Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Arlo Barnes wrote at 01/20/2013 12:11 PM: > New: Is this the selfsame Axiom of Choice that enables Banach-Tarski if > used? Yes, that's the way I intend to use it. -- glen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

On 1/20/13 1:11 PM, Arlo Barnes wrote: Clips are one thing, but it does not seem 3-D printed parts would be appropriate for most parts of a gun. Would they'd perform well enough for short term use by suicidal users? Marcus FRIAM Appl

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

One of the downsides of email's serial format rather than hypermedia's tree format is that I cannot make this message just a child of an earlier message, but instead the whole threas. Old (drafted days ago):To focus on a different aspect: Clips are one thing, but it does not seem 3-D printed parts

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Glen - Nice! You wax poetic in the latter part, which I'm incapable of paralleling. But I'll try to mimic the spirit. Well, I definitely tend to wax, I'm not quite sure how poetic it is :^) 1. Is concept space discrete or continuous (Axiom of Choice vs Landscape)? I agree that we can safely

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Nice! You wax poetic in the latter part, which I'm incapable of paralleling. But I'll try to mimic the spirit. Steve Smith wrote at 01/17/2013 12:40 PM: > 1. Is concept space discrete or continuous (Axiom of Choice vs Landscape)? > 2. What is the relationship between humanity and technology? >

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Glen - Thanks for the continued engagement. We may not be converging on any agreement but we might be approaching a common language. Here is an outline of the issues in our discussion as I see them: 1. Is concept space discrete or continuous (Axiom of Choice vs Landscape)? 2. What is the r

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

I applaud your attempt to expand out to the forest layer! But I still think you're being overly specific about our disagreement. My summary about dissimilarity as the common cause for the communication illusion and tool abuse failed to capture the core disagreement, I suppose. So, I'll try agai

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Glen - I'll save you and the rest of the list my long-winded point by point response (written but ready for delete) and try to summarize instead: I understand now your connection between communication and tool (mis)use. I think we disagree on a couple of things but I am sympathetic with what

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Steve Smith wrote at 01/15/2013 05:43 PM: >> a fatally wrong assumption underneath: that "we" can be distinguished >> from "technology". I'm pretty sure we've covered this ground as well. >> I can sum it up with the aphorism: >> >>"The problem with communication is the illusion that it exists.

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Glen - I never understand your posts. You likely are not alone in this. But I can say that I think this one has a fatally wrong assumption underneath: that "we" can be distinguished from "technology". I'm pretty sure we've covered this ground as well. I can sum it up with the aphorism:

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

It's like you know them! :) On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 4:37 PM, glen wrote: > But I also suspect those tools did not > translate well to non-astrophysicists or non-lawyers ... or perhaps even > very many astrophysicists or very many lawyers. > -- *Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-far

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Douglas Roberts wrote at 01/15/2013 03:27 PM: > Well, define "tool". > > Dick is (or was) a theoretical astrophysicist, and Bart was a lawyer. But > even the simplest little bit of technology would always stump either one > of them. For the longest time I considered it to be a studied stupidity

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Well, define "tool". Dick is (or was) a theoretical astrophysicist, and Bart was a lawyer. But even the simplest little bit of technology would always stump either one of them. For the longest time I considered it to be a studied stupidity. I later came to believe that it was either genuine, o

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Douglas Roberts wrote at 01/15/2013 03:06 PM: > I know any number of technophobes and technoklutzes. They are *always* in > conflict with technology. Sometimes technology as simple as operating a > cell phone. I refer to this as the "Bart" trait. I have an uncle named > Bart. He's the most tech

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

I never understand your posts. On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:56 PM, glen wrote: > And I'll end with as clear a statement as I can make: There is no > conflict between technology and any other human trait. > I know any number of technophobes and technoklutzes. They are *always* in conflict with

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

I never understand your posts. But I can say that I think this one has a fatally wrong assumption underneath: that "we" can be distinguished from "technology". I'm pretty sure we've covered this ground as well. I can sum it up with the aphorism: "The problem with communication is the illusion

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Doug, Marcus, et al. - No offense Marcus, butI refuse to get drawn into gun control discussions. --Doug mailto:mar...@snoutfarm.com>> wrote: http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/01/14/gunsmiths-3d-print-high-capacity-ammo-clips-to-thwart-proposed-gun-laws/ I think we've made th

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

: Re: [FRIAM] here we go Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 01/15/2013 09:22 AM: http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/01/14/gunsmiths-3d-print-high- capacity-ammo-clips-to-thwart-proposed-gun-laws/ Excellent! 3D printing allows me to imagine an explosion of persecution complex stick-boys

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 01/15/2013 09:22 AM: > http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/01/14/gunsmiths-3d-print-high-capacity-ammo-clips-to-thwart-proposed-gun-laws/ Excellent! 3D printing allows me to imagine an explosion of persecution complex stick-boys shooting up public places. ;-)

Re: [FRIAM] here we go

No offense Marcus, butI refuse to get drawn into gun control discussions. --Doug On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Marcus G. Daniels wrote: > http://www.forbes.com/sites/**andygreenberg/2013/01/14/** > gunsmiths-3d-print-high-**capacity-ammo-clips-to-thwart-** > proposed-gun-laws/

[FRIAM] here we go

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/01/14/gunsmiths-3d-print-high-capacity-ammo-clips-to-thwart-proposed-gun-laws/ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscrib