From extropians-request@extropy.org Tue Sep 21 18:57:49 1993 Return-Path: Received: from usc.edu by chaph.usc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+ucs-3.0) id AA02501; Tue, 21 Sep 93 18:57:40 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: from ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.ed (ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu) by usc.edu (4.1/SMI-3.0DEV3-USC+3.1) id AA25532; Tue, 21 Sep 93 18:57:32 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: by ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu id AA07384; Tue, 21 Sep 93 21:51:19 EDT Received: from news.panix.com by ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu via TCP with SMTP id AA07377; Tue, 21 Sep 93 21:50:35 EDT Received: by news.panix.com id AA19530 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for exi-maillist@ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu); Tue, 21 Sep 1993 21:50:31 -0400 Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 21:50:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199309220150.AA19530@news.panix.com> To: Extropians@extropy.org From: Extropians@extropy.org Subject: Extropians Digest X-Extropian-Date: September 22, 373 P.N.O. [01:49:38 UTC] Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Status: RO Extropians Digest Wed, 22 Sep 93 Volume 93 : Issue 264 Today's Topics: [3 msgs] -- digest on [1 msgs] --digest on [2 msgs] Der Krieger ist rechtig [1 msgs] Extropian response to expert advice? [1 msgs] Finished Selfish Gene; any comments? [2 msgs] GUNS: Buy now [1 msgs] LIFE EXTENSION: Sources? [1 msgs] META: Beat Up On Tim Week (was: Miscellaneous) [1 msgs] META: two lists [1 msgs] Meta: login from Unix Expo [1 msgs] Miscellaneous [1 msgs] Misrepresenting Objectivism [1 msgs] Recovering Objectivist Seeks Source Material [5 msgs] SOC: Nazi science [1 msgs] SPACE: DC-X Flies [1 msgs] SPACE: limits on launch costs [1 msgs] SPACE: limits on launch costs [1 msgs] Tech: Unix for your Mac $350 [1 msgs] The glorious POSTAL thread [1 msgs] WACO: Re: This Should Piss You Off [1 msgs] talk.extropians... NOT! [1 msgs] Administrivia: No admin msg. Approximate Size: 51946 bytes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 10:47:43 CDT From: eder@hsvaic.boeing.com (Dani Eder) Subject: GUNS: Buy now Here is an example I found in the McMaster-Carr Supply Co. catalog (they are a general industrial supply house): Republic-Lagun Vertical Turret Milling Machine 44" x 10" table (to which you clamp what you are working on) Table moves 29.5" left-right 16" front-back, and 16" up-down. Turret head (which holds a drill-like milling cutter) tilts 90 degrees left-right, and 45 degrees front-back. The head is attached to a beam which can slide 22" front to back, and the beam is attached to a column, on which the beam can rotate. So you have a total of 7 axes of motion to position the part and the cutter relative to each other. This is not a computer controlled machine, it is your basic manual-era milling machine. Weight = 2,600 lb. Price = $4,950. Add power feed for table travel: $615. Indexing chuck for holding barrel, about $500 or so. Replacing the manual crank handles that are used for positioning with stepper-motor driven mechanisms (like the motors in dot-matrix printers) should add a few hundred dollars per axis, with connections to a computer on the side. I would expect a complete system, including computer and software to drive it, can be had for around $10,000 today. Dani Eder ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 11:53:12 -0400 From: "Perry E. Metzger" Subject: SPACE: limits on launch costs Dani Eder says: > Re: long term potential of electromagnetic launch > Thus, the total launch cost is $403.33 per shot, or $4.03 per kg, [ultimate potential cost for EM catapult system] versus > Comparison with rockets: > add another $20/kg to this, for a total launch cost of around $40/kg. [ultimate potential for rockets] This is an order of magnitude difference in cost, which makes me think that EM looks like a good way to go long term. Is there anything out there potentially even better? Perry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 08:58:15 -0700 From: kwatson@netcom.com (Kennita Watson) Subject: Recovering Objectivist Seeks Source Material I have come to the conclusion that I am not designed to be an Objectivist. Unlike most people, I didn't choose the philosophy consciously -- I was brought up with it. So Ayn Rand made sense to me because I believed it, rather than the other way