From extropians-request@extropy.org Sun Oct 10 22:18:58 1993 Return-Path: Received: from usc.edu by chaph.usc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+ucs-3.0) id AA09072; Sun, 10 Oct 93 22:18:54 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 AA13450; Sun, 10 Oct 93 22:18:47 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: by ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu id AA12051; Mon, 11 Oct 93 01:13:34 EDT Received: from news.panix.com by ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu via TCP with SMTP id AA12046; Mon, 11 Oct 93 01:13:18 EDT Received: by news.panix.com id AA03568 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for exi-maillist@ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu); Mon, 11 Oct 1993 01:13:03 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1993 01:13:03 -0400 Message-Id: <199310110513.AA03568@news.panix.com> To: Extropians@extropy.org From: Extropians@extropy.org Subject: Extropians Digest X-Extropian-Date: October 11, 373 P.N.O. [05:12:49 UTC] Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Status: RO Extropians Digest Mon, 11 Oct 93 Volume 93 : Issue 283 Today's Topics: [2 msgs] BURGLARY COUNTERMEASURES [1 msgs] FWD: VR Systems Show in NY - free tix [1 msgs] Forward: Virtual City (tm) Network FAQ 1.0 (fwd) [3 msgs] Free Will [1 msgs] GUNS, SOC: Burglary and countermeasures [2 msgs] Hexum shooting blanks? [1 msgs] JUST: Amok-Time [1 msgs] Judgement Proofing [1 msgs] MEDIA: Oldest Cryonics Story? [1 msgs] MOVIE: Demolition Man [1 msgs] Nightly Market Report [1 msgs] The Biter's Manifesto [1 msgs] To nobody@alumni.cco.caltech.edu [1 msgs] Tolerance (was Meaninglessness) [1 msgs] WACO: plusgood duckspeaker Minitrue prolfeed [1 msgs] burglary survival [1 msgs] Administrivia: No admin msg. Approximate Size: 57069 bytes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1993 22:38:03 -0700 From: John K Clark Subject: Free Will On Thu, 07 Oct 93 20:23:45 GMT sjw@liberty.demon.co.uk (Stephen J. Whitrow) Wrote: > we could call this [definition] free-will(2):"An individual >acting under his/her/its own free will, is able to use the >reasoning ability of the brain in order to weigh up >the pros and cons of alternative actions, and after due >deliberation select that which appears to return the >highest value at a given micro-instant of time, as judged >according to current values, beliefs and >preferences. The individual is also free to learn from past >experiences and future simulations; hence current values, >beliefs,preferences, and even goals are not >stagnant but may be transformed in the light of new evidence and >computations.In other words, the algorithms are not constant." I like this definition better than the old #2 . This one is meaningful and useful but its not all that deferent from definition #1 (a feeling of choice ). I don't see how you could have one and not the other. >Free-will wouldn't be a Boolean quality, a thing >that you either had or hadn't Yes, I think that's probably true. Its a different subject but I think survival is also not a all or nothing matter. >We agree on the principle of downward causation, >where a higher level structure like the brain can be considered >as the proximate cause. The next question is >whether the conscious mind has properties above that of an >everyday data processing system . Let's look at something a little less emotional than free will , pressure. When I blow up a balloon pressure causes it to expand and eventually pop. But what is this thing "pressure"? Is it a mysterious non material fifth force that floats around in no particular place and causes things to expand? No, pressure is just a higher level description, a description of the collective motions of particles. The molecules don't know anything about pressure, they just bounce around according to Newton's law's of motion. Our tiny brains are not able to cope with the trillions of collisions of air molecules against the side of the balloon so we must go to a higher level description. In this example you lose a little accuracy but at a HUGE saving in complexity, in some cases you may not lose any accuracy at all. Although It is perfectly true that William Shakespeare made his living and reputation by putting a subset of ASCII characters in a particular sequence I think you would do better in a literature test if you thought about it at a somewhat higher level. Similarly it's usually not appropriate to talk about quantum jumps or even neuron firings when trying to understand human behavior (although Nanotechnology may change that) ; we use higher level concepts like reason, judgment, belief, preference, emotion and free will. Wow, all this talk about higher level meaning has made me hungry, I think I'll go to a restaurant, look at the air pressure graph I made at the last