From extropians-request@extropy.org Fri Dec 31 15:03:31 1993 Return-Path: Received: from usc.edu by chaph.usc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+ucs-3.0) id AA01231; Fri, 31 Dec 93 15:03:28 PST Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: from news.panix.com by usc.edu (4.1/SMI-3.0DEV3-USC+3.1) id AA17825; Fri, 31 Dec 93 15:03:25 PST Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: by news.panix.com id AA28206 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for more@usc.edu); Fri, 31 Dec 1993 17:47:32 -0500 Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1993 17:47:32 -0500 Message-Id: <199312312247.AA28206@news.panix.com> To: Extropians@extropy.org From: Extropians@extropy.org Subject: Extropians Digest X-Extropian-Date: December 31, 373 P.N.O. [22:46:59 UTC] Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Status: RO Extropians Digest Fri, 31 Dec 93 Volume 93 : Issue 364 Today's Topics: PPL [1 msgs] Pets [1 msgs] Relativism&Nihilism [1 msgs] Social Security [1 msgs] Khmer Vert - Seal Rant [2 msgs] Mail Bombs [1 msgs] Meta: Announcing PPL-self! [1 msgs] Meta: Announcing Wolf's Head PPL [1 msgs] PPL: Has the experiment failed? [2 msgs] PPL: hnewstrom-ppl [2 msgs] Religion: Anti-Technology [2 msgs] TIM'S MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEM [1 msgs] Tech: Price of Macs vs. PCs [2 msgs] Administrivia: No admin msg. Approximate Size: 58172 bytes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 31 Dec 93 5:48:45 GMT From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu Subject: Social Security >From: plaz@netcom.com (Geoff Dale) >Subject: Longevity: Imprison us for living. > >One of the biggest reasons that social security is in the mess it's in now >is the fact that the law makers that created it underestimated the average >lifespan of the american population. Not quite. The legislators that originated it weren't concerned with the American population. From the ISIL pamphlet "Social Security: WARNING! Time Is Running Out On A Bankrupt System": "The origin of government Social Security was not American at all. It was created by the Prussian/German leader Otto von Bismarck in 1883. Bismarck was looking for a way to win the support of the working people, who were unhappy with the high taxes needed to support the large German military and the high prices created by the government-protected industrial cartels. "He wanted to find a way to con people into believing that they were going to get something from the state, without its actually having to deliver. He asked an actuary how long people could be expected to live. The answer was 65 years. Bismarck then set the age of eligibility for his social security system at 65, knowing full well that most of the people would have died before they received a dime from the system... "During the 1930s in the United States, FDR was looking a way to gain the support of the working people who were unhappy with the continuing Great Depression and the high taxes needed to support the New Deal. So the Social Security program was created in 1935 (just in time for the election the following year)." I wanted this to be nastier to FDR, but got vetoed. >As >the Billary Unhealth Plan threatens the Insurance Industry you may see more >insurance companies refuse to write policies with cryonics companies as >benificiaries. (Maybe, maybe not.) That doesn't affect life insurance, it affects health insurance, which hasn't really been insurance for decades. Health "insurance" is actually pre-paid consumption, not based on risk-management (essentially you betting your insurer that you'll get sick accidentally). Further, her plan wouldn't threaten the health "insurance" industry even if it went through, which it won't. It would just get rid of all those nasty little competitors for the benefit of the Big Five - unnecessary "friction," don't you know. Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! Assistant Editor: Freedom Network News, the newsletter of ISIL, The International Society for Individual Liberty, 1800 Market St., San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 864-0952; FAX: (415) 864-7506; 71034.2711@compuserve.com Think Universally, Act Selfishly - starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 93 5:49:30 GMT From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu Subject: Relativism&Nihilism >From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo) >Subject: PHIL/MORALS: absolutism, relativism, and all that (fwd) > >Well said, Han Huang! I thought it was all wrong. >Such confusion of relativism and nihilism >is commonplace; I even seem to recall catching my moral >philosophy instructor at it in college. They aren't the same, but they do overlap. Relativism is nihilistic, but nihilism doesn't have to be relativistic. Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! Assistant Editor: Freedom Network News, the newsletter of ISIL, The International Society for Individual Liberty, 1800 Market St., San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 864-0952; FAX: (415) 864-7506; 71034.2711@compuserve.com Think Universally, Act Selfishly - starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 93 01:15:57 EST From: Harvey Newstrom Subject: Meta: Announcing PPL-self! Dan Davis correctly states: >Phooey. This PPL dance has gotten pretty silly. The List Gods can and >will enforce whatever punishments they want. They are the only ones >with the *power* to do so. And then Dan Davis dares, no double-dares, no double-dog-dares: >Harvey, please go ahead and form your voluntary association >without writing on the blackboard 100 times "I will not coerce". Civil >Disobedience, to the end! The ensuing scenes may be quite a hoot. Announcing PPL-self! I may have been the first to declare that I am leaving PPL-1 and not joining any PPL. I may have been the first to declare that I want no PPL "protecting" me against my will. But do not be confused: I am not in any way a founder or controller of PPL-self. PPL-self is an innate right of each person which can only be self-declared. All governing bodies which claim to control other people by "default" without requiring that person's knowledge or consent, are by Extropian definition "EVIL"! Here's how PPL-self works: 1. Declare that you do not want to be in any PPL. 2. Affirm that you never joined PPL-1 and never requested its "protection." 