- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Getting into MIT is impossible
by Phillip M. Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anonymous <nobody(a)REPLAY.COM> wrote in article <5cndl2$89k(a)life.ai.mit.edu>... > "The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I > made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need > full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the > Russian front!"" > > My guess is that "other factors" were involved. Inevitably since the admissions tutors would not have known the means of the parents. Thats the whole idea of "needs blind" admissions. The admissions people could not give a damn about means. The alumni that are most likely to make donnations are those who made it from scratch in any case. > I noted with some interest, but little surprise, that the guy claiming MIT > required a 4.0 GPA and a 1600 combined SAT score could barely spell, and > had major problems making a coherent point. Methinks this is why MIT > rejected him, not his lack of a "1600." Possible but remember that dyslexia is not an indicator of intelligence. The director of the Media Lab is dyslexic. Certainly if you think that being taught in a particular operating system is important you should probably try elsewhere. Depending on which classes you take you could end up using UNIX, Windows or Genera. The main advantage of UNIX is that it is reasonably compact and we have full sources which means that people can be set operating system projects. Windows NT is much too large for that although it does have many interesting APIs that make it usefull for teaching application level stuff. I would imagine that there will be people interested in NextStep for Apple too, Tim-B-L was always a Next person, but he learnt how to use it because he had an open mind. If he had thought that nothing could be better than what he had already he would still be using CERN-VM. If someone can't cope with an unfamilliar O/S they probably shouldn't be an engineer at all. An O/S is only one large software system a grad needs to deal with. They have short lifetimes, rarely being dominant for more than a decade. Phill

1 0

Re: Best Computer School?
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ichudov(a)algebra.com writes: > moscow state university in russia is not bad also. > > they teach lots of theory... which is good. > > - Igor. > Do they have a master's program in computer science? :-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

2 1

Re: Shave the Whales
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What a joy to make a public mockery of Dogfucker L"amprey" Vulis K"adaver" Of The Moment! __[I]__ o-o' __oOo__(-)_oOo__ Dogfucker L"amprey" Vulis K"adaver" Of The Moment V

1 0

News report RE:RSA Data Security Conference, pointer
by aaron＠herringn.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Report on RSA data security conference. Mentions 'Legislation in Congress could ban mandatory key storage', anyone know what they're referring to? http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,7437,00.html

1 0

H E Y!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
by sqa＠usa.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello,^Morons, $ $ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$ $ $ $$ $$ $ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $ $$ $$ $ $ $$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $ $ *** HELP HUMANITY AND OUR EARTH *** NO MONTHLY FINANCIAL COMMITTMENTS *** NO INVENTORY *** BANKING *** INTERNATIONAL CREDIT UNION / VISA *** TRADE CREDIT *** STOCK OPTION *** INSURANCE AND LEASING STARQUEST ASSOCIATION HAS BEEN IN DEVELOPMENT FOR 5 YEARS IT CAN BEST BE DESCRIBED AS A HUMANITARIAN ASSOCIATION WITH VAST TECHNOLOGY TO ENHANCE OUR LIFE AND EARTH. FOR FREE INFORMATION EMAIL US AT sqa(a)usa.net WITH YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OR CALL OUR 24 HOURS INTRO LINE AT 1-888-882-STAR(7827) THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SINCERELY, MEMBERSHIP COUNCIL

1 0

RE: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc.
by P.J. Westerhof 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 20:06 27-01-97 -0500, Hettinga wrote: >At 7:39 pm -0500 1/26/97, blanc wrote: >>p.s. I be femme > ^^^^^^^^^^ > >Franconics... Or Lesbonics of course, Skol, Peter _________________________________________________________ P.J. Westerhof LL.D e-mail P.J.WESTER(a)NGI.NL | Computerlaw voice +31-347-375400 | Legal informatics fax/data +31-347-375400 | IT - consultancy Web: www.ngi.nl/cr/ | Soaring _________________________________________________________

1 0

Re: Cats Out of Bags
by sameer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > Remember, Aaron is employee of the government. He talks in doublespeak, Aaron is employee of the government. Therefore he must lie. -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net http://www.c2.net/ sameer(a)c2.net

1 0

Re: Libel & the 1st Amendment (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:46:57 -0500 (EST) > From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)pathfinder.com> > > * The 1st Amendment does protect some lies. No, it protects speech. The Constitution is meant to protect citizens from a priori constraints on their speech, not the results of the content ex post facto. It is clearly not in the best interest of society to limit opinions or fiction. > If I say "Jim Choate is a > Venusian albatross," the statement is probably (?) a lie, No, for it to be a lie there must be a potentiality of its truth. A nonsense statement which happens to fit the syntactical rules of a language wouldn't qualify. A more apt situation would be, "Hey, <some person>, I saw <your name> in a public restroom blowing the President's pink torpedoe and <your name> was begging for more!". The statement should have to be transmitted to <some person> without the permission of <your name>. The legal standard should be that if you make statements purported to be true about a third party without their prior consent you should be held to a minimum standard of evidence demonstrating the actuality of your statement. A democratic society should have no tolerence for libel, slander, or other forms of lies. > but I doubt > you'll prevail in a libel suit. What damages do you have? That's the key, > I believe -- the statement has to lower you in the opinion of others. Which is exactly one aspect of the problem. Wrongs should not be based on quantity or opinion. By focusing on what others think trivializes the issue at hand, a untruth about a person has been passed off as a truth. > * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of libel. > It is, they say, a rich man's game Exactly, instead of equal protection under the law we have a specieocracy. > -- if I'm libeled by the NYT, I'm > probably not going t be able to sue them, but Donald Trump can. Moreover, > if I don't have the resources to sue but the statement is libelous, it > creates a *presumption* in the minds of the readers that the article is > certainly true. (If it were not, I would have sued, right?) Another good example of why our system is broke. > * The concept you may be searching for is consensual speech, which I > believe a society should tolerate. Libelous speech isn't consensual, > though obscenity is. There is no such thing as 'obscenity' just as there is no such thing as 'community standard'. These are the results of mental masturbation to justify some power freaks alterior motives. No, what I should be permitted to say should not rest on what others may permit. If so then I should have a say in what they can say, which means I have a say in what they can say about what I can say, ... (got it yet?) What we need is a fundamental change in the legal system which focuses on first principles and results, not social status or wealth or the potential for gain. Perhaps what we need is a legal system where both the defence and prosecuting attornies are selected by lot. We already have such a system applied to the defence. If it is considered sufficient for a defence it should qualify as sufficient for prosecution. Each practicing attorney would receive a stipend allocated by the appropriate legislative body. The court and police (who should represent the people in general) would provide both parties the results of any tests and equal and simultaneous access to all evidence. If a person wants additional legal council they can buy it from their own pocket but the attorney is limited to act only as a adjunct to the appointed attorney (ie they would not be allowed to speak in court). In civil cases the plaintiff should place a bond, set at some percentage of the maximum permissible award, at the time the case is filed. This would at least cover the general costs of the court and limit nuisance cases. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

2 1

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by drose＠azstarnet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Phill" wrote: >Society is not bound to put up with cranks and psychopaths. Err, "Phill", how then do you see yourself fitting in?

1 0

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by drose＠AZStarNet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Phill" wrote: >Society is not bound to put up with cranks and psychopaths. Err, "Phill", how then do you see yourself fitting in?

1 0