Beethoven Symphony and relax. >Although the hunger feelings may act as a >trigger you're still free to ignore them for one hour . If I was free to ignore them why didn't I ? Because I didn't want to. why? .... The point is it had a cause. >>Some drugs have the embarrassing side >>affect of making >us irritable. [...] Did the >>drug make me loose my free will? >>The world is full of drugs, some of the >>most potent ones made by my own body. > I'd say that the drug would have reduced the >ability to reason, and to objectively weigh >up the pros and cons of possible actions. Granted I was stupid but was I free? I certainly felt free. I wanted to pick a fight and felt better after I did, indeed , if someone had tried to stop me from making a fool of myself "for my own good" I would have felt that my freedom was violated and I would have been correct. >if people commit crimes because they're on drugs, or >they claim they can't control themselves >because of their "hormones" or something, I don't think >this should be an acceptable "excuse". Absolutely! Could not agree with you more. >Intelligence without consciousness wouldn't have evolved, >but we should treat the two separately. >A chess playing program might perform very well, yet have >no conception of the meaning behind the numbers it is >manipulating, I've never seen a chess program that came anywhere close to being intelligent so it's not surprising that it's not conscious either. Unless science comes up with a test for consciousness I think we should treat them as only one thing but keep in the back of our mind that the only consciousness we can be sure of is our own. >I'll wager that if a high-level function required the >particle to select a specific option in order to make things >work at the higher level, the particle would "just happen > " to select that option.[...] If you accept the principle > of downward causation then the high-level function must > be effecting causes on the particles. No, just as pressure doesn't tell molecules in air what to do The Will doesn't tell neurons in my brain what to do, they are just high level descriptions. Also just how high would this "high-level function" have to be? A big AI program? A massive NASA weather simulation? Or does it have to be made of meat? How about the brain of a dog, or a flea or does it only work for human beings? >for our example of a conscious mind this [ input / output >relationship] is only useful if we presuppose that all the >capabilities of a self-conscious intelligent being can be >reduced to an algorithm, Turing proved that any input / output relationship can be reduced to an algorithm ( except one generating true random numbers) but I admit he said nothing about subjective experience . I can prove your intelligent but I can't prove your conscious. However nobody could live their life that way, so I just have to assume that when something acts intelligently ( input / output ) its conscious. We should remember the immortal words of Socrates ( or was it Plato ?) who said " If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck , quacks like a duck then its a duck". I suppose it might somehow be possible that parallel processing could generate new subjective experiences of some sort but now your leaving science and entering meta- physics . Nothing wrong with meta- physics really, its just not my cup of tea. >It [a computer] can't ever prove that A * > B = B * A whatever the variable values, for instance. Just because a computer is made up of a lot of simple on - off switches doesn't mean it cant work at a higher level. Computers have been able to do symbolic math for years. In the 1950's Allen Newell ,Herbert Simon and J.C. Shaw wrote a program called Logic Theorist. It was able to prove the theorems in Principia Mathematica and some of the proofs it found were shorter and more elegant than the ones Whitehead and Russell found. What computers have trouble with is not higher math but more mundane things like pattern recognition, manual dexterity and that grab bag of skills and knowledge we call common sense. Only recently has much progress been made. One surprising thing computer science has taught us is that an enormous about of brain -power is needed to perform a apparently simple task like moping a floor. How do I pick up the mop? Is that dirt on the floor or is it a shadow? Should I move that obstacle or go around it? How long should I try to get rid of that stain before I give up. These problems don't seem hard to us because were very good at them. Natural selection gave a big advantage to those who good at spotting a saber toothed tiger hiding in the bushes but no advantage to those who were good at solving differential equations. It is not mere rhetoric to say that in an absolute sense a janitor has a more intellectually challenging job than a