGANISM: Reading List [1 msgs] TECH: Electronic organizer suggestion... [1 msgs] Thoughtcrime [1 msgs] email address list [1 msgs] rattlesnakes,gila monster [1 msgs] Administrivia: This is the digested version of the Extropian mailing list. Please remember that this list is private; messages must not be forwarded without their author's permission. To send mail to the list/digest, address your posts to: extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu To send add/drop requests for this digest, address your post to: exi-daily-request@gnu.ai.mit.edu To make a formal complaint or an administrative request, address your posts to: extropians-request@gnu.ai.mit.edu If your mail reader is operating correctly, replies to this message will be automatically addressed to the entire list [extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu] - please avoid long quotes! The Extropian mailing list is brought to you by the Extropy Institute, through hardware, generously provided, by the Free Software Foundation - neither is responsible for its content. Forward, Onward, Outward - Harry Shapiro (habs) List Administrator. Approximate Size: 52389 bytes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 4 Jul 93 13:09:40 PDT From: GRAPS@galileo.arc.nasa.gov Subject: MATH/HELP: curved analytic geometry? Anton asks: >Seems to me there ought to be ways to generalize the formulae of >Cartesian analytic geometry to curved spaces. Can someone suggest a book >that teaches non-E in Cartesian language? Try these (in order of usefulness- the latter ones may be too specific or technical)*: _Euclidean and Non-Euclidean Geometries_ by Marvin Jay Greenberg W.H. Freeman, 1980 _Differential Geometry of Curves and Surfaces_ by Manfredo P. DoCarmo, Prentice-Hall, 1976. _Differential Geometry_ by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer, Dover, 1977. _Geometrical Methods of Mathematical Physics_ by Bernard Schutz, Cambridge University Press, 1980. _Introduction to Differentiable Manifolds_ by Louis Auslander and Robert E. MacKenzie, Dover, 1977. *List generously supplied by Vince. ---------------- Amara Graps graps@gal.arc.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jul 93 17:56:11 WET DST From: rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray) Subject: META: List Statistics I posted this a few days ago, but it didn't show up. Number of users on extropians list : 178 Number of users on digest list : 88 Number of users on essay list : 210 Number of users on both mainlist and essay: 72 Number of users on essay list only : 138 Number of users on digest and extropians : 5 Total number users: 399 Only 65% of users are reachable by posting to extropians only. Also, 65% of essay users are not on any other list. -- Ray Cromwell | Engineering is the implementation of science; -- -- EE/Math Student | politics is the implementation of faith. -- -- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu | - Zetetic Commentaries -- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jul 93 16:13:15 PDT From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: (fwd) Fermat's Reported Proved 3 Years Ago Since Pandit Singh was kicked off the Extropians list by narrow-minded skeptics of yogic flying, I have been acting as his avatar. Pandit sent me this illuminating article, explaining how FLT was known to the Hindus many thousands of years ago. (I regret that the proof was written in Sanskrit, which the margins of this post are too narrow to contain.) The Vedas also contain proofs of FTL, as well as FLT. Yogic warpspeed. -Klaus! Newsgroups: sci.math From: ad656@Freenet.carleton.ca (Jai Maharaj) Subject: Fermat's Reported Proved 3 Years Ago Message-ID: Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 04:38:53 GMT NEWSITEM from Hinduism Today of August *1990* %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% "Since 1637, Fermat's Last Theorem has remained unsolved, despite concerted efforts by western mathematicians. Now, Dr. S.K. Kapoor, an Uttar Pradesh judge, claims he has solved the problem with the help of the JABALI UPANISHAD, devising five solutions to the theorem. The proof has been a particularly irritating conundrum to the math world because Fermat himself scribbled this ote in his book, "I have discovered a truly remarkable proof, but this margin is too small to contain it.' Yet, no one else has ever discovered it. - END OF NEWS ITEM - Hinduism Today is published by Himalayan Academy 1819 Second Street Concord, California 94519 voice: 510/827-0237 fax: 510/827-0137 TELEX: 650/2928827 E-mail: hinduism@mcimail.com %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Well it appears