3. Reaffirm that you will obey all basic List Rules as portrayed in the Welcome message. Reaffirm that you do this because of your agreement to the terms and conditions of the Welcome Message received when you joined the List, and not due to the coersive institution of force from any governing person or body. 4. Denounce the idea that you will be coerced into any membership or any contractual agreement against your will. 5. Denounce the idea that your agreements orginally confirmed upon your joining can be modified without your consent. Although ExI can terminate its service of the List to you, this does not mean that you have agreed to every decree that has been made in the name of PPL-1. 6. Denounce the idea that you are supporting PPL-1 or any PPL by silence. Denounce the idea that you automatically agree with PPL-1 or any PPL by virtue of not starting a competing PPL. Declare that your opinions are unknown until specifically stated by you. Declare that no one speaks for you except for yourself. 7. Announce that you will defend yourself as needed and will not resort to any governing authority. Use ::exclude commands to gain protection from someone' posts. Post evidence exposing false claims perpetrated against you. Use logic to defuse false arguments made against you. 8. Realize that PPL-1 may still claim you as a "default" member even if you do not sanction this claim. Realize that any PPL may claim you as a member even if you do not sanction this claim. Realize that persons and bodies will give credence to the authority they most believe. Realize that you may be harmed by people who believe that you are in a PPL based on that PPL's claims over your own claims. 9. Realize that words on a screen cannot hurt you. Stay calm and logical. Realize that emotions will flare, but that you are in no physical danger. 10. Realize that ::excluding a post or thread is always your valid right. You do not have to respond to e-mail you wish to ignore. 11. Realize that preventing other people from posting or e-mailing is not a right. If you don't want to see what a person writes, ::exclude it. Do not seek to have that person's right to write modified. 12. Realize that although Harvey Newstrom may be the first to claim these rights of self-determination, and he may be the first to post an enumerated list of these rights, he in no way defines these rights for anyone else. All self-governing people have to declare their own self-determination. Since this PPL of self rule is not "run" by any central authority, and that every self-declared member of this PPL is authorized to be the PPL arbitor in cases dealing with themselves, there is no central authority for Harry to approve as being capable of running it. Certainly, the "nobody" who is in charge is qualified to do the "nothing" that is expected. Harry may claim the right to approve every individual membership declaration on a case-by-case basis. Of course all members will join this PPL at their own risk. The PPL takes no responsibility for any individual's actions. __ Harvey Newstrom (hnewstrom@hnewstrom.ess.harris.com) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 22:17:49 -0800 (PST) From: Oliver Seiler Subject: Tech: Price of Macs vs. PCs On Thu, 30 Dec 1993, Ray wrote: > Phil G. Fraering writes: > > > > Harvey was writing about the list of things Macs come with > > that PC's don't and you have to pay extra for... > > > > Do I remember wrong, but do Mac's have built-in SCSI still? > > Yeah, but I don't think it's DMA driven which means it will > impact the CPU during I/O. Compare the Amiga3000 where a transfer of 1mb/s > from the HD uses only 5% CPU but 50% on the Amiga4000's polled I/O > interface. The result is that the 4000's 68040 is slower running animation > from the HD than the 68030 driven 3000. DMA buys you performance. > Maybe the AV macs have higher performance SCSI. (ok, so I'm a > perforance freak) The 3000's have great SCSI performance, although I'm not familiar with the 4000's performance enough to comment. Is this performance with the built-in IDE interface, or with the 4091 (or equivalent) SCSI-2 board? With or without the fixed Buster chip (not sure how much of a difference this makes to speed, since I don't deal much on hardware related aspects)... I'm hoping this will be fixed in the 68060 version of the A4000 and next years (yet to be truly named) A5000 (which will probably no longer use Motorola and move to HP-PA RISC's...) -Oliver | Oliver Seiler + Erisian Development Group + Amiga Developer + | oseiler@unixg.ubc.ca +-------------Reality by the Slice--------------+ | oseiler@nyx.cs.du.edu | Phone: (604) 683-5364 Fax: (604) 683-6142 | | ollie@BIX.com | POB 3547, MPO, Vancouver, BC, CANADA V6B 3Y6 | ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 93 6:26:08 GMT From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu Subject: Pets >From: Daniel Lam >Subject: FOOD: Domestic Pets > >Timothy C. May >> Oh, and in _my_ PPL I would >> certainly take steps to stop others from raising and eating dogs and >> cats. Morality is aesthetics---and what you're prepared to confront.) > >Now I'm really confused. Tim says that he does not care about people >he does not know. Why then does he object to other people eating >their own cats and dogs? If he doesn't give a damn what happens to >strange people, what should he feel upset at strange cats being >stewed? Because he holds most of humanity in contempt, that's why. Most ideologues do because they're alienated from society. Anyone got the clinical definition of "sociopath" handy? Can't seem to find it amongst my resources. >I can certainly understand the point about aesthetics. Pfeh. Anyone who thinks morality reduces to aesthetics knows nothing about morality, aesthetics, or reductionism. Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! Assistant Editor: Freedom Network News, the newsletter of ISIL, The International Society for Individual Liberty, 1800 Market St., San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 864-0952; FAX: (415) 864-7506; 71034.2711@compuserve.com Think Universally, Act Selfishly - starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 93 02:32:27 EST From: Harvey Newstrom Subject: Religion: Anti-Technology I was just flipping channels and ran into the Christian Broadcasting Network's "700 Club Newswatch" program. In a news-report format they "examined" the information age with its computers, interactive TV, networking and virtual reality. Without being specifically clear, these all were represented as bad things happening to society and undermining religeous beliefs and "The Family." I knew that reliance on God would lessen reliance on technology, but I didn't realize to what extent it was actually being taught that advances in computers and networks are bad! __ Harvey Newstrom (hnewstrom@hnewstrom.ess.harris.com) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 93 2:36:20 WET From: rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray) Subject: Tech: Price of Macs vs. PCs Oliver Seiler writes: > > > > Yeah, but I don't think it's DMA driven which means it will > > impact the CPU during I/O. Compare the Amiga3000 where a transfer of 1mb/s > > from the HD uses only 5% CPU but 50% on the Amiga4000's polled I/O > The 3000's have great SCSI performance, although I'm not familiar with the > 4000's performance enough to comment. Is this performance with the built-in > IDE interface, or with the 4091 (or equivalent) SCSI-2 board? With or without It's with the built in IDE interface. It's polled I/O with a 16byte buffer I believe. (e.g. the interface interupts the CPU and it xfer's 16bytes) > I'm hoping this will be fixed in the 68060 version of the A4000 and next years > (yet to be truly named) A5000 (which will probably no longer use Motorola and > move to HP-PA RISC's...) Interesting, HP licensed the Amiga's chipset for use in a set-top box. If Newtek doesn't end up buying C=, HP probably will. -- Ray Cromwell | Engineering is the implementation of science; -- -- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu | politics is the implementation of faith. -- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1993 02:29:38 -0800 (PST) From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo) Subject: Meta: Announcing Wolf's Head PPL /hawk: > > Unless there is some great reason I am over looking I will not authorize > > this PPL. Dan Davis: > The federales are going to come down hard > on you Nick, if you don't back down. They would, except that "we are the Federales." "Badges? We don't have no badges. We don't need no stinkin' badges!" your warm & fuzzy Wolf's Head proprietor, Nick Szabo szabo@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 93 6:48:48 WET From: rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray) Subject: Religion: Anti-Technology Harvey Newstrom writes: > > I was just flipping channels and ran into the Christian Broadcasting > Network's "700 Club Newswatch" program. In a news-report format they > "examined" the information age with its computers, interactive TV, > networking and virtual reality. Without being specifically clear, these > all were represented as bad things happening to society and undermining > religeous beliefs and "The Family." I knew that reliance on God would > lessen reliance on technology, but I didn't realize to what extent it was > actually being taught that advances in computers and networks are bad! They were really upset at that scene in Lawnmower Man where he is pinned to a cross with the Lawnmower Man playing god. The 700 club often decries "humanists" in the newage movement who beleive that each and every person is a God or can become one which leads me to believe that Christians won't approve of Extropianism -- especially since our god-quests contain no mysticism and are totally tech oriented. -- Ray Cromwell | Engineering is the implementation of science; -- -- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu | politics is the implementation of faith. -- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1993 08:21:54 -0500 (EST) From: "Harry S. Hawk" Subject: PPL: hnewstrom-ppl a conscious being, davisd@auburn.ee.washington.edu wrote: > Any other PPLs will have to rely on voluntary sanctions from their > members. In light of this, I would be quite surprised if Harry took > any sanctions against Harvey for operating an "unapproved" PPL. Will > Harry bar Harvey from forming a completely voluntary association? Ha! Dan does me a great disservice in the post above. Their have been many voluntary associations on this list and their is no reason why that should stop now. I certainly have no desire to do so. However, if someone wants a PPL sanctioned by ExI, they have to deal with me, and meet ExI requirements, etc. It is that simple. You can make PPL claims like Mr. Newstrom his "PPL-SELF" but it do "mean nothing." PLEASE, don't confuse your desire for freedom and liberty in real life with this space. This space is private property. We try to make it fun and space because we want you here... This idea of PPL is a experiment. This is a space owned my ExI, and ulimitately ExI controls this space. ExI is willing to give some power and authority to PPL operators, esp over what is and is not a flame. We are not going to sancation someone