EAGLE Netlist conversion

John Fields · Nov 21, 2004

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:23:16 GMT, Pig Bladder
<pig_bladder@anyspammer.org> wrote:

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 10:53:46 -0600, John Fields wrote:

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 13:44:13 GMT, Pig Bladder
pig_bladder@anyspammer.org> wrote:

The Pig Bladder From Uranus, still waiting for
some hot babe to ask what my favorite planet is.

---
And will you be picking your nose when you answer, "Arkansas"?

Well, nobody knows yet, but the world does know that you'll be
on-the-spot, the first to be investigating the object of your worship,
my booger.

---
Knowing that pigs fuck and commenting on it doesn't indicate a desire
to watch them.

--
John Fields

Tim Wescott · Nov 21, 2004

Jim wrote:

I have an RF coil. Some material having strong absorption for 100MHz RF is placed
inside the coil. X", size and position of the absortive meterial is known.
How can I simulate the resistor of the RF coil at the specific frequency of 100MHz?
Thank you very much!

Do you want to simulate this on something like SPICE, simulate the
conditions with a real coil in a real circuit, but without the
absorptive material, measure the resistance, analyze the loss in the
coil given the material characteristics, what?

If you are going to run at exactly 100MHz and none other you can
simulate this quite well by putting an appropriate resistance in
parallel or in series with the coil, either in the real world or in your
SPICE schematic. If you want it to be accurate for DC _and_ 100MHz then
only the parallel resistance will do.

But you really have to tell us more about what you're trying to do
before we can help you.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

keith · Nov 22, 2004

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 17:37:31 -0800, Tom Seim wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message news:<41A04596.7677@armory.com>...
Tom Seim wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer <null@example.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.11.20.02.01.44.925063@neodruid.org>...
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:08:20 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:15:24 GMT, Rich The Philosophizer
[rich vs. poor stuff]

But spending isn't primarily what rich people do. Poor people think
about all the things they would buy if they were rich. But the essence
of being rich is *not* spending. A billionaire may have three houses
and ten cars, but not 3000 houses and 10,000 cars.

Well, yeah, but here's the thing. To the guy who has no hope of
ever having even one house that he can ever call his own, that
second or third house that the billionaire just conjures up
with a flip of his wrist really, really rankles.

Would they also be pissed off at a millionaire that owns only one
(really nice) house?
----------------
You mean like with ten thousand rooms? If they don't have any and he
made them build it and then made them live there and pay rent?
Betcher fuckin' ass!

-Steve

Ten thousand rooms? Have you ever seen such a house? If such a thing,
were it to exist, would be out of the price range of a millionaire. I
was thinking about a $0.5M house.

Let's say they would be pissed off about that, too. Would they be
pissed off at a starter house, say $125K (at least that would be a
starter in my area)?

Walz is pissed at the world. If it were $.29 he'd be pissed at anythign
he didn't have. Commies are like that. ;-)

--
Keith

Pig Bladder · Nov 22, 2004

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:48:46 -0600, John Fields wrote:

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:23:16 GMT, Pig Bladder
pig_bladder@anyspammer.org> wrote:

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 10:53:46 -0600, John Fields wrote:

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 13:44:13 GMT, Pig Bladder
pig_bladder@anyspammer.org> wrote:

The Pig Bladder From Uranus, still waiting for
some hot babe to ask what my favorite planet is.

---
And will you be picking your nose when you answer, "Arkansas"?

Well, nobody knows yet, but the world does know that you'll be
on-the-spot, the first to be investigating the object of your worship,
my booger.

---
Knowing that pigs fuck and commenting on it doesn't indicate a desire
to watch them.

Very creative.
--
The Pig Bladder From Uranus, still waiting for
some hot babe to ask what my favorite planet is.

Pig Bladder · Nov 22, 2004

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:07:34 -0800, Tom Seim wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message news:<41A059D8.582@armory.com>...
Tom Seim wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message news:<419EC733.56E7@armory.com>...
Mark Fergerson wrote:

R. Steve Walz wrote:
....
All this can be done quite locally in terms of a govt of perhaps
only 5000 people

What size population are you talking about? It takes 5000 people just
to issue Social Security checks when all steps in the process are
considered.