Dr. Kapoor beat everyone else to it! Please comment after you have checked out this news article -- that would be the *scientific* way. Namaste, Jai -- |_|_|_|_| jai maharaj |_| |_| mantra corporation jyotishi |_|_ _|_| 808-948-4357 jaimaharaj@mcimail.com | | | | | vedic prediction sciences ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jul 93 18:22:32 -0700 From: hfinney@shell.portal.com Subject: AIT VirtSem: AIT & Physics I've given a little more thought to Bennett's "logical depth" ("LD") and how it may relate to evolution and complexity. We know that the AIT information content of a string is the length of the shortest program to produce that string. The logical depth of the string is basically just the running time of that shortest program. Note that LD is not (and cannot be) the shortest running time among all programs which produce a given string. That's because there will always be a (long) program which merely prints the string, very quickly. So we need to constrain ourselves to the shortest program so that we have an unambiguous value for the LD. Bennett argued that LD was an objective measure of value, that something which is logically deep is inherently hard to produce. Most objects are logically shallow for the same reason that most are random in the AIT sense (there just aren't that many short programs). As I explained before, I don't view AIT information content as a good measure of what is increased by evolutionary processes (or Tim's GP Go tournament example). But logical depth is a better candidate. We do all this information crunching to come up with a good Go strategy, or a more successful genome, and it appears intuitively that there would not have been any "short cut" to produce the same result. In some sense, it seems like the only way to evolve people is by a long, compute-intensive process. We just wouldn't expect human-level intelligence to evolve from inorganic material in some short period of time. Intuitively, we are logically deep. So, it appears to me that evolutionary processes may be characterized by the production of logical depth. Contrariwise, it may be that normal, non-evolutionary processes do not increase logical depth, at least not by much. The planets travel around the Sun, but their orbits don't seem to be logically deep. Wind and waves may introduce some depth in the shapes of rocks and coastlines, but it seems like the amount of depth there maxes out after a few million years, and then we're just seeing variations on a theme, shapes changing but no new depth appearing. This would suggest that there are some kinds of physical processes which increase logical depth, and some which don't. What distinguishes them? Asking this question in the more tractable world of computer programs, we could say the same thing of computer programs: some run for a long period and produce strings of great LD; others run for a long time but produce shallow strings (say, a program which runs for gigacycles to output a string of all 1's); others run for a short time and stop. An interesting question would be, what (if anything) distinguishes those programs which produce high-LD objects from those which don't? Or, can we at least say something statistical about the probability that a random program will produce a high-LD object? Similar questions can be asked about AIT. Some programs produce a string with a high-AI information content; these would be the optimal or near- optimal programs for those strings. Other programs produce strings of low AI information content. Again, is there any way to distinguish these programs? Intuitively, the physical processes which increase LD have elements of replication, variation, and selection. It would be interesting to consider whether computer programs which produce high-LD strings had any similar features. Or, turning the question around, it would be interesting to take computer programs which produce high-LD strings and consider whether there are any analogous physical processes. I wonder if there could be non-living items of LD as high as intelligent life itself. Hal hfinney@shell.portal.