around. Note that besides having been brought up by a fundamentalist Objectivist, I have read "Atlas Shrugged", "The Fountainhead", "The Night of January 16th", "The Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology", "Philosophy: Who Needs It?", "The Romantic Manifesto", "The Virtue of Selfishness", "Anthem", and "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal", so I'm not judging on the basis of scanty exposure or of vague impressions. I believe that what will be most useful to me at this point are works that refute Rand's philosophy directly and cogently. Works that present their own philosophies, however self-consistent, without reference to Rand or her ideas, will likely not be satisfying to the side of me that is addicted to dialectic. Any you may know of that address the futility of reasoning about complex life situations from first principles (A is A, etc.) (assuming there are any such works) would be particularly helpful. I am NOT interested in starting an argument about the relative merits of Objectivism/non-Objectivism -- I just want a list of study materials. If any Objectivists out there are feeling put upon, please realize that I am not denigrating the philosophy -- it just doesn't fit me, and I'm trying to find a crowbar to lever it off with. If it works for you, great. Abundance and harmony, Kennita ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 12:27:17 -0400 From: "Perry E. Metzger" Subject: SPACE: DC-X Flies Dani Eder says: > Re: long term potential of electromagnetic launch > Electromagnetic > launchers are estimated to cost on the order of $10/kilojoule total > to construct, which gives a $50 million projected cost for the > launcher. > I should point out that > we are a long way from demonstrating an electromagnetic catapult > that throws large projectiles at 9 km/s, much less reliably for > years at a time, Another question comes to mind right here. A single space shuttle costs something like a billion dollars. It seems from what you've said that the R&D plus construction costs of a functioning electromagnetic catapult would cost something on the same order of magnitude. Would you say I'm in the wrong ballpark here? Perry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 09:17:45 -0800 From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty) Subject: Recovering Objectivist Seeks Source Material Kennita Watson writes: >I am NOT interested in starting an argument about the relative merits >of Objectivism/non-Objectivism -- I just want a list of study >materials. If any Objectivists out there are feeling put upon, please >realize that I am not denigrating the philosophy -- it just doesn't >fit me, and I'm trying to find a crowbar to lever it off with. If it >works for you, great. I think that Albert Ellis wrote a book of this sort. I can't recall the title, but I believe the name "Rand" appears in it. If my memory improves, I'll let you know. -- Lefty (lefty@apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 09:55:34 -0700 From: freeman@maspar.com (Jay R. Freeman) Subject: Recovering Objectivist Seeks Source Material > [ Kennita says she is not designed to be an Objectivist ... ] I'd be curious as to what philosophies do appeal to you, and as to the way in which you became aware of your anti-Objectivist tendencies. (Not that you have to talk about either just because someone asks.) In case anyone sends you EMail with "study materials", I'd be interested in seeing a bibliography. -- Jay Freeman ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 17:24:42 GMT From: price@price.demon.co.uk (Michael Clive Price) Subject: Miscellaneous I see Tim Starr still hasn't learnt the knack of giving informative responses. Instead he prefers shallow ambiguous responses, which, no doubt, he imagines are quite witty rhetorical devices, leaving the route open for retreat when his cover's blown. For instance: >> The fundamental objects of enquiry in science are defined in >> [an] operational fashion and tied to meter readings, gauges etc. > > Easier claimed than proven. So what are you saying, Tim? Agreeing or disagreeing? Is science non-operational? Do you have a disproof? I'm not going to waste time and effort painfully explaining how scientific concepts are defined operationally only to hear you say that you knew already. :-( >> Can you formulate an operational test of "existence exists"? No. >> Therefore it is a meaningless utterance. > > This not only presupposes a theory of meaning, but also a definition > of "operational." Do you lack