How much money could be saved if citizens were allowed to keep their
own money and bank it instead of having Uncle Sugardaddy take it away
and pay 5000 parasites to give half of it back to you?
--
The Pig Bladder From Uranus, still waiting for
some hot babe to ask what my favorite planet is.

Clarence · Nov 22, 2004

"Pig Bladder" <pig_bladder@anyspammer.org> wrote in message
news

an.2004.11.22.02.45.56.167867@anyspammer.org...

As usual "Pig Bladder" had nothing of value to say!

Tom Del Rosso · Nov 22, 2004

"Brian Hance" <brian@net-prophet.com> wrote in message
news:a45rp0t06p55mipohpud73qqdqp2l3ov4v@4ax.com...

For the record, I don't care for the french government. They are
every bit as craven and two faced as our current administration. The
current fad by those on the right of shit-hammering the french for
every little thing though certainly seems like there are some out
there with some kind of weird inferiority complex though. I mean,
heaven forbid that other countries look out for their best interest
rather than ours.

I don't know about heaven, but the treaty they signed forbids it after one
of us has been attacked.

What you said applies to Russia though.

--
Reply in group, but if emailing add
2 more zeros and remove the obvious.

Jim Thompson · Nov 22, 2004

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:56:21 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:

Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
Don't waste your money supporting the French enemy. Buy American or
Aussie !-)

Your money doesn't support the French anyway. At least, not
more than 70% of what it used to, ever since George "Economic
Disaster" Bush took over the dollar.

--Blair
"So your $300 bribe from the Junta
is worth only $210 now. And it only
cost 1200 American lives. Happy?"

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Pig Bladder · Nov 22, 2004

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:43:34 -0800, classd101 wrote:

bigcat@meeow.co.uk (N. Thornton) wrote in message news:<a7076635.0411171435.62a32d30@posting.google.com>...
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message news:<8k2fp0h3ukql072fcm8p47lsruoq95q42i@4ax.com>...

To the left of my keyboard is a climber with bed-on-top roost. He
presides there most of the time. But if he needs his ears scratched
he often will simply step out and drape himself straight across the
keyboard. He's too big to sit in my lap... he's Burmese and twice the
size of a typical domestic cat.

...Jim Thompson

Cats make us choose between them and the keyboard, in the nicest
posible way. Those who choose wisely enjoy life. Those who choose
unwisely have chosen their discontent themselves.

NT

Don't know about you guys but I could sure go for some chinese food right about now.

I've heard that even snakes won't eat cat.
--
The Pig Bladder From Uranus, still waiting for
some hot babe to ask what my favorite planet is.

Chuck Harris · Nov 22, 2004

Jeff Thompson wrote:

Pig Bladder wrote:

I've heard that even snakes won't eat cat.

There aren't many snakes big enough to eat
a cat. And that's a good thing.

However, fox, wolf, coyote, alligator, owl, and
many others are more than happy to snack on a few.

John Larkin · Nov 23, 2004

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:47:19 -0700, Jim Thompson
<thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 22:38:55 GMT, Bob Stephens
stephensyomamadigital@earthlink.net> wrote:

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 23:00:10 +0100, Simon Cussonnet wrote:

yeah Beaujolais nouveau isn't for red necks.
Best to keep fur us French

"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> a écrit dans le message news:
gaupp0pdt5s4h7i4ild3ig711r48526kdf@4ax.com...
Don't waste your money supporting the French enemy. Buy American or
Aussie !-)

...Jim Thompson

I say we reposses our California grapevines. They probably never payed for
them anyway...

Bob

Good point. Most people don't know that French vineyards were
destroyed by rot and vine cuttings from California were sent to France
to re-plant them.