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jul 93 21:12:09 EDT From: boojum!esr@gvls1.VFL.Paramax.COM (Eric S. Raymond) Subject: PAGANISM: Reading List > Correction: most Llewellyn books are rubbish, and Conway's in particular > are ABSOLUTE GARBAGE. True. > Just so. She's a fraudulent plagiarist also; many of her incantations are > direct rip-offs of some of the oldest bardic works from the Celtic cycle True, but not necessarily a condemnation. Remember her purposes, and consider what anthropologists call "folk process". > Also, this is a pretty mixed bag of stuff, which is good, but in case you > are not aware of it, there is a very big difference between wicca, "true > newage" (crystal mongering and aromatherapy, that sort of thing), > hermetics (Crowley, Rosy Cross, Golden Dawn, etc.), paganism in the > European sense (Celtic, Nordic, Graeco-Roman), paganism in the eastern > sense (Zoroastrianism, Egyptian mythos, that kind of stuff), and paganism > in the "primitive culture"/tribalism sense (North American Church, and so > forth.) To the rationalist eye, it's all the same, and pretty much the > same as any religion, but internally there are whole realms of difference. Very, very, true. I'll go further and say that this stuff only looks "all the same" because the "rational eye" is prone to its own kinds of limiting prejudgements. -- Eric S. Raymond ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 19:13:52 -0800 From: Bruce.Baugh@p23.f40.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Bruce Baugh) Subject: Thoughtcrime U> From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) U> Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 12:06:27 PDT U> Remember Orwell's "thoughtcrime"? U> Apparently the mere thinking of certain thoughts is becoming U> illegal. Indeed. Over in soc.bi there's been a lot of heat over the recently created alt.flame.faggots. At least one person working in academia seems quite confident that the mere existence of such a group is a violation of his or her "civil rights". Efforts to point out that probably lots more people find bi and homo people chatting offensive than bi/homo-directed flames have been unavailing. Bruce UUCP m2xenix!qiclab!therose INTERNET: therose.fidonet.org FIDONET: 1:105/7.0 DATA: (503) 286-3855 UUCP <> FidoNet(tm) Gate is a public service provided by therose **Reply messages should not be sent to/through therose.pdx.com** ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jul 93 20:18:09 -0700 From: hfinney@shell.portal.com Subject: META:anonymity and list rules /hawk writes, responding to an anonymous poster: > > Assuming that the list software could be altered to send the list to an > > encrypted anonymous return address, would people object? > > some may. > > > This could be reduced if unsigned anonymous postings were filtered. An > > anonymous subscriber would have to supply a public key along with the > > anonymous return address in order to post to the list. Then, unsigned > > flames would get flushed, and signed flames would receive the usual > > treatment. I think the problem is not posting FROM anonymous users, although that could get to be a problem eventually. Rather, the problem is the list rule against unauthorized distribution. It would be difficult or impossible to enforce that rule if there were list subscribers whose true identity was not known to the list managers. An anonymous subscriber could repost list messages and there might be no way of establishing where they came from. OTOH, it seems to me that this problem already exists to some extent; someone who wanted to repost a list message could do so using an existing anonymous posting service or remailing service, and there would already be no way of tracking them down. So I don't really think that allowing people to subscribe anonymously really hurts list security. As far as accepting postings FROM anonymous sources, I gather that we are already doing so since I've seen some recently. If these become abusive there might need to be some restrictions in place. In that case the proposed mechanism to allow only signed anonymous messages might be workable. As a small editorial comment, I favor the use of anonymity in electronic communication. Present network protocols tend to stamp every message with its source and destination. This impairs personal privacy, IMO, by allowing network snoopers to record and track public postings and even email. Current Usenet postings are being archived commercially, and no doubt law enforcement organizations are doing so as well. It would not be impossible for this very list to be archived, and for those archives to now or in the future be the property of people inimical to Extropian interests. If our posters were protected by the shield of anonymity, people could post more freely on controversial issues without fear that their words would come back to haunt them twenty years later. Hal ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jul 93 23:59:19 EDT From: The Hawthorne Exchange Subject: Nightly Market Report The Hawthorne Exchange - HEx Nightly Market Report For more information on HEx, send email to HEx@sea.east.sun.com with the Subject