an understanding of what operational means? Webster's 9th: Operationalism: (1931) a view that the concepts or terms used in nonanalytic [ie synthetic or empirical -ed] scientific statements must be definable in terms of identifable and repeatable operations. I recall there was a bit a discussion about Peircian pragmatism and logical empiricism (which promote the operational methodology) on this list just before Eric flew up the chimney :-) If you are ignorant look up the entries for pragmatism, Charles Peirce, and postivism in, say, the Encyclopaedia Brittanica, otherwise kindly address the issue here (of giving meaning to a non-operational utterance) instead of hiding behind a smoke screen of ignorance and rhetoric. These little irritations aside, Tim was slightly more informative on some other points: > It's not that I reject the methods of physics, it's > that I don't think they apply universally. Well, Tim and I will just have to disagree here. I _do_ think the methodology of physics (and other areas of science) is applicable universally. > Too many students of science specialize to the point where they > have no idea where the roots of their science are or came from. In my experience scientists know a lot more about the history and philosophy of science than the so-called philosophers know about science and the scientific method. > P.S. - Since Price fell for Burns' bait in committing the fallacy of > self-exclusion You'll have to explain this very carefully because you're so much clever than my humble stupid self, O Wise One. Mike Condescending Price price@price.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 13:09:32 -0400 From: Tim Freeman Subject: SPACE: limits on launch costs From: "Perry E. Metzger" >Is there anything out there potentially even better? I would expect the beanstalks in Robert Forward's _Future_Magic_ to be cheaper per unit of launched mass because there wouldn't have to be any losses due to drag. One landing object could be used to help launch another. Unlike the railgun, you could use it to launch fragile things like humans. To put it briefly, the idea is to have a long fiber going from the earth's surface to orbit, and to run an elevator up it. The trick is holding up the fiber. One proposed scheme uses a stream of electromagnetically propelled metal hoops; another uses a strong fiber that holds itself up by centrifugal force. There would be air drag losses on the metal hoops, supposing they weren't thrown in a hollow evacuated tube inside the fiber; I don't know how much. But perhaps beanstalks are more speculative than what you had in mind. Tim ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 10:14:17 -0700 From: dkrieger@Synopsys.COM (Dave Krieger) Subject: SOC: Nazi science >From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo) >Subject: Nazi science >X-Extropian-Date: Remailed on September 21, 373 P.N.O. [12:34:04 UTC] >X-Message-Number: #93-9-1108 > >Tim Starr: >> [Nazis] derogated and disowned [rocket science] theories as "Jewish" science. > >>From my reading of history I recall this in connection with >quantum physics and nuclear fission, not rocket science, which >was basically Newtonian physics with contemporary high-precision >engineering, with very Germanic heroes like Von Braun. Heh heh... Nazi Germany was not the only nation to canonize von Braun... visit Huntsville, AL, some time. As Alan Barksdale (who toured the U.S. Space and Rocket Center with me) or any of the Intergraph crowd can attest, that neck of the woods has a definite Wernher fetish. Every hotel has a conference room named after von Braun, and at the Rocket Center there is a mural/portrait depicting WvB as a godlike figure of cosmic size, with one hand resting on the Earth and the other on the Moon. "Our Germans are smarter than your Germans." -- Truman to Stalin (apocryphal) dV/dt ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 13:16:19 EDT From: Brian.Hawthorne@east.sun.com (Brian Holt Hawthorne - SunSelect Engineering) Subject: Recovering Objectivist Seeks Source Material > Kennita Watson writes: > >I am NOT interested in starting an argument about the relative merits > >of Objectivism/non-Objectivism -- I just want a list of study > >materials. If any Objectivists out there are feeling put upon, please > >realize that I am not denigrating the philosophy -- it just doesn't > >fit me, and I'm trying to find a crowbar to lever it off with. If it > >works for you, great. > Lefty replies: > I think that Albert Ellis wrote a book of this sort. I can't recall the > title, but I believe the name "Rand" appears in it. The Library of Congress (telnet locis.loc.gov) shows: 37. 