professor of mathematics ; But I digress. I think the heart of the question of the Will can be found in the un- controversial statement "Everything, EVERYTHING, happens because of cause and effect OR it doesn't". If it has a cause its deterministic. The cause may be pressure ,anger, gravity, reason, electromagnetism ,pain ,chemistry , love, ESP, influences from parallel worlds or devil demons from Pango Pango, it doesn't matter. The point is it has a cause. If something has no cause ,it is, by definition, random. It has no plan, no rule , no method, no aim. This would not be a bad description of the opposite of intelligence or will . If you can find a pattern in it then its predictable, deterministic, and can't be random and must have a cause. I just don't see any room for free will other than a feeling of choice. This doesn't mean freedom is not important. We certainly have wishes, desires and emotions, and the ability to do what you want to do, without interference is what makes life worth living. >Some time I intend to have myself uploaded, Me too >I don't want to wake up and find that >my bath's full of little green men Don't worry, there not so bad once you get to know them, now if I can just get President Clinton to stop blinking his eyes in Morse code on TV and sending me secret messages. John K Clark johnkc@well.sf.ca.us ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Oct 93 22:57:24 PDT From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: Hexum shooting blanks? > The actor in question was John Eric Hexum, noted more for his looks > than his acting capability or intelligence. The show Ray is refering > to was "Voyagers", which was one of his acting roles, but not the one > he died while making. He killed himself by firing a blank at his head > while on the set of the last TV series he was on (obviously), and I > can't remember its name. All this was nearly a decade ago, and those > brain cells have largely been killed off in the interim. And no, I > don't memorize this sort of thing -- I just remember it. > > Perry The t.v. show was about fashion models who were actually secret agents...I think. Good looking chicks, and Hexum, in a typical "high concept" (low-brow) t.v. series. I think Jennifer O'Neill played the "older" model, mananging the younger models (one of whom may've been Alexandra Paul, but probably not.) Sorry to not have all the details, but Anton could not be reached tonight. No, I did not watch this t.v. show, but I think I half-watched the pilot, circa 1985. Ironically, I have decided to let my cable t.v. subscription go away, to go cold turkey on CNN, CNN Headline News, CNBC, HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, Discovery, USA, and the other 50 channels of shit. Here in Santa Cruz, that'll mean about 4 local channels, of not great broadcast quality. The final straw was a combination of the $60 a month bill (3 outlet boxes, charge for remote, charge for FM, several types of extra charges, taxes, fees, etc., and the HBO/Showtime/Cinemax/Disney package) and the $40 "reconnect fee" they want because I lost track of a bill (as I sometimes do) and missed their deadline. They flipped a software switch at their headquarters a few days ago and my cable connection vanished...now they claim $40 is the fee to throw the switch in the other direction. (Maybe it's set by rules, as I can't imagine a private business losing customers this way.) If I let the service go away and simply pay my owed balance, I can presumably sign up again in a few months without paying this soak-the-customer fee. And in several months I may have gotten used to not having cable, even though I almost never watched it seriously....I just used to like to have it on. Meanwhile, I'll listen to more music. -Tim -- .......................................................................... 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: Saturday, 9 October 1993 22:13:13 PST8 From: "James A. Donald" Subject: GUNS, SOC: Burglary and countermeasures > >I would think it obvious that killing them is not the primary > >objective -- the use (or, more properly, the threat) of deadly force > >is to keep them in place for the cops to come get them. In <9310091959.AA18851@spooner>, cappello@cs.ucsb.edu (Peter Cappello) wrote: > > Understood. > > >If they sit quietly and wait to be arrested, then there is clearly > >no need to shoot them. > > dV/dt, let's say he politely declines your offer for him to sit and > wait to be arrested. He, instead, quietly gets up, and walks away > from you, towards the door with your VCR in his arms. > > Are you prepared to shoot him with the intention of killing him? Absolutely, and it is right to shoot him. > His kin will know you shot > him in cold blood for stealing your VCR. No they will not. Plus he probably stole from his kin