info. --------------------------------------------------------------- News Summary as of: Sun Jul 4 23:59:01 EDT 1993 Newly Registered Reputations: (None) New Share Issues: (None) Share Splits: (None) --------------------------------------------------------------- Market Summary as of: Sun Jul 4 23:00:02 EDT 1993 Total Shares Symbol Bid Ask Last Issued Outstanding Market Value ACS 10 50 - 10000 0 NA ALCOR 10 60 - 10000 0 NA ANTO - - - NA NA NA BLAIR - 30 50 10000 25 1250 CHAITN - - - NA NA NA DEREK 50 100 - 10000 0 NA DRXLR 10 60 - 10000 0 NA E - 100 100 10000 5 500 ESR - - - NA NA NA EXI - - - NA NA NA FCP - - - NA NA NA GOBEL - 50 50 10000 2 100 H - - - NA NA NA HEX 100 - 100 10000 1848 184800 HFINN - - - NA NA NA IMMFR 1 - - 10000 0 NA LEF 1 100 100 10000 1 100 LEFTY - - - NA NA NA LIST - - - NA NA NA LL - - - NA NA NA MARCR - - - NA NA NA MLINK 1 - - 10000 0 NA MWM - - - NA NA NA N 120 120 - 10000 0 NA P 50 - - 10000 0 NA PRICE 1 - - 10000000 0 NA R - 50 - 10000 0 NA ROMA - - - NA NA NA SGP - - - NA NA NA TIM* - - - NA NA NA TRADE 100 100 - 10000 0 NA TRANS 1 50 - 10000 0 NA WILKEN 1 10 10 10000 1 10 --------------------------------------------------------------- Market Summary as of: Sun Jul 4 23:59:01 EDT 1993 Total Shares Symbol Bid Ask Last Issued Outstanding Market Value ACS 10 50 - 10000 0 NA ALCOR 10 60 - 10000 0 NA ANTO - - - NA NA NA BLAIR - 30 50 10000 25 1250 CHAITN - - - NA NA NA DEREK 50 100 - 10000 0 NA DRXLR 10 60 - 10000 0 NA E - 100 100 10000 5 500 ESR - - - NA NA NA EXI - - - NA NA NA FCP - - - NA NA NA GOBEL - 50 50 10000 2 100 H - - - NA NA NA HEX 100 - 100 10000 1848 184800 HFINN - - - NA NA NA IMMFR 1 - - 10000 0 NA LEF 1 100 100 10000 1 100 LEFTY - - - NA NA NA LIST - - - NA NA NA LL - - - NA NA NA MARCR - - - NA NA NA MLINK 1 - - 10000 0 NA MWM - - - NA NA NA N 120 120 - 10000 0 NA P 50 - - 10000 0 NA PRICE 1 - - 10000000 0 NA R - 50 - 10000 0 NA ROMA - - - NA NA NA SGP - - - NA NA NA TIM* - - - NA NA NA TRADE 100 100 - 10000 0 NA TRANS 1 50 - 10000 0 NA WILKEN 1 10 10 10000 1 10 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jul 93 23:35:06 CDT From: ddfr@midway.uchicago.edu Subject: TECH: Electronic organizer suggestion... Ron writes about his favorite electronic organizer. I prefer a pocket computer. My Psion 3 is about the same size as his Wizard, similar in power, but thinks of itself as a small computer rather than a very fancy organizer/calculator/etc. It uses a GUI reminiscent of a Mac but specialized to a palmtop, contains a word processor (with on screen bold face, centering, etc.--saves in RTF for transfer to my Mac), a simple database program, a reasonable schedule, a programming language, etc. The newer version (which I do not have) has a spreadsheet. A truly lovely machine. About $400 including the cable to link to a Mac (PC version also available). David Friedman University of Chicago Law School ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1993 22:50:58 -0400 (EDT) From: schirado@lab.cc.wmich.edu (Schirado) Subject: Citizenship Regarding Anthony L. Hargis' post, and D. Anton Sherwood's puzzled query: The Frog Farm FAQ, and other relevant reading material, are now available for anonymous FTP from uglymouse.css.itd.umich.edu in /pub/Politics/FrogFarm. Individuals without access to FTP may request the FAQ by replying to this address. The Frog Farm is devoted to discussing the exercise and defense of Rights secured by the federal and State constitutions of the united States of America. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 02:42:19 -0400 From: Alexander Chislenko Subject: META:anonymity and list rules Hal Finney writes: >OTOH, it seems to me that this problem already exists to some extent; >someone who wanted to repost a list message could do so using an existing >anonymous posting service or remailing service, and there would already >be no way of tracking them down. So I don't really think that allowing >people to subscribe anonymously really hurts list security. It might be possible to modify list software so that it sends a slightly different version of the message to each subscriber. The differences may be subtle but recognizeable and unique for each user. This may let us track any messages that were distributed without authorization, and do something about it. We can't do anything like that to anonymous subscribers though; in the worst case, they'll just resubscribe with a new address. Though we might allow users to be anonymous on the list, if at least *some* trustworthy list members know their identities. That might be an acceptable compromise to many would-be anonymous users. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Alexander Chislenko | sasha@cs.umb.edu | Cambridge, MA | (617) 864-3382 | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Member: ExI, BCS, WFS, IONS, U/D Council, Foresight Inst., MENSA, AAA ;)..| |---------------------------------------------------------------------------| | This sig space is for rent - if you have any idea worth distributing, | | I would consider including it here. | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1993 23:53:37 -0800 (PDT) From: phoenix@ugcs.caltech.edu (Phoenix) Subject: email address list > > I've been collecting email addresses of interest to sf/fantasy readers, > fans, writers, etc. In a few days, I'll have the latest version of my > listing ready to post. > > If you're interested in receiving it, let me know. If you have a list to > suggest that you think I might not know about, let me know. Just saw this message; I'd be interested, please. -- ->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>{Phoenix<>Damien R. Sullivan<> X-) Kiljoy}<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<- || 6x9=42 | AIXELSYD | 1374245896=4 | Libertarian Dictatorship! || || Honk if you're American and have heard of Steeleye Span... || -==========================================================================- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 Jul 93 05:33:30 EDT From: "stuff available list" available on request--just ask for it! Subject: rattlesnakes,gila monster >From Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia: "In newborn rattlesnakes, the tail ends in a spherical scale. While all other snakes cast off this terminal scale at every molt, rattlesnakes do so only at their first molt, which occurs 7 to 10 days after birth. This last scale hardens into a pistonlike hollow structure before the onset of the second molting; it has a ringlike construction. During subsequent molts, this last scale loosens like all the others, but it is not cast off. In the meantime, a new terminal scale has de- veloped from inside this first one, and the new one has a greater diameter and holds the first one. Another terminal scale develops at the next molt, and so it goes, adding more and more rattles to the chain. Each of the hollow, podlike scales in the chain of rattles was, at one time, the closest to the snake's body. Thus, contrary to widespread popular concepts, the number of rattles does not indicate the rattle- snake's age in years. They show how many times the snake has molted and rattlesnakes molt at an average of three times each year. Rattles tend to break off and with an irregular molting schedule, there is no direct connection between num- ber of rattles and a snake's age." About those SW geeks who make bets on gila monster bites: I believe GM fangs are located in the bottom jaw. They have to flip over, and, because of the gravity feed feature, wait for poison to drip into the victim. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 20:53 EST From: X91007@pitvax.xx.rmit.edu.au Subject: JURRASIC PARK: truth stranger than fiction I have just read a brief report in the paper saying that a group scientists think that they have actually isolated DNA from a 65 million year old T. Rex. It appears that they may have isolated blood cells in the femur. The original story was published in _The Independent_. If anyone has any further information please let me know. Since it is July 4th I assume this is not an April Fools Joke. I guess the scientists involved are still trying to make sure that they have really found DNA from a T. Rex before making a more formal announcement. Sorry to be so vague the newspaper was fairly low on detail. If this is true we should all be hearing lots more about it real soon. One interesting thing was the obvious excitement of the reporter. This person definitely was looking forward to seeing one of these things moving around in the flesh. -Patrick Wilken x91007@pitvax.xx.rmit.edu.au ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 09:47:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Harry Shapiro Subject: META:anonymity and list rules Hal Finney writes: About the differents between incoming and outgoing anon. mail. a conscious being, Alexander Chislenko wrote: > It might be possible to modify list software so that it sends a slightly > different version of the message to each subscriber. The differences may > be subtle but recognizeable and unique for each user. This may let us track Our new list software is database driven so having anon mail (incoming or outgoing) would be difficult without a special agent being written to allowing allow anon mail to "TRUSTED" posted. Esp. in the area of out