who would allow something that is not in Exi's self-interest. (Why would we?) We are going to continue with this Experiment until after Expo-1, at that time we will consider giving PPL's the boot and implementing another scheme - the Enlightened Dictator. More on that in the future. -- Harry S. Hawk habs@extropy.org Electronic Communications Officer, Extropy Institute Inc. The Extropians Mailing List, Since 1991 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1993 12:56:36 -0230 From: Bill Garland Subject: Khmer Vert - Seal Rant The last time I visited the beautiful United States of America, some friends took me to a nightclub on the borders of a wealthy suburb of Atlanta - Buckhead, I believe it was. This was one of the first, if not the very first, non-smoking nightclub around. The owner/proprietor was/is a comedian, whose main stock in trade is insulting people for fun and profit. He was very good, sort of. He would insult the blacks sitting in the corner, and they all laughed. He insulted Jews at some other tables. He made fun of blacks and Jews fighting each other. He picked his nose. He talked about the rich people who lived in that neighbourhood. All in good humour, I must say, if you are not uptight about such things. Then he turned to me and said "And where are you from, Sir?" To which I replied "Newfoundland!" rather proudly. His expression immediately changed to serious. He then paused a moment and asked me "Couldn't you people find some better way to live than by killing poor defensless little baby seals?" or words to that effect. Well, I didn't know what to make of this. He mentioned that he had four charities he supported, naming among them the International Fund for Animal Welfare, which, in case you didn't know, is a scam operated by one Brian Davies. They soak the hapless cuddly-pooh crowd for money and sometimes even do things that might look like they cared for animals, but most of the money seems to go to support Davies' lavish lifestyle. Anyway, I said that we often had problems with ignorant people who didn't seem to know what they were talking about. I wasn't prepared to argue the issue with him then and there, and I had had several drinks, but I did say that he was mislead and knew very little about the issue. First of all, they aren't babies, they are pups, and many of the people of Newfoundland had made some portion of their living harvesting seals for their pelts and meat for many centuries. The Innuit people, especially, relied on seals for much of their livelihood, their food, their clothes, and so on. They lived quite harmoniously with nature. Now they live off welfare, raising everyones taxes, and are alcoholics and glue sniffers. Well, not all of them, of course... My own father (my father's family has lived here for about three hundred years or so - we are from Devon in England before that, and my mothers family were here in the 1500's, from the Channel Islands, I think) had his very first job on a sealer going to the front one spring many decades ago. So part of my own self comes from this heritage, and I didn't take too kindly to being called a barbarian by this goofball. We have had the industry totally destroyed by these do-gooders, and a way of life seems to have gone into history. The Canadian govt banned the whitecoat hunt several years ago, and sealing is not much of an industry any more. I used to respect Greenpeace, mainly because they were trying to protect and save whales, which I thought was a Good Thing, and at one time I even considered joining them to work on their vessel, which was then a converted minesweeper. I figured my experience in the navy and my trade as a navigator could be put to good use. However, they got into the seals thing and used it as a cash cow to soak more hapless, mostly European, consumers who seemingly send their money to anyone who begs loud enough. Greenpeacers came here to interrupt the hunt, and they would harrass the hunters, throw their gear into the water, chain themselves onto the ships, etc. I'm amazed at the self-control exhibited by the "barbarians", who didn't even stop to throw the Greenpeacers into the water. Now, I don't object to protecting endangered snow leopards or whales, and I would not object to sinking the ships of drift-netters and others who harm the oceans and the environment, but the militant tactics of those who are out to scam people for dubius reasons leave a bad taste in my mouth. There are literally millions and millions of seals out there, and their pelts make great coats. Their flippers are delicious to eat, and the seal meat is also good. There is nothing inherently wrong with sealing. Most people seem to object to the methods of killing, especially the whitecoats (seal pups about two or three weeks old have a beautiful white pelt) - the easiest, quickest, and best way to kill them is to bash their skull with a big stick with a metal ball on the end. It is quite painless to the pups, but is rather gruesome especially to the faint-of-heart. Nowhere near as cruel as what goes on in slaughterhouses or chicken factories, and not as barbaric as the French custom of force-feeding poor little baby birds (geese) to make pate-de-fois gras. And seals don't eat turnips, either. So anyway, this comedian wanted to get his point across at my expense, and I don't mind a little fun and games. But he was deadly serious and I felt truly insulted. So I got up, held up his show, and walked around to his stage. I looked at his feet. He was wearing some cloth shoes, but there on the stage was a nice pair of leather boots. I said to him, as I pointed to the boots, that he was a goddammed hypocrite. How in hell could he pretend to protect mammals when he supported the killing of cows to make boots? He backed off and said something wishy washy like, oh yeah, but there must be a better way and why can't we all get along. Fine, I said, I'll get along as long as you hypocrites stop calling us barbarians and get the hell out of our faces. I went back to my seat and lit a cigarette. ( I did get up and go outside to smoke it, since there were no ashtrays and I didn't really want to fight the football-player/singer/bouncer he kept on staff, and being in a foreign country, my armaments were not readily at hand...) Bill Garland, whose .sig tells him to calm down, they mean well... ------------------------------ Date: 31 Dec 93 12:17:46 EST From: Sandy <72114.1712@compuserve.com> Subject: TIM'S MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEM ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT Reply to: ssandfort@attmail.