anyway. Plus it is fortunes of war. Burglary is a dangerous business. Plus, letting a burglar know that you are not prepared to shoot is extremely dangerous. If you ever point a gun at someone for any reason, you have to be prepared to follow through on your threat. Are you suggesting that I should not point a gun a burglar and say "Freeze", or are you suggesting that I should do this, but not really mean it! If there is a burglar in the house, and I have the gun, then plainly it is my duty to both myself and the neighborhood to stop him if I can get the drop on him. If he disobeys, I should shoot. This a positive moral duty, not a matter of personal self interest. I have an obligation to make the threat. And having made it I have an obligation to carry it out. After carrying it out I do not tell the police "I shot him to keep my VCR". I tell the truth. I shot him because I said "Freeze" and he did not freeze. This is generally accepted as adequate grounds for shooting a criminal. Failure to freeze suggests that the criminal is going to respond violently to your threat. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves and our James A. Donald | property, because of the kind of animals that we | are. True law derives from this right, not from jamesdon@infoserv.com | the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1993 02:51:40 -0400 (EDT) From: bhaworth@acpub.duke.edu (W. Blair Haworth Jr.) Subject: WACO: plusgood duckspeaker Minitrue prolfeed Pete observes: > Let's see : ATF & FBI cause ~82 people to die, resulting in ~4 gestapo/agents > to be suspended w/ pay and one director to retire early. > Compare this to the Navy's tailhook incident : 100's of aviator's > careers ruined and a call to dismiss 12 admirals. Your Government, in its continuing quest for excellence, insists on only having Sensitive Guys drop cluster bombs for us. --Blair Haworth bhaworth@acpub.duke.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 93 07:53:12 GMT From: price@price.demon.co.uk (Michael Clive Price) Subject: JUST: Amok-Time Judge Death wrote: >> On your way back from killing all those evil NASA engineers and >> IRS agents, Tim, don't forget to thermite your local state school >> and medicare centre (bonus points for under-5s and cripples). [...] Major responded: > And try not to use any roads, or you might have to blow your own > brains out. > Its not a nice fact, but it is a fact: *everyone* receives benefits > from the state .... Exactly. I am very unhappy with this "guilt by association" idea. Historically it has been used to justify the most atrocious mass murders - often through a repression of self-guilt and projection onto others. Like the way the French turned on each other after WW-II and killed thousands upon thousands of "collaborators". Fact is everyone collaborated to some extent. To hear them talk now you'd think they were all in the Resistance. Makes me puke. My opinion of human nature is already low enough. [1] Don't force me to lower it any further with all this talk of taking out collaborators. We are all collaborators. Fight (or ignore!) the state, not each other. Mike Price price@price.demon.co.uk [1] Heard about the Polish Underground, battling against the evil Nazi superstate? Risking life and limb to throw off the Aryan yoke - except that is when they captured Jews. What did they do? Either shot them or turn them over to the Gestapo. Nice people, these humans. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1993 09:30:25 -0500 From: "Phil G. Fraering" Subject: To nobody@alumni.cco.caltech.edu To whoever posted the "Irn Rant" piece and the followup "apology" bit, I have a small request: Do you think you could learn about Carriage Returns? It would make the odd post of yours we have to read because it's in the middle of the digest a bit easier to digest. Hanno Digestionist ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 93 10:00:55 PDT From: mlinksva@netcom.com (Michael R Linksvayer) Subject: Forward: Virtual City (tm) Network FAQ 1.0 (fwd) I'm 111% for massive skepticism, but I think Derek Zahn may have gone overboard. I met and spoke with M. Strata Rose a few months ago and think I can vouch for her not being a "net.jerk" or having trouble finding work. Then again, VirtualCity or whatever it is called may be totally bogus. Hopefully I'll talk to Strata and see a demo in the near future. For better or worse, it is people like Strata who are building the net of tomorrow. Or people like Bill (Clinton). -- Mike Linksvayer mlinksva@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1993 13:19:36 -0400 From: xiaozhou@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kate Xiao Zhou) Subject: Tolerance (was Meaninglessness) At 8:04 AM 10/9/93 +0000, Michael Clive Price wrote: >I fear I didn't make it clear that Perry did have a better (read: >clearer) definition to offer - namely that of the competing protection >agency approach to define PPL. Each signs up the PA that totes their Cool. I read that as persuasive, and I agree. But it does raise a peripheral question. What does Perry's argument have to say to the Kitten Sympathizers when they imagine the possibility of an Incorporated District of Kitten Stranglers? You and I might be able to tolerate this, but presumably there might be some sort of behaviour sufficiently odious that even we would not tolerate it in others. Or is there - does our libertarianism allow us (or even compel us) to tolerate any and all kinds of mutually consenting action? I guess the default answer is yes. Any counterexamples? 1) If this line between the tolerable and intolerable existed, how would we draw it reasonably, critically, scientifically? Or is this self-contradictory? 2) Is there an alternative conceptual framework for thinking about this? 3) Is this just a debating point or are we likely to run up against a practical situation where we need to make such a judgement? Most of the historical practices or contemporary tyrannies that would top my list if I were going to go out there and 'do something' about my convictions involve non-consent (slavery still exists in Saudi Arabia) or some other convenient excuse. (This raises the question of when it's worth stopping even non-voluntary interactions. I don't particularly want to think of this in cost-benefit terms, yet I clearly don't feel compelled to act on all of my convictions. Is there a third way?) Of course, the kittenists would claim that kitten strangling doesn't involve the kittens' consent. But I'm pretty comfortable restricting my peace treaties to entities that I consider capable of understanding and respecting a bargain. (Though I guess this doesn't explain my unilateral disarmament regarding my 1.5 year old son.) Dave Burns tburns@gmuvax.gmu.edu (T. David Burns) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1993 13:19:52 -0400 From: tburns@gmuvax.gmu.edu (T. David Burns) Subject: The Biter's Manifesto > HOW YOU CAN BECOME A BITER: > >Write pithily, speak clearly. > Good advice, if vague. More concretely, practice and test your bite on a sample audience similar to your target audience beforehand. Otherwise, you'll get it, they won't. Orwell has some appropriately brief heuristics for good writing. I can't lay my hand on it at the moment, but two of them I remember are 1) use the active voice and 2) edit out most of your adjectives and adverbs. P.S. By coincidence I was browsing the ftp site at cpsr.org and found the Biter's Manifesto there under the filename 'crypto'. How curious. Dave tburns@gmuvax.gmu.edu (T. David Burns) 'Physician, heal thyself. Where's your UHS smartcard?' ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 93 10:55:45 PDT From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: Forward: Virtual City (tm) Network FAQ 1.0 (fwd) Mike Linksvayer writes: > I'm 111% for massive skepticism, but I think Derek Zahn may have gone > overboard. > > I met and spoke with M. Strata Rose a few months ago and think I can > vouch for her not being a "net.jerk" or having trouble finding work. > > Then again, VirtualCity or whatever it is called may be totally bogus. > Hopefully I'll talk to Strata and see a demo in the near future. > > For better or worse, it is people like Strata who are building the net > of tomorrow. Or people like Bill (Clinton). I met her yesterday for the first time at the physical meeting of the Cypherpunks (about 22-25 in attendance, usual discussions). She did not talk about VC, but later, at dinner, it became apparent that she's in "learning mode." I happen to share Derek's dislike for the overuse of *present tense*, as in "Digital Cash (tm) is being used." I also think cutesy trademarks (as above, and seen in many other business plans and visions) are being overused. Everybody seems to think that the act of _naming_ something is 90% of the battle in actually making it. (This is just a pet peeve of mine.) I wish Strata well, and I think MUDs/virtual realities are a powerful avenue to pursue...any of us who read "True Names" or "Snow Crash" and has seen the "Habitat" system knows this. Well, we'll see what happens. --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: Sun, 10 Oct 1993 13:16:34 -0500 (CDT) From: derek@cs.wisc.edu (Derek Zahn) Subject: Forward: Virtual City (tm) Network FAQ 1.0 (fwd) Mike Linksvayer: > I'm 111% for massive skepticism, but I think Derek Zahn may have gone > overboard. > > I met and spoke with M. Strata Rose a few months ago and think I can > vouch for her not being a "net.jerk" or having trouble finding work. Just to clarify, my critical post _did_ contain the sentence "Damn apathetic net.jerks", but was intended as a dramatic portrayal of the