going mail, I don't think we would want to what anon. out going mail. /hawk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 10:23:25 WET DST From: habs@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Harry A B Shapiro) Subject: Meta: The new software Those of you interested in kill files for the list, might enjoy this sneak preview of the new code that Ray and myself are currently testing. This is a ack from the new code in response to an "::exclude thread" command: > Subject: List command processed > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Command: exclude thread > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thread "PAGANISM: Reading List" excluded. > -- /hawk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 09:18:47 -0600 (MDT) From: Stanton McCandlish Subject: HUMOUR: the anti-newage flame to end all flames (FWD) Picked this up off the thesegroups list, though you might enjoy it, considering the latest discussion. It does not necessarily reflect my own view, as I remain strictly neutral on the matter. McGee later stated that if we could all flame this well, flammage would be an interesting hobby, rather than "killfile fodder". Enjoy! Quoth Arthur R. McGee, verily I saith unto thee: [excessive pile of forward headers removed] > Picked this one up in alt.religion.kibology: > > >From alt.religion.kibology Tue Jun 29 08:12:28 1993 > From: kibo@world.std.com (James "Kibo" Parry) > Subject: Die, Jay, Die! [was: Re: My dictionary] > Message-ID: [more obnoxious headers stripped] > In article <20op1u$j1p@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> chawla@wam.umd.edu (Jay Paul Chawla) writes: > > > > Your dullness is very flattering. It shows your trust that I'll be > > so incredibly entertaining in response that nobody will mind. > > Jay, > Here's a dime. Now go buy two nickels. Oh, yeah, and I almost forgot: > have yourself completely encased in a ton of concrete and then dropped > into the Marianas Trench while a band plays the theme to "Space:1999". > > > PS I'm starting to feel that it is impossible for anyone to express > > negative feelings or intentions towards me. > > Jay, > I'd like to wipe my ass with your collection of rare hermetic manuscripts. > Then, I'd like to see you go for a swim in a pool filled with sparkling > cherry-flavored Citroma(R) laxative and piranhas which have been crazed > by exposure to the worst episodes of "Space:1999". Your remains would > then be framed and then vandalized by a trained chimpanzee named Floyd, > who would then receive his own TV series, making as much in a day as you > would in Avogadro's number of eternities. Your soul would then > reincarnate as a collection of rare hermetic manuscripts, and I would > begin the cycle of life anew, while reading a "Space:1999" paperback in > a porta-john. > > > I think it's the language's way of saying it loves me. > > Jay, > I love you so much I'd like to drill a hole in your eyeball, insert a > firecracker, blast it into space (not unlike the moon in "Space:1999"), > stick in a big vibrating dildo, and connect it to a fusion reactor that > would supply so much power your head would explode and vibrate > simultanously. I would have the Goodyear Blimp take aerial photos in > super-slo-mo. I would have Spot lick up the earthly remains, swig > Ipecac, and then lick them up again. > > -- K. > > =-=end cut=-= -- Stanton McCandlish * Space Migration * Networking * ChaOrder * NO GOV'T. * anton@hydra.unm.edu * Intelligence Increase * Nano * Crypto * NO RELIGION * FidoNet: 1:301/2 * Life Extension * Ethics * VR * Now! * NO MORE LIES! * Noise in the Void BBS * +1-505-246-8515 (24hr, 1200-14400, v32bis, N-8-1) * ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 10:31:29 CDT From: capntaz@dudemar.b24a.ingr.com (Heath G. Goebel) Subject: Ginseng Anyone? Do any extropians have positive/negative experience with ginseng to share? After purchasing _Smart Drugs & Nutrients_, I decided to try an easy to purchase nutrient as a test case, before deciding to order nootropics from overseas. I picked ginseng because of the long list of benefits including improved athletic performance. I bike ~100 miles per week, so shortened recovery times would be nice. I have transcribed the list of benefits below. Over the past month taking 500mg twice a day, I have not noticed any significant benefits. My warning bell/scam alert went off this past week when I heard Larry King promoting a ginseng product as a commercial during his talk show. ..... >From _Smart Drugs & Nutrients_ by Ward Dean, M.D. and John Morgenthaler, Unlike drugs which are designed to act against a specific disease or symptom, ginseng