On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Carol A Braddock wrote:
>So say you -could- estimate a fractal dimension for the internet. What would
>the number be good for?
If it could be shown that a consistent estimate exists and it was
calculated, it would probably affect the scaling properties of the Net -
after all,
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Ray Dillinger wrote:
>>>(RAH might have called it a geodesic political culture if he hadn't got
>>>this strange Marxist idea that politics is just an emergent property of
>>>economics :-)
>
>Just by the way, how widespread is this use of the word 'geodesic'?
Not very, I think
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000, Kevin Elliott wrote:
>This is why people who don't know statistics should not be allowed to
>think... By no means is that number, by itself, of any significance
>whatsoever. How many got canceled last election- one number I heard
>said 14,000. If so then 19,000 is about wha
On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Tim May wrote:
>In close elections, as in close sports games, as in the golf example,
>there will be many events which are later claimed to be "hinge
>points," or forks.
Which is pretty much caused by the count being seen as an advancing 'race'
with a definite order. I've n
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Tom Vogt wrote:
>> You know, I don't like spammers any more than the next guy, but come
>> on. Unethical? we're not talking genocide and it's not like it
>> cause significant (heck, even measurable) harm.
>
>as a matter of fact, it does. the quantity of it, you know. if your
On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Eric Murray wrote:
>>The unit can be turned off by the wearer, thereby making the monitoring
>>voluntary. It will not intrude on personal privacy except in applications
>>applied to the tracking of criminals.
>
>Heh.
>
>>Digital Angel[tm] measures bodily parameters. It does n
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote:
>For another, most people have not themelves experience a security
>problem. While they understand how neighborhood thieves can break in
>and steal their stuff, they have no similar experience for their
>computer data. Unless and until this changes, they jus
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Eric Murray wrote:
>Why should I vote for someone who doesn't stand for what I beleive
>in just because the media says that they're "not electable"?
>That's the kind of loser attitude that's gotten us a contest
>that'll assuredly elect either an idiot (Bush) or a fool (Gore).
On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
>> recant
>
>"Recount", right?
So right it hurts. GOD!
>Asking Tim, or anyone else here for that matter, me included, to recant
>something, is, of course, an invitation to verbal violence. :-).
You can say that again. For less, even, as I well know. E
On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote:
>Chomsky is hardly a reliable source. He routinely fabricates or falsifies
>quotes. I suggest you check his alleged sources.
Do you have some past examples at hand?`
Sampo Syreeni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university
On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Gil Hamilton wrote:
>>And if your neighbours are simply malignant? Since when did people need a
>>reason to harm each other?
>
>Then, too bad. They haven't *done* anything to you.
A distinction without a difference, I say.
>>Yep. That would be my point. This sounds decepti
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Gil Hamilton wrote:
>>I do not agree. I think shunning harms you regardless, if it is organized
>>well enough. Say, you do something which causes your whole town to shun
>>you. Where do you suppose you get food, shelter, whatever from there
>>on? You'd say 'just leave', here,
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Jodi Hoffman wrote:
>You are wrong to protect them without knowing what they're about, Jay.
>Their motto is, "Sex before eight, or it's too late." They are
>referring to grown men having sex with an under-eight year old little
>boy. Surely you don't mean to suggest that
On Sat, 16 Sep 2000, Jodi Hoffman wrote:
> AIDS/HIV: $39,172.00
> Diabetes: $ 5,449.00
> Cancer: $ 3,776.00
> Heart Disease: $ 1,056.00
> Stroke: $ 765.00
>
> What's wrong with this picture? You don't get cancer by engaging
>in p
On Mon, 4 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>However, one cannot discount the decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphics
>the Rosetta Stone.
Or the Linear A ordeal.
>I imagine it would be extremely difficult to decipher a language that very
>structurally different from what is known.
Indeed. With
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, petro wrote:
> Of course, a *simple* substitution of one word (or even
>spaces) would make this *much* harder.
As I said, people on this list hardly have a problem with dictionary
attacks.
> "Friends, Romulans, fellow countrymen, lend me your beers..."
>
>
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, No User wrote:
>> Nuh. I think they should be happy about biology education - might one day
>> give them a nice young crackpot with the talent to create a drug user
>> killing flu...
>
>Or better yet, a flu that killed everybody without sufficient THC residue
>in their bod
On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, Eric Murray wrote:
>A small note: IW digitally-signing the releases would not
>have made a difference in this case-- the guy used his knowledge
>of IW's procedures to social-engineer IW into accepting the
>fake release without doing their usual checking procedures.
So essen
On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, Tim May wrote:
>And when Denmark and Norway, say, decide to leave the Union, look for
>the fascists to dust off the speeches of Lincoln.
Nitpickin': Norway never joined.
Sampo Syreeni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Missouri FreeNet Administration wrote:
>:If they truly believe in getting rid of guns, why don't they start with the
>:guns of their body guards?
>
>They [obviously] don't believe in "getting rid of guns": they believe in
>getting rid of OUR guns.
I think there is nothing mu
20 matches
Mail list logo