typical response of self-proclaimed net.visionaries when nobody devotes much time to their Vision. I have no reason to suspect that M. Rose is a "jerk" and regret any confusion. Similarly, I have no personal knowledge of M. Rose's history and on rereading it this morning, my "critique" was probably too full of bile; it caught a pet peeve at the wrong time. Still, as with all notes to extropians, it should be read in the context of discussion with friends about the broader world. Mike says that the Net is built by people like M. Rose. That's a pleasantly optimistic attitude and it has sweetened my disposition toward the project. Thanks, Mike. Still, the Net is built by actions, not fuzzy descriptions of faraway (and rather unoriginal) dreams. On Cypherpunks, M. Rose has apologized for cluelessness regarding public key servers, and went on to make more far-off plans for encrypted newsgroups. What possible purpose could be served by an encrypted newsgroup is left as an exercise for the reader, I guess. derek promising to think happier thoughts ------------------------------ Date: 10 Oct 93 15:07:45 EDT From: Sandy <72114.1712@compuserve.com> Subject: BURGLARY COUNTERMEASURES ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT Reply to: ssandfort@attmail.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Extropians, I was reminded of yet *another* story by some strange advice offered to us by Sean Gladfelter: I can see maiming a person [!, SS], , but not death over theft. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. If they steal your VCR, beat the person and steal your VCR back and his wallet :) While I was in Singapore, the Chinese businessman with whom we were doing business told us about one of his cousins, who was a very highly ranked contender in one of the martial arts. The cousin was preparing for a Singapore-wide tournament that was to take place in the near future. He devoted every hour of spare time to working out in the gym and sparring with partners. One night he was coming home after a particularly strenuous workout. As he walked from the bus stop toward the apartment complex in which he lived, he was accosted by two thugs, one armed with a knife, who demanded his watch and wallet. He was tired, and decided to comply rather than put up any resistance. After the thieves took his valuable, instead of just leaving, one of them went one step too far. He apparently decided the cousin was a wimp, so he taunted him by saying something about his mother and laughing. Was it the mother comment? Was it the laugh? We don't know, but the cousin proceeded to disarm the thieves, beat the stuffings out of them and recover his things. He started to walk away, but after a few paces, he turned around and returned to where he had left the thieves on the ground. He ordered them to give him *their* wallets. They complied. He took the money and went home. Think of it as evolution in action. S a n d y P.S. If anyone requests it. I will tell a fourth story: "How the Ethiopians Solved the Skyjacking Problem." >>>>>> Please send e-mail to: ssandfort@attmail.com <<<<<< ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1993 16:35:49 -0400 (EDT) From: "money inc." Subject: GUNS, SOC: Burglary and countermeasures Newbie. Bah! I live to argue. I'll go against any logical thinking for the sake of an arguement. :) l8 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 93 16:10:55 PDT From: martino@morticia.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Martin R. Olah) Subject: MOVIE: Demolition Man The greatest value of this movie is that it pokes a barbed finger into the eye of Political Correctness. We see how paralyzed a society can become when today's trends are taken to their logical conclusions. This, plus the pop culture, offbeat references, and inside jokes had me laughing out loud several times. The science was awful and the action was no better than average, but if you thought of the movie as a live-action cartoon it had some very entertaining elements. O Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- sig available on request ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1993 20:44:18 -0400 From: "Perry E. Metzger" Subject: Tolerance (was Meaninglessness) Kate Xiao Zhou says: > At 8:04 AM 10/9/93 +0000, Michael Clive Price wrote: > >I fear I didn't make it clear that Perry did have a better (read: > >clearer) definition to offer - namely that of the competing protection > >agency approach to define PPL. Each signs up the PA that totes their > > Cool. I read that as persuasive, and I agree. But it does raise a > peripheral question. What does Perry's argument have to say to the Kitten > Sympathizers when they imagine the possibility of an Incorporated District > of Kitten Stranglers? Pardon, folks, but I see my (is it my?) name is being invoked, and I've been bypassing this thread. If someone could fill me in on the thread thus far, I could perhaps answer this directly... Perry ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 93 18:39:19 PDT From: martino@gomez.