There is a common thread running through this discussion it that to my mind
seems quite problematic. It has to do with imposing a restriction on any
given religion to be in concordance with science to be valid and not to
be regarded as some fantasy or myth. Here any religion is reified to its
information ends up hidden, but no particular individuals have done the
hiding, is kind of cool. Seems like the type of thing encryption guys could
get into (or already are into, or have already moved past).
Eric
On Fri, May 6, 2011 10:05 PM, *Mohammed El-Beltagy moham...@computer.org
* wrote
A few rhyming lines that came to mind after hearing about OBL's killing.
On the death of a terroristy
No glory in slaying a monster you made
No joy! The debt of injustice must be paid!
What justice and honor and values you state?
Feed anger with hate, but will hatred abate?
Why celebrate? Why
Thanks Steve and Peggy, you give me more praise than I deserve.
I naturally see terrorism as abhorrent and I regret that Russel read
my few lines as an attempt to be an apologists for those who attack
the US and Israel. I am against any form of violence being exercised
against any human being,
I have a question I would like to pose to the group in that regard:
Can we model/simulate how in a democracy that is inherently open (as
stated in the constitution: for the people, by the people etc..) there
emerges decision masking structures emerge that actively obfuscate
the participatory
This reminds me of an open source game I can across a while back.
See Phun:
http://www.phun.at/
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at