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X-Folks, Tim Starr posted: . . . Because he [ Tim May ] holds most of humanity in contempt, that's why. Most ideologues do because they're alienated from society. Anyone got the clinical definition of "sociopath" handy? Can't seem to find it amongst my resources. The term, "sociopath" is no longer used. It has been replaced by the more descriptive, "anti-social personality disorder." The definitional elements that characterize this diagnosis, in no way apply to Tim May. Could we cool the /ad hominem/, or at least get it right? >>>>>>>>> And now for something completely different <<<<<<<<<< If people who fear Tim May are "Timorous," what do you call folks who both fear *and* admire him? [ See below ] "Timamorous" >>>>>> Please send e-mail to: ssandfort@attmail.com <<<<<< ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 93 13:02:01 EST From: Harvey Newstrom Subject: PPL: hnewstrom-ppl /hawk writes: >This idea of PPL is a experiment. This is a space owned my ExI, and >ulimitately ExI controls this space. ExI is willing to give some power >and authority to PPL operators, esp over what is and is not a flame. >We are not going to sancation someone who would allow something that >is not in Exi's self-interest. (Why would we?) I think Extropians understand and even applaud the control of privately-owned space. I don't think anyone would complain if ExI simply said "We own it -- you do what we say." The issue here is honesty and directness. What ExI seemed to be saying in the past was that we all told ExI what to do and that we chose our own rules via the PPL system. It was repeatedly stated that List Members must agree with PPL-1 because no one had started a competing PPL. As soon as PPL-1's actions became too outrageous, many people tried to get out of PPL-1 and/or start new PPLs. ExI seemed to say that alternate PPLs could have different rules (as Harry said, "or what would be the point?"). Yet as differing PPLs tried to form, it became obvious that no alternative rules were going to be allowed. Only those conforming to ExI's wishes were allowed. This frustrated a lot of people. Not because ExI's rules were enforced, but that they kept stating that we were choosing our own Rules via the PPL system using free-market principals. This simply was not true. __ Harvey Newstrom (hnewstrom@hnewstrom.ess.harris.com) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 93 13:03:12 EST From: Harvey Newstrom Subject: PPL: Has the experiment failed? In message #93-12-1293 Harry S. Hawk wrote: >This idea of PPL is a experiment. > >We are going to continue with this Experiment until after Expo-1, at >that time we will consider giving PPL's the boot and implementing >another scheme - the Enlightened Dictator. More on that in the future. I personally think that the PPL's on this LIst were a failure. As a matter of market-place evolution, I have seen many people seeking to exit PPL-1 or start their own. I have not seen anybody claiming that PPL-1 was the best, nor have I seen any mass migration to any of the new PPL's. In fact, most of they "buying public" on this List seemed to have no interest in the PPL "services" one way or another. In a free-market system, none of these PPLs would have gotton off the ground. It was only via state-like coersion and force that any PPL system occurred at all. I don't consider any experiment a failure if we learn from it. But most experiments are goal-neutral, seeking only to discover the outcome. This particular experiment seemed intent on proving that PPLs are actually a vialble legal solution. I think we failed to do that. I also thought (and was told) that the PPL system was the one and only legal design for this List. Now I think (and was told) that ExI is backing away from that position and trying to figure out a new form of List government. I think the new Enlightened Dictator idea will work better. Most people here want a forum where we can discuss ideas. We don't need a government system or a legal system to function as a mailing list. In fact, let me "enlighten" the new dictator a little more: Very few of us are so weak-willed that a few flames or unsupported arguments will demolish our Extropian ability to function. In the past, the List Legal System seems to have banished, punished, or somehow driven away List Participants that many of us liked. I would venture to say that except for a couple of infamous cases, most of us would have preferred to do without the so-called protections performed on our behalf. I would even venture to say that most of us found the governmental control of this list to be more interfering with our discussions than enhancing of them. (Individual board members, such as Harry, enhanced discussions greatly with their individual contributions.) This doesn't mean that we aren't grateful for all the hard work on our behalf, but as customers of this List, I think most of us would request a safe haven that is not only safe from outside attack, but safe from internal attack as well. Unless someone is interferring with our discussions, I don't think punishment is necessary. I think most alternatives offerred to PPL-1 specifically said that defending one's honor was allowed, and that an *occasional* flame or slip of the e-mail was not going to hurt anybody. I also would suggest that all Legal Actions take place in full view of the List Participants. I think I saw more complaints that legal actions seemed to be hidden from public view than I saw complaints about the actions themselves. I also saw a lot of people (myself included) running into unwritten rules and interpretations that we never expected. When the new Legal System is announced, there should be a clear List of ALL rules, and little extrapolation or interpretation of thos rules. I also saw a lot of emotion when people were questioning the actions of the List Government. Multiple people (including myself) thought we were told to back off our level of discussion on the List, only to have these claims denied in public when we publically stated that we are complying. I wonder how many people quietly complied. I have had questions about Legal judgements, about monies I paid, about List software, about the number of people on the List, about appeals, about unwritten rules and other subjects posted on this List simply ignored by the "ruling" personell. I have had questions asked publically answered by private e-mail, and then been attacked for posting the answers to the List. I have had direct e-mail mail to three board members, and a couple of List Authorities ignored. I don't have any current problems, but still feel that things have not been presented in an honest manner. I feel that embarrassing questions are hidden rather than answered. All this is simply just too political for a mailing list! Many people have privately e-mailed me that they, too, feel that the List Legal system was a sham or that personal feelings were used to determine who would get punished and who would not be prosecuted. If you are going to revamp the List Legal System, let's do it right this time. __ Harvey Newstrom (hnewstrom@hnewstrom.ess.harris.com) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 93 13:07:44 WET From: rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray) Subject: PPL: Has the experiment failed? Harvey Newstrom writes: > > In message #93-12-1293 Harry S. Hawk wrote: > >This idea of PPL is a experiment. > > > >We are going to continue with this Experiment until after Expo-1, at > >that time we will consider giving PPL's the boot and implementing > >another scheme - the Enlightened Dictator. More on that in the future. > > I personally think that the PPL's on this LIst were a failure. As a matter That's hard for me to accept given that the experiment hasn't been run yet. Unless you think 2-3 people declaring themselves a PPL is a sufficient test. -- Ray Cromwell | Engineering is the implementation of science; -- -- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu | politics is the implementation of faith. -- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1993 10:12:59 -0800 (PST) From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: Khmer Vert - Seal Rant I won't quote Bill Garland's long rant (good reading), because I don't want to line-by-line comment it. The environmental issues are unresolved, I think. Rand never had to deal with it (except for her trademark "Factories belching smoke are the symbol of man's control over nature"), and, as I recall, "Machinery of Freedom" did not dwell on issues of overfishing of the oceans or loss of habitat or the ozone layer in detail. (David can correct me if I've misremembered this.) "Reason" magazine has had several articles over the years. Anyway, there are lots of questions, and not a lot of answers, as I see it. While I'm a libertarian, anarchocapitalist in all person-to-person dealings, I have more doubts about how to handle damage to the "environment" and to (possibly) endangered species. The issues are familiar: - property rights for things that have historically not been considered property (air, oceans, species, etc.). Challenging. - the "commons" probem. Wasn't it Bill Garland, or at least some other "Newfie" (pardon me if I'm misspelling it), who was noting that the fishing grounds of Newfoundland are now exhausted? Does this relate to the seal pup harvest? (I'm not claiming it does.) - can libertarians support "rationing" of a service or commodity? (The thought generally is repugnant....I try to tell my neighbors that we don't _need_ water rationing in California, so long as the market is allowed to work. My problem here is that since no one owns the supply of snow leopards or seal pups or clean air, how is a market ever established?) - punishment may have to be much more than the reparations for a crime. In the recent (and fizzled out, this time) thread on imprisonment, several folks averred that libertarians only support incarceration to prevent continuing crime, and that reparations in the amount of the damages are all that can be "demanded." Well, the burglar who gets caught once per 100 jobs will not be deterred by having to "compensate" (give back the loot) the victim for the one time out of 100 he gets caught. No, punishment may have to be much greater. (I recall Friedman suggesting a 3x ratio in MoF, but no strong reasons were given.) - as this point relates to poachers and other killers of, say, condors and Bengal tigers, the punishment may have to be much more severe than, say, paying a $500 fine or being rapped on the knuckles. What this should be, who might administer it, and on what basis it derives from, are all issues I haven't begun to resolve. This is all I'll say for now. I don't have many answers. A while back, Max More opined that the Greens would be the next totalitarian movement. He suggested a campaign by Extropians against this movement. I haven't heard much more about this since. Perhaps Extropians could work on solutions which address the very real species and environmental problems, as well, thus