68-21132: Ellis, Albert. Is objectivism a religion? New York, L. Stuart 1968] 320 p. 21 cm. LC CALL NUMBER: B945.R234 E4 Along with a slew of other fascinating sounding titles by Albert Ellis (things such as The encyclopedia of sexual behavior, The folklore of sex, and several editions of A guide to rational living). Sounds like I may need to look up some Ellis. Thanks for the pointer, Lefty. Rowan Hawthorne (R on HEx) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 10:23:22 -0800 From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty) Subject: talk.extropians... NOT! >Why not sci.extropians? There's _already_ an alt.extropians. Why don't you see if you can determine how much traffic it's had in the six or eight months it's existed? -- Lefty (lefty@apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 10:23:25 -0800 From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty) Subject: Using Bets to Incentivize Duncan Frissell writes: > >Total charges thus far: $19.00 I think that before Jeff badgers Perry any further about "clarifying" the terms of the postal monopoly bet, he should immediately send Duncan $19.00 to defray Mr. Frissell's expenses. -- Lefty (lefty@apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 10:23:27 -0800 From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty) Subject: META: Preaching to the choir (was: Using Bets to...) Jeff Fabijanic writes: >>I think Lefty's comparison to a graduate course is apt. > >I agree that there are strong parallels. Having taken more than a few grad >courses myself, I will say that in such venues, unsupported claims rarely go >unchallenged. I chose my comparison quite carefully. In the context I cited, no one, with the exception of the fellow who wandered in, would view the statement that "integrating a function yields the area under the curve" as an "unsupported claim". The fellow asking the question might. But he'd be _wrong_. At least in the context of that particular venue. He should go over to Calculus 101, study for six months, and do the homework. Then he'll be able to support the claim for himself. -- Lefty (lefty@apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 10:23:19 -0800 From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty) Subject: Finished Selfish Gene; any comments? >Am I the only one here taking the reading list seriously enough >to spend money buying the books? Certainly not. What in the world would lead you to assume that you were? >Am I the only one who doesn't have Phil in his exclude file? Heh. Soon, maybe. -- Lefty (lefty@apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 10:33:56 -0700 From: jamie@netcom.com (Jamie Dinkelacker) Subject: The glorious POSTAL thread Extropians! Today's _San Jose Mercury News_ ran an article credited to the _New York Daily News_ titled "But it didn't really have to be there overnight." Here are excerpts: "During the past three years, the Postal Service has audited dozens of corporations and fined them more than $500,000 in 'back postage' fees for shipping 'non-urgent' mail through couriers like Federal Express and UPS. "Under federal law, couriers may by used only to ship 'urgent' mail, which the government defines as correspondence requiring an immediate response. "'Postal inspectors are being used as marketing tools to lure businesses away from couriers,' said Peter Farkas, counsel for the Air Courier Conference of America. "The companies audited so far -- including GTE ... and Equifax ... -- are being charged fees for the amount the Postal Service would have collected if the business materials had been sennt by first-class mail. "In 1974, Congress amended the 1872 law that gave the government a monopoly on first-class mail by allowing private companies to transport urgent next-day packages." Since when did the Postal Service develop any sense of time? Of urgency? Of being able to tell what's good for business? -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Jamie Dinkelacker Palo Alto CA Jamie@netcom.com 415.941.4782 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 10:37:24 -0700 From: dkrieger@Synopsys.COM (Dave Krieger) Subject: META: Beat Up On Tim Week (was: Miscellaneous) I know I can hardly be considered an objective (pun intended) observer of this debate, being as I am firmly on the side of relativism and operationalism, AND I admit in advance to being at least as black a pot as the kettles