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Martin R. Olah) Subject: burglary survival In <9310080635.AA17299@netcom3.netcom.com>, kwatson@netcom.com (Kennita Watson wrote: >> >> Except that I happen to know that in CA a permit is required to carry >> Mace, no. >It is easy to purchase pepper gas (more potent than mace, >faster acting) without a permit by mail order. Of course >it is legal to keep pepper gas in your home, in reach of >kids, and so forth. The stupid law against concealed >carry of pepper gas and mace does not seem to be enforced >very vigorously. Many places won't ship to CA, NY and some red-neck states you wouldn't expect, but it IS available. PHASOR is a mixture of mace and pepper which might work well. In CA it is not difficult to get a license for mace. I got mine at a local community college. Unfortunately it involves several hours of a mostly useless class(no hands-on, and little legal discussion) and costs at least $30 if I remember correctly. A few months ago someone used it at Disneyland, which got a lot of attention due to it's effect on other people nearby. It looked like a crack-down was imminant, but things seem to have quietened down for now. I don't believe that the punishment for unlicensed carry would be too severe, but that's just a guess on my part. I'm assuming most cops would ignore it. Mace is not best for all situations, but it is sometimes the most appropriate weapon to be carrying. Like anything else, you should practice with it occasionally. If you do it indoors you will even get a slight feel for it's effects. Although you must legally be 18 years old for a license, it is something children can also easily learn to use for emergency situations. O Martin ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 93 19:07:00 PDT From: martino@gomez.jpl.nasa.gov (Martin R. Olah) Subject: MEDIA: Oldest Cryonics Story? Last night I read what has got to be one of the oldest cryonics-type stories. It's called The Senator's Daughter and is about a women who has to be suspended until she is 30 years old so she can marry an Asian without her father's approval. The facility is called the Frigorific Refuge and cools people to the point of near complete biostasis. Ok, it's not exactly cryonics, but hey, this was written in 1879. Anyone know of a comparable story pre-dating this? The author was Edward Page Mitchell, from a compilation of his stories called The Crystal Man. I haven't read any more yet, but allegedly the story The Ablest Man In The World is about a watchmaker who creates a calculating machine and places it in the head of an "idiot" to increase his intelligence! And to think I paid 50 cents for this book. Library book sales are great. O Martin ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1993 22:57:31 -0400 From: Alexander Chislenko Subject: FWD: VR Systems Show in NY - free tix >From wixer!wixer.bga.com!fringeware@cs.utexas.edu Fri Oct 8 21:33:00 1993 To: sasha@ra.cs.umb.edu From: fringeware@wixer.bga.com (FringeWare List) List-Server: fringeware-request@wixer.bga.com Reply-To: pgm@world.std.com (Paul G Matthews) Subject: EVENTS - Free tickets available for VR Systems Show in NYC Sent from the cyberdeck of: pgm@world.std.com (Paul G Matthews) I have a bunch of free exhibits-only passes to the Virtual Reality Systems show in NYC. If you want up to two, send a stamped, self-addressed standard business envelope to me: Paul Matthews Worlds Best Three Crafts Road Gloucester, MA 01930 Tell me if you want one or two tix. Also, I'll try to coordinate rides and accomodations. E-mail or call me and I'll add you to the list. Show info: VR Systems Show, Teleoperation '93 and Beyond Speech Recognition shows in New York City running concurrently October 19-21, at the Hotel Macklowe, 145 W.44th Street (between 6th AVe & Broadway) 212-768-4400. Exhibit hours: 19th: 9 am - 7 pm 20th: 9 am - 7 pm 21st: 9 am - 3 pm BCS members get discounts: All conferences & exhibition: BCS members pay $700 until Sept 23, after Sept 23, $800. In both cases, a $95 savings. Single-day admission to conferences & exhibition: BCS members pay $275, a $50 discount. Exhibits only: BCS members pay $40, a $10 discount. For details, call SIG-Advanced Applications, 212-717-1318. -- Paul ============================================================================= Paul Matthews The Boston Computer Society Director, BCS VR Group Building 1400 (01) 508 283 9095 (home) One Kendall Square 508 281 2993 (office) Cambridge, MA 02139 pgm@world.std.com (01) 617 252 0600 _____ ____ ____ __ ___ _____ ____ /____/ \ /_____/\ /____/\ /_/\ /__/ /____/ \ /_____/\ | __ \ /| / ___ \/ / ___ \/ \ \\ / / | __ \ \ / ___ \/ | | \ |/ | /| \/ / /\__\/ \ \\ / / | | \ \/ | /| \/ | |__/ /\ | || \ \/___/\ \ \\ / / | |__/ / | || ____ | __ \ \ | || \____ \ \ \ \\/ / | _ / | ||/___/| | | \ \/ | |\___/\ /\___\ \/ \ / / | ||\ \ \ | |\|__ |/ | |__/ / \ \___/\/ /\/___/ / \ / | || \ \ \ \ \___/ / |______/ \_____/ \______/ \_/ |_|/ \_\/ \_____/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1993 23:54:06 -0400 From: Duncan Frissell Subject: Judgement Proofing K > * "Poison pills" that render attachable property worthless upon K > confiscation, or trigger harm to the confiscator in some way. K > These can take a wide variety of physical or legal K > forms depending on the property in question. K > K >I would love to hear some speculation on what some of these forms K >might be -- I haven't been able to think of anything more subtle than K >dynamiting the place. K > K >Kennita For Real Estate, one 50-gallon drum of fuel oil. When they confiscate your land, open the tap, $125,000 bill for hazardous waste cleanup. Duncan Frissell --- WinQwk 2.0b#0 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1993 23:54:05 -0400 From: Duncan Frissell Subject: Judgement Proofing R >Unfortuneately, there is no way to be completely judgement proof. The poor are completely judgment proof. It is harder for the rich but they can be *effectively* judgment proof just like PGP can be effectively unbreakable without being absolutely unbreakable. Duncan Frissell --- WinQwk 2.0b#0 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Oct 93 00:10:02 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: Mon Oct 11 00:10:02 EDT 1993 Newly Registered Reputations: (None) New Share Issues: (None) Share Splits: (None) Market Summary as of: Mon Oct 11 00:00:02 EDT 1993 Reputations of members of the Extropians mailing list: [ Note: Contact hex-request to have a reputation placed on this list. ] Total Shares Symbol Bid Ask Last Issued Outstanding AMARA - - - - - ANTON .61 .63 .63 10000 1943 ARKU .18 .31 .30 10000 5301 BLAIR .01 1.20 30.00 10000 26 DEREK .06 .19 .19 100000 18330 DRS - .15 .15 10000 2600 DVDT 1.70 1.75 1.70 10000 10000 E .80 1.00 .90 10000 8011 ESR - - - - - FCP .06 1.30 1.50 80000 15345 GHG .02 .30 .20 10000 8180 GOBEL .01 .25 1.00 10000 10000 GODII .01 1.00 - 10000 - H .40 .76 .76 30000 10290 HAM .60 .90 .90 20000 15918 HANNO .15 .24 - 10000 500 HFINN 1.50 6.00 .01 10000 1005 IMMFR .25 .70 .80 10000 1838 JFREE .02 .50 .50 10000 3200 JOHN .35 .40 - 10000 100 JPP .26 .29 .26 10000 3500 KARL 2.00 1.00 1.00 10000 1000 KNNTA .12 .19 .26 100000 9900 LEFTY .30 .40 .40 10000 4751 MARCR - - - - - MLINK - .01 .01 1000000 102602 MWM - 1.50 .01 10000 1260 N 5.00 9.00 9.00 10000 4750 P 22.50 25.00 1.50 1000000 94 PETER - .01 1.00 10000000 600 PRICE - .01 .01 10000000 1410 R .40 .80 .70 10000 6100 RJC .65 2.00 1.00 10000 5200 ROMA - - - - - RWHIT - - - - - SAMEER .30 .75 .61 10000 9810 SHAWN .55 .55 .01 10000 25 TIM 1.00 2.00 1.00 10000 1704 WILKEN 1.00 10.00 1.00 10000 102 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other reputations: Total Shares Symbol Bid Ask Last Issued Outstanding 1000 .05 .40 .20 10000 5000 110 .01 .10 .10 10000 1750 150 .01 .10 .10 10000 1750 1E6 .20 - .20 10000 8825 1E9 .01 .09 .20 10000 7000 200 .02 .20 .10 10000 5075 80 .01 - - 10000 - 90 .01 - .10 10000 2000 ACS .10 .15 .12 10000 3223 AI .01 .09 .10 10000 2000 ALCOR - .25 .20 10000 3675.00 ALTINST - .25 .05 10000 4000 ANARCHY .20 .90 1.00 10000 1100 BIOPR .01 .09 .05 10000 3000 BITD .01 1.00 - 10000 - BLACK - .10 .10 100000 5000 BROOX - - - 10000 - CHUCK - - - - - CYPHP .23 .25 .50 10000 8900 D&M - - - 10000 - DC1000 - .10 - 10000 - DC200 - .15 .10 10000 1500 DC7000 - .10 - 10000 - DCFLOP .15 - .15 10000 6000 DRXLR .75 .90 .80 10000 4545 EXI .11 .25 1.54 10000 3025 FAB - - - - - GOD - .10 .10 10000 3000 GOEBEL - - - 10000 - GUNS - .90 1.00 10000 3900 HART - 1.99 2.00 10000 9000 HEINLN .28 .30 .30 10000 6600 HEX 100.00 101.00 100.00 10000 4188 KLAUS .05 .45 .45 100000 34004 KPJ - - - - - LEARY .01 .50 .20 10000 1000 LEF .10 .35 .10 10000 5214 LIST .40 10.00 .75 10000 5000 LP .25 .30 .50 10000 5625 LSOFT .50 1.00 .50 10000 9550 LURKR - .01 - 100000 - MED21 .01 .30 .30 10000 5399 MMORE - 1.25 .10 10000 3000 MNSKY - 1.80 - 10000 - MORE .38 1.25 .75 10000 2660 NEWTON - .50 .20 10000 1000 NLAW - .50 - 10000 - NNLAW - .50 - 10000 - NSS .02 .03 .01 10000 25 OCEAN .15 .18 .20 10000 6600 PENNY - .08 1.50 10000 2500 PGP - 1.00 1.00 100000 2100 PLANET .01 .02 .02 10000 4000 PPL .30 .45 .30 10000 4600 RAND .18 .20 .20 10000 3500 RAW - .05 - 10000 - SGP - - - 10000 - SSI .15 .20 .20 10000 5200 TCMAY .38 .40 .38 10000 6200 TRANS .01 .90 .60 10000 3211 VINGE .01 1.00 .75 10000 3449 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of Extropians Digest V93 #283 *********************************