has a wide range of uses. Ginseng appears to function by acting as an adaptogen, a nontoxic substance that increases resistance to stress. Adaptogens have a remarkable ability to normalize conditions in the body, restoring homeostatsis, and protecting against stress and fatigue. Ginseng improves brain function, concentration, memory and learning. In addition, it can reduce or normalize heart beat, blood sugar, and cholesterol, stimulate metabolic functions, and increase endocrine activity. Ginseng can stimulate the circulatory system and digestion, quench free radicals, increase resistance to drugs, alchohol, chemotheraphy, and other toxins. It is known to improve athletic performance, shorten recovery time after exercise or stressful situations, benefit insomnia and sleep disturbances, stimulate the immune system, and improve sexual function. It is ginseng's ability to normalize conditions in the body that give it this rather long list of benefits. Dosage: 500mg to 3000mg per day in divided doses. ..... -- Heath G. Goebel, ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 09:46:09 -0600 (MDT) From: Stanton McCandlish Subject: Ginseng Anyone? I also get little if anything noticeable from ginseng. I've been taking it in light doses for a while now (about 8 mo.), and feel nada from it. But it's cheap so what the hell. Better to be safe than deanimated before my time! :) -- Stanton McCandlish * Space Migration * Networking * ChaOrder * NO GOV'T. * anton@hydra.unm.edu * Intelligence Increase * Nano * Crypto * NO RELIGION * FidoNet: 1:301/2 * Life Extension * Ethics * VR * Now! * NO MORE LIES! * Noise in the Void BBS * +1-505-246-8515 (24hr, 1200-14400, v32bis, N-8-1) * ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 09:52:15 -0600 (MDT) From: Stanton McCandlish Subject: JURRASIC PARK: truth stranger than fiction Wow, that was quick! I posted the original news that some lab people were attempting to pull off something like this, but I hardly expected the news of success within 5 years, much less 3 weeks! Please do keep us posted, this could be very interesting indeed! -- Stanton McCandlish * Space Migration * Networking * ChaOrder * NO GOV'T. * anton@hydra.unm.edu * Intelligence Increase * Nano * Crypto * NO RELIGION * FidoNet: 1:301/2 * Life Extension * Ethics * VR * Now! * NO MORE LIES! * Noise in the Void BBS * +1-505-246-8515 (24hr, 1200-14400, v32bis, N-8-1) * ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 11:57:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Harry Shapiro Subject: Ginseng Anyone? (fwd) a conscious being, Stanton McCandlish wrote: >I also get little if anything noticeable from ginseng. I've been taking it in >light doses for a while now (about 8 mo.), and feel nada from it. But it's >cheap so what the hell. Better to be safe than deanimated before my time! :) I can't comment on the effect of ginseng on your body. I have taken it from time to time and found the effect pleasing. However, i didn't take any prepared Ginseng. my GalPal buys various Genseng roots in our local Chinatown like "red and american white." I suggest you try it in its pure form. /hawk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 09:30:57 -0700 From: hfinney@shell.portal.com Subject: AIT VirtSem: Does a String Have an Intrinsic AIT Value? AIT information content measures the degree to which a string is (in)compressible. Tim points out that various amount of "programming effort" might succeed in compressing a string to various degrees. He also mentioned that, in practice, attempting to compress a random string will typically make it larger, since you have to add some compression codes. Specifically, where AIT measures the information content of a string as the size of the smallest program which will print that string, we assume that for most random strings the smallest such program will basically be the equivalent of "print 10110011...101001", something which just prints the string in literal terms. Since the "print" code presumably takes some room, the program would typically be larger than the string itself. Given a particular computer C, then, one would define the AI size of typical random strings of length n as the size of the smallest program to print those strings, and that size will typically be n+c where c is particular to the computer C and measures the overhead necessary to specify the "print" coding. One area that AIT does not speak clearly about is "slightly compressible" strings. In at least some computers C, the coding to specify some actual compression will be much larger than the coding for a simple "print". For example, suppose a string S consists of 3 1's