at whom I am about to point fingers, but I think my allies are letting their emotions get the better of them: >From: price@price.demon.co.uk (Michael Clive Price) >Subject: Miscellaneous >X-Extropian-Date: Remailed on September 21, 373 P.N.O. [17:01:21 UTC] >X-Message-Number: #93-9-1125 >Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org >Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu > >I see Tim Starr still hasn't learnt the knack of giving informative >responses. Instead he prefers shallow ambiguous responses, which, no >doubt, he imagines are quite witty rhetorical devices, leaving the route >open for retreat when his cover's blown. And similar stuff by Perry, along the lines of "I did NOT call my opponent a sneaky, loathsome ass; I called him a sneaky, loathsome S.O.B." Mike, I don't know how this plays to a neutral audience, but it sure isn't going to convince Tim. I think everyone else has probably heard enough that they've made up their minds about which camp the fools are in, so I bowed out of the discussion some days ago. Can we just let this rest? Or, if anyone out there is still undecided, can they identify themselves so the combatants can continue to rant at them with private e-mail? Or, at the very least, can the discussants adopt a consistent thread prefix and stick with it (OBJ: or OPER: come to mind) to facilitate "::exclude thread OBJ:" commands? "Your discourse has become tedious. Now iss ze time on Shprockets vhen ve dance." (<-- hopelessly obscure pop-culture reference -- my apologies to non-Americans) dV/dt ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 10:49:37 PDT From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: Der Krieger ist rechtig Der Krieger Speiche: > "Our Germans are smarter than your Germans." -- Truman to Stalin (apocryphal) > > dV/dt Ja, das ist rechtig. Extropianism owes more to Nietzsche than it does to Rand, in my personal opinion (of course). Ideas of transcendence, supermen (ubermenschen), atheism, and rationalism are squarely in this tradition (though Nietzsche had a few mystical ideas, like "eternal recurrence," but even this can be generously interpreted). By the way, I take the broad view that nearly all Jews of intellectual importance to us had Germanic cultural roots. "Germanic" including the Austrians and even the Hungarians, of course. Even to the east, possibly as far as Alice Rosenbloom. Obviously I don't endorse the perversions of Nazism, which represents everything opposed to Extropianism (blind faith in dogma, genocide of entire regions, secret state police, socialization of industry, etc.) By the way, my ethnic background is Danish/Norwegian/Scottish/Irish/English, so I'm not interested in the German intellectual tradition for that reason. -Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 13:58:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Harry Shapiro Subject: Meta: login from Unix Expo HI, THis is kinda of cool. I am at the Javits Center here in NYC, working on the "mailing list :) /hawk -- Harry S. Hawk habs@extropy.org Electronic Communications Officer, Extropy Institute Inc. The Extropians Mailing List, Since 1991 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 11:03:39 -0700 From: freeman@maspar.com (Jay R. Freeman) Subject: Extropian response to expert advice? Steve Witham seems to have won the Extropian impossibility award this week by coming up with an uncontroversial thread topic. That won't do, now will it? 8:) Thus let me suggest a derivative thread off "Being w/Smart People": How do you respond when someone whom you have previously decided is smarter than you, makes a statement concerning his or her domain of smartness, of the form: "It's in your own best interest to do so-and-so, and I can't explain why because ." Plausible reasons might include (1) lack of time for the explanation; (2) lack of adequate background information on your part; and (3) lack of intelligence on your part. Simplified illustrative examples of such statements might include: (A) "This is the Captain! All passengers to the port life-boat deck!" (B) "The four-color theorem is true, don't bet otherwise." (C) "Vote for me." -- Jay Freeman ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 11:05:53 PDT From: desilets@sj.ate.slb.com (Mark Desilets) Subject: talk.extropians... NOT! > > >Why not sci.extropians? > > There's _already_ an alt.extropians. Why don't you see if you can > determine how much traffic it's had in the six or eight months it's > existed? > alt.extropians gets about 10 posts per month. Usually started by some guy wandering in and saying "What the hell is extropy, anyway? My dictionary has entropy, but not extropy", or "Why the hell would you want to upload/live forever/be a libertarian/start a postal service anyway?" It could easily be co-opted, but I agree that a *real* hierarchy newsgroup is a better idea. I like sci.extropians, but imagine there will be a stink about getting into the sci. group. I imagine we could easily get a misc.extropians, though. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 14:14:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Harry Shapiro Subject: META: two lists Someday, we will implement a feature that will allow the essay list to be a logical sub-set of the main list. Untill then, it is a seperate list, running on a seperate host (gnu) /hawk a conscious being, D. Anton Sherwood wrote: > > Dave Burns asked on 8/30: > > (. . . What has become of the essay list in the era of the > > new software?) > > I suppose essay-list subscribers could get the same effect by > "::exclude all" and "::include thread ESSAY", or something like that, if > we could be counted on to put in an ESSAY prefix. Otherwise, the two lists > are still complementary. > > *\\* Anton Ubi scriptum? > > -- Harry S. Hawk habs@extropy.org Electronic Communications Officer, Extropy Institute Inc. The Extropians Mailing List, Since 1991 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 11:15:32 -0700 From: dkrieger@Synopsys.COM (Dave Krieger) Subject: Finished Selfish Gene; any comments? >From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo) >Subject: Finished Selfish Gene; any comments? >X-Extropian-Date: Remailed on September 21, 373 P.N.O. [06:16:09 UTC] >X-Message-Number: #93-9-1083 > >> I'd love to read some F.M. Esfandiary, but can't find any. > >You're not missing anything. I think the only reason he's on >the list is he coined the term "transhuman". His basic Marx-style >modus operandi is to find a trend and declare it desirable >and "transhuman", eg there's a trend towards more divorce, so >transhumans don't care much about families, stuff like that. I think you're doing Esfandiary (or "FM-2030" as he calls himself nowadays) a disservice. For example, the trend toward divorce is not necessarily anti-family, but rather a move toward a more diverse range of styles of family, as opposed to the old state-endorsed, nuclear-style family -- we now have single-parent families, extended families, ad hoc families (such as, perhaps, Romana's Nexus Lite), but we still have families. His earlier works (particularly _Up-Wingers_) had, I believe, a seminal influence on the development of early Extropianism (long before FM started using the word "transhuman"). I like to consider his books as being sort of like Extropian poetry -- maybe not as "hard" (in the sense of "hard" science fiction) as _TMoF_ or _EoC_, but definitely a fun read. I didn't particularly care for _Are You A Transhuman?_ either -- reminded me too much of those bogus self-tests in women's magazines ("Is He Cheating On You? Take this easy twelve-question multiple-choice test to solve all your problems"). dV/dt ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 11:23:49 -0700 From: dkrieger@Synopsys.COM (Dave Krieger) Subject: WACO: Re: This Should Piss You Off >From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty) >Subject: This Should Piss You Off >X-Extropian-Date: Remailed on September 10, 373 P.N.O. [07:52:01 UTC] >X-Message-Number: #93-9-358 > >------- Forwarded Message >The United States Justice Department has requested that all files relating >to the Waco, Texas [Branch Davidian - David Koresh and friends] raid by >U.S. Government forces and the resulting deaths be exempted from all >Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) inquiries [...] >The period for comment on this action expires on September 15, 1993 (six >days from the date of this message), after which the files will be sealed >if there is no opposing comment by the public. So what happened? Did this monumental miscarriage go through, or what? Does anyone know? dV/dt ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 12:44:03 PDT From: thamilto@pcocd2.intel.com (Tony Hamilton - FES ERG~) Subject: Recovering Objectivist Seeks Source Material Kennita, Would have sent this private, but I do not get original sender headings, and it is out of my control. So, to the list then: I think I&O's Neo-Tech might be something along the lines of what you are looking for. Certainly no better