providing a more libertarian, extropic alternative to those Greens who want a return to a pastoral, deindustrialized world. --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: Fri, 31 Dec 93 13:37:18 EST From: cards@top.cis.syr.edu Subject: PPL Harry S. Hawk writes -- > PLEASE, don't confuse your desire for freedom and liberty in real life > with this space. This space is private property. We try to make it fun > and space because we want you here... > > This idea of PPL is a experiment. This is a space owned my ExI, and > ulimitately ExI controls this space. ExI is willing to give some power > and authority to PPL operators, esp over what is and is not a flame. > We are not going to sancation someone who would allow something that > is not in Exi's self-interest. (Why would we?) I am a little worried. This space? What space? "This is a space owned my (sic) ExI..." What property rights, exactly, does ExI claim? And to what? Do my postings become the property of ExI? If it is not the postings to which ExI claims ownership, what else is there 'here' to claim ownership of? If these questions can be clearly and explicitly answered, fine. Then the list remains a voluntary contractual arrangement. However, if ExI or its spokesmen start making claims which were not part of the original agreement, then they have no basis unless and until agreed to by the other parties. If ExI claims the right to make up the rules as they go along, and not always tell us what those rules are... hmm, sounds like a government to me. Don't get me wrong. I appreciate what ExI has done and is doing for me. But no way am I going to 'sign' a one-way contract where the other party can change the terms as we go and expect me to still be bound by them. And yes, I know that I can always leave. I would just like to be able to make that decision on the basis of knowledge rather than ignorance: no 'ex post facto' laws that are enacted (or at least published) only after I have violated them. Now if these are not actually ExI ex post facto laws, but merely PPL-1 judgements, no problem -- but then I will be 'joining' Harvey in PPL-self. It is true that PPLs have only such real authority as ExI permits them, since ExI controls the actual mailing list. Obviously, if PPL-1 offends too many people, and alternate PPLs are not allowed to have more than nominal existence and powers, then the answer becomes Extropians2, a separate mailing list 'owned' and run by a spin-off PPL. Personally, I think a one-to-one mapping of PPLs to mailing lists is natural, but inefficient in terms of readership. No, I don't plan to run off and start my own list. Too much work for me, and PPL-1 hasn't stepped on my toes. I'm just bothered by the increasingly authoritarian tone of Hawk's pronouncements. Hawk, I know you are doing a lot of work for us, and I suspect you feel ill-used by some of us of late... but do try to temper your emotional responses to the Great PPL Debate. thanks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stuart W. Card, Consultant, Card & Associates -- Research & Development Box 153 RR 1 Newport Rd Utica NY 13502 315-735-1717 / FAX -8469 swc@uc1.ucsu.edu or cards@top.cis.syr.edu "Who is John Galt?" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 93 10:48:19 -0800 From: graps@clio.arc.nasa.gov (Amara Graps) Subject: Mail Bombs Hello Extro-Beings: I learned that the FBI had a text file on Internet describing the Mail bombings that have gone on in the last 15 years. I was hoping to learn the status of Gelertner (of Mirror Worlds fame), he being the computer professor that was last struck by the bomb looney. But the file didn't have any recent information on his medical status (anyone know?). Here's the file anyway.. It has a good summary of the cases. (Possibility to earn 1 million too if you have information that leads to the arrest and conviction of this person.) Amara Graps graps@gal.arc.nasa.gov -----------------------cut here-------------------------------------------- UNABOM $1,000,000 Reward SERIES OF 14 UNSOLVED BOMBINGS Beginning in May, 1978, a series of 14 bombing incidents have occurred across the United States for which there is no apparent explanation or motive. No person or group has been identified as the perpetrator(s) of these incidents. The explosions have taken place in seven states from Connecticut to California. As a result of these bombings, one person has been killed and 23 others injured, some grievously. There had been no incidents identified with this series of bombings since 1987. However that changed in late June, 1993, when a well known geneticist residing in Tiburon, California, and a renown computer scientist from Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, opened packages which had been mailed to them and both were severely injured when these packages exploded. In the past, targets of the bomber have been associated with the computer industry, the aircraft and airline industry and universities. Seven of these devices have been mailed to specific individuals and the other seven have been placed in locations which suggest there was no specific intended victim. All but two of the explosive devices functioned as designed and exploded. All 14 crimes, dubbed "UNABOM", have had common effects: all have caused terror, grief, and fear. On September 11, 1985, Hugh Scrutton, the owner of the Rentech Computer Company, in Sacramento, California, was killed by one of these diabolic devices. The two most recent victims narrowly escaped death. In response to the June, 1993, events, the Attorney General directed that a task force of federal law enforcement agencies be reestablished to urgently investigate and solve these crimes. The UNABOM Task Force, consisting of investigators from the FBI, ATF, and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, has been operational in San Francisco and Sacramento, California, since July 