followed by an algorithmically random string. To compress this one might try a program of the form, "print 3 1's, then print 0110011...101001". But certainly when written out in this form, this appears to be longer than the literal form of the program ("print 1110110011...101001"). The overhead to go from a simple program like "print" to a more complex one with loops, counters, and so on, adds a cost which is greater than the savings from this "slight" degree of compressibility. This suggests that for a particular computer C it may be that a large fraction of (conceptually) slightly compressible strings are actually not compressible in strict AIT terms. Until the amount of redundancy in C exceeds some threshold, it may not be worthwhile to switch to a more complex compression program. This isn't that surprising; Chaitin's information measures all have an O(1) fudge factor. He tends to think in terms of strings with grossly different information contents, in effect admitting that fine differences aren't captured well by this model. But I wonder if there would be some class of computers C which are more successful at uniformly compressing strings, computers which don't have this threshold problem. Ideally, for such a computer, 1/2 of all strings of length n would not be compressible; 1/4 of such strings would be compressible by 1 bit; 1/8 of them would be compressible by 2 bits, and so on. Equivalently, of all programs of length n, 1/2 of them would simply produce n-bit outputs which represent incompressible strings; 1/4 would produce n+1 bit outputs of strings which were compressible by 1 bit, 1/8 would produce n+2 bit outputs, etc. (I may be off by a factor of 2 here in some of these fractions; the numbers don't quite seem to add up as I have them. Hopefully it is a simple fix?) If such C existed, they would be good candidates as canonical computers for measuring AIT complexity. It might be easier to prove assertions about AIT complexity with such uniform measures. Hal ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 13:18:59 WET DST From: rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray) Subject: META: anonymous list mail Alexander Chislenko writes: >>OTOH, it seems to me that this problem already exists to some extent; >>someone who wanted to repost a list message could do so using an existing >>anonymous posting service or remailing service, and there would already >>be no way of tracking them down. So I don't really think that allowing >>people to subscribe anonymously really hurts list security. > It might be possible to modify list software so that it sends a slightly >different version of the message to each subscriber. The differences may >be subtle but recognizeable and unique for each user. This may let us track >any messages that were distributed without authorization, and do something >about it. We can't do anything like that to anonymous subscribers though; >in the worst case, they'll just resubscribe with a new address. >Though we might allow users to be anonymous on the list, if at least *some* >trustworthy list members know their identities. That might be an acceptable >compromise to many would-be anonymous users. I thought about this technique a while ago but it would only work if people didn't know it was happening (unless you have some kind of super stegonography technique). Anonymous return addresses will not be supported by the new software. The list software needs to know the address you are posting from if it is to process your commands, and the way I have set it up this just happens to be the same as the address you are sending from. (it also handles people who post from multiple machines/accounts) My original plan was to key the user database with a "list id/login" that way you could post from anywhere and it wouldn't care. (people from nobody@foo.bar would just have to tell the software an id/passwd if they wanted any commands to work) In the future I may do that, but for now, anonymous return isn't in there. Anonymous posting will be allowed, but I could disable it at anytime. (whenever something is posted by someone who is not a member of the list, it sends a warning to the listadmin but posts the message. That feature can be turned off and anonymous posts blocked entirely. We can also blacklist specific trouble makers.) -Ray -- Ray Cromwell | Engineering is the implementation of science; -- -- EE/Math Student | politics is the implementation of faith. -- -- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu | - Zetetic Commentaries -- ------------------------------ End of Extropians Digest V93 Issue #0375 ****************************************