or worse than any other philosophy unless you happen to agree or disagree with everything they have to say, but Robert Wallace (the author - now dead I think) does both reference Rand in some cases, and refutes many of Rand's conclusions in other cases. Given the amount of reading you have done, you should have no problem with the immensity of the Neo-Tech works. Only problem; I do not know how you can get ahold of it. To my knowledge, it has only been privately published, or "marketed" if you will. I haven't heard from them in a while, since I've moved many times and I think I fell off their mailing list. If you have problems tracking their works down (and the volume I personally own is titled "New-Tech Power" I believe, which encompasses a number of volumes), let me know. I'll try to help. Tony Hamilton thamilto@pcocd2.intel.com HAM on HEx ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 12:16:32 -0800 From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty) Subject: Misrepresenting Objectivism >>From: "Perry E. Metzger" >>Subject: Misrepresenting Objectivism >> >>starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu says: >>> >I was strongly under the impression that she refused to >>> >publicly retract her statements on smoking even _after_ she was diagnosed >>> >with cancer. >>> >>> Also true. She changed her mind, and she irresponsibly refused to make a >>> public retraction. >> >>So how do we know she actually changed her mind? > >She made private retraction, if Barbara Branden's biography, "The Passion of >Ayn Rand" is to be trusted. Which, IMO, makes her unwillingness to publicly retract her statements on smoking all that much more irresponsible. -- Lefty (lefty@apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:. ------------------------------ Date: 21 Sep 1993 16:36:50 U From: "Richard Ehrman" Subject: -- digest on :: digest on ::digest on ------------------------------ Date: 21 Sep 1993 17:14:14 U From: "Richard Ehrman" Subject: --digest on ::digest on ::digest on ------------------------------ Date: 21 Sep 1993 17:14:14 U From: "Richard Ehrman" Subject: --digest on ::digest on ::digest on ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 15:52:41 -0700 From: mcpherso@lumina.ucsd.edu (John McPherson) Subject: LIFE EXTENSION: Sources? pls@cup.portal.com wrote: | [...] supplements for improving life span or intelligence. | [...] I'm particularly interested in Mexican sources, since I'll | be in southern California for the next few months. A couple of years ago I went "shopping" in Tijuana, and found at least 5 pharmacies ("Pharmacia" I think they're called). They were almost all very helpful, but if you don't know some Spanish you may not succeed in some stores. I found: Nootropil, Hydergina, and I think I found a bottle of Diapid too. One store, whose name I don't recall at the moment, would even mail their products to me! At the time, I was a little paranoid about the activity so I never went back and I sought mail-order access instead (from Germany I think it was). At this point, however, I'd be curious to try it again ... so if you'd like, maybe we could go down there (as an Extropian alliance ;-) and hunt for some bargains .... perhaps others from the LA area would like to go too (I'd recommend taking a full day, so perhaps we could go on an upcoming Saturday ...). I remember something about a "3 month" allowance for such products when they're sent by overseas mail, but what about bringing them across the border yourself? (or is it generally better not even to bring the matter up to the smiling face at the border gate? ;-) JOHN ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 17:57:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Harry Shapiro Subject: Tech: Unix for your Mac $350 MachTen, a version of Unix that run's on your Mac, along with your MacOS, is being sold as a show special at Unix Expo for $350. It normally costs $695; this is the professional version. It is a complete environment including lots of GNU tools. There is also a Personal version for about 275. It lacks virual memory... and some other stuff, like gnu compilers... Like most show specials, you can normally call up the company a few days after the show and get order for the show special price. Their phone number is 800 6 Mach 10 /hawk -- Harry S. Hawk habs@extropy.org Electronic Communications Officer, Extropy Institute Inc. The Extropians Mailing List, Since 1991 ------------------------------ End of Extropians Digest V93 #264 *********************************