12, 1993, and is dedicated exclusively to the investigation of these crimes. Among the clues in the case are the following words in what appears to be a note possibly written by the bomber as a reminder to make a telephone call: "call Nathan R--Wed 7PM." The UNABOM Task Force believes that "Nathan R" may be associated, perhaps innocently, with the bomber and that "Nathan R" may have received a telephone call from the bomber on a Wednesday prior to the June, 1993 bombings. The two most recent tragic bombings illustrate the senseless and tragic consequences of these crimes and demonstrate the urgent necessity of solving this case. This serial bomber will strike again. We do not know who the next victim will be. We do believe that there is someone out there who can provide the identity of the person or persons responsible for these crimes. This person may be a friend, a neighbor, or even a relative of the bomber(s). UNABOM's chronology is as follows: 1) Northwestern University Evanston, Illinois May 25, 1978 A package was found in the Engineering Department parking lot at the Chicago Circle Campus of the University of Illinois. The package was addressed to an Engineering Professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, New York. The package had a return address of a Professor at Northwestern's Technological Institute. The package was returned to the addressor who turned it over to the Northwestern University Police Department because he had not sent the package. On May 26, 1978 the parcel was opened by a police officer who suffered minor injuries when the bomb detonated. 2) Northwestern University Evanston, Illinois May 9, 1979 A disguised explosive device which had been left in a common area in the University's Technological Institute, slightly injured a graduate student on May 9, 1979, when he attempted to open the box and it exploded. 3) Chicago, Illinois November 15, 1979 An explosive device disguised as a parcel was mailed from Chicago for delivery to an unknown location. The bomb detonated in the cargo compartment of an airplane, forcing it to make an emergency landing at Dulles Airport. Twelve individuals were treated for smoke inhalation. The explosion destroyed the wrapping to such an extent that the addressee could not be determined. 4) Chicago, Illinois June 10, 1980 A bomb disguised as a parcel postmarked June 8, 1980 was mailed to an airline executive at his home in Lake Forest, Illinois. The airline executive was injured in the explosion. 5) University of Utah Salt Lake City, Utah October 8, 1981 An explosive device was found in the hall of a classroom building and rendered safe by bomb squad personnel. 6) Vanderbilt University Nashville, Tennessee May 5, 1982 A wooden box containing a pipe bomb detonated on May 5, 1982, when opened by a secretary in the Computer Science Department. The secretary suffered minor injuries. The package was initially mailed from Provo, Utah on April 23, 1982, to Pennsylvania State University and then forwarded to Vanderbilt. 7) University of California Berkeley, California July 2, 1982 A small metal pipe bomb was placed in a coffee break room of Cory Hall at the University's Berkeley Campus. A Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science was injured when he picked up the device. 8) Auburn, Washington May 8, 1985 A parcel bomb was mailed on May 8, 1985, to the Boeing Company, Fabrication Division. On June 13, 1985, the explosive device was discovered when employees opened it. The device was rendered safe by bomb squad personnel without injury. 9) University of California Berkeley, California May 15, 1985 A bomb detonated in a computer room at Cory Hall on the Berkeley Campus. A graduate student in Electrical Engineering lost partial vision in his left eye and four fingers from his right hand. The device was believed to have been placed in the room several days prior to detonation. 10) Ann Arbor, Michigan November 15, 1985 A textbook size package was mailed to the home of a University of Michigan Professor in Ann Arbor, Michigan from Salt Lake City. On November 15, 1985, a Research Assistant suffered injuries when he opened the package. The Professor was a few feet away but was not injured. 11) Sacramento, California December 11, 1985 Mr. Hugh Scrutton was killed outside his computer rental store when he picked up a device disguised as a road hazard left near the rear entrance to the building. Metal shrapnel from the blast ripped through Scrutton's chest and penetrated his heart. 12) Salt Lake City, Utah February 20, 1987 On February 20, 1987, an explosive device disguised as a road hazard was left at the rear entrance to CAAMs, Inc. (computer store). The bomb exploded and injured the owner when he attempted to pick up the device. 13) Tiburon, California June 22, 1993 On June 22, 1993, a well known geneticist received a parcel postmarked June 18, 1993, at his residence. The doctor attempted to open the package at which time it exploded severely injuring him. It has been determined that this parcel was mailed from Sacramento, California. 14) Yale University New Haven, Connecticut June 24, 1993 On June 24, 1993, a Professor/Computer Scientist at Yale University attempted to open a parcel which he had received at his office. This parcel exploded severely injuring him. It has been determined that this parcel was mailed from Sacramento, California on June 18, 1993. At this time, the UNABOM Task Force would appeal to the public for assistance. For this purpose, a one million dollar reward is being offered for information which results in the identification, arrest and conviction of the person(s) responsible. Contact the UNABOM Task Force at 1-(800) 701- 2662. William L. Tafoya, Ph.D. Special Agent, FBI UNABOM Task Force San Francisco, CA btafoya@orion.arc.nasa.gov ------------------------------ End of Extropians Digest V93 #364 *********************************