But you know how it is... we bad Americans never bail out the
Europeans ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Hey, speaking of rotten French things, we just had a Safeway Select
Creme Bruille for dessert. Comes frozen in a box with two beautiful
big flat ceramic ramekins with the custard inside, and each has its
own sugar packet. You thaw it, sprinkle the sugar on top, and blast it
with a propane torch to crystalize the sugar. Takes a bit of practice
to get the knack, just like learning to solder. It was *really good*.
And I can reuse the ramekins for my Kozyshack Bruille version.

It was, er, made in France. We had it with, er, Pouilly Fuisse.

Sorry.

John

John Larkin · Nov 23, 2004

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:56:21 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:

Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
Don't waste your money supporting the French enemy. Buy American or
Aussie !-)

Your money doesn't support the French anyway. At least, not
more than 70% of what it used to, ever since George "Economic
Disaster" Bush took over the dollar.

--Blair
"So your $300 bribe from the Junta
is worth only $210 now. And it only
cost 1200 American lives. Happy?"

The price of the Euro is indeed a disaster... for Europe. I could
either let my products get cheaper in Europe and undercut my
competitors, or raise my European prices and make more money. But
wait... I don't have any European competitors! Guess I know what I'll
do...

John

R. Steve Walz · Nov 23, 2004

Pig Bladder wrote:

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 08:56:17 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Tom Seim wrote:
...
Ok, what's the maximum wealth that you would permit?
---------------
No owning land, ...

Two fleas arguing over who owns the dog.
--------------------------

No, a guy talking to other guys about killing some guys.
Steve

Repost of deleted response!:
--
No owning land, democratic control of all land except residential.
Everyone is entitled to own their home and compound. No sale of
homes, only trade straight across through the aegis of the State
if one desires to relocate.

No owning corporate factories or any industrial equipment except
what you can pursue on your residential compound. No owning stocks
or bonds, no savable money, all exchange is in terms of labor hours
rendered to the State for basic commodities and consumer items.
All grown and made products are rendered to the State for their
agreed labor hours credit amortized over the whole of each product.

If it takes a total of 300 labor hours to make 3000 widgets from
materials mined or harvested to parts composing it, to the final
assemblage, then each costs a tenth of an hour. Unless crippled,
veryone is required to work the democratically agreed minimum hours
to meet basic needs or else they don't eat and it is illegal to even
feed them.

If they want more they sign up for more labor hours over their
minimum, with which to buy consumer items. The only wealth that
would even be possible is in personal property. Used items can be
freely traded at weekly local flea markets.

The State mandates that repair parts be available indefinitely for
anything at cost. If you can make something the rest of us want on
your compound then you can petition to work at home, and be paid for
supplies and tools as well, but otherewise you work at a publically
owned factory or farm.

If you want something and can find enough other people who do you
can get the State to assign labor credit to anyone who wants to make
that item at an agreed exchange rate based on how long other skilled
workers in similar fields agree it would cost in hours of labor.

Everything of this sort is decided locally at the Society meeting
twice a week by whomever shows up to do it. People are lenient
with each other because they want support for their own desires
as well.

You order things before they are produced, and they aren't produced
for your order unless you order them. If we all decide we have enough
stuff for a month or two, we go home and pursue our hobbies after our
minimum hour jobs until enough people want new things. They literally
arrange with others who ALSO want more "stuff" to make it for one
another, via the computerized ordering system between factories that
records all orders for manufacture and all labor hour credit. High
ticket items can be partly paid in advance by labor and partly by
promised future labor, time payment out of your wage to save storage
costs. If you don't work the hours, you forfeit the item till you
do.

All this can be done quite locally in terms of a govt of perhaps
only 5000 people either at public meetings or over the Net. Larger
governance are done via the Net or by study committees that report
back to everyone for grassroots approval.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

R. Steve Walz · Nov 23, 2004

Tom Seim wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message news:<41A04596.7677@armory.com>...
Tom Seim wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer <null@example.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.11.20.02.01.44.925063@neodruid.org>...
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:08:20 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:15:24 GMT, Rich The Philosophizer
[rich vs. poor stuff]

But spending isn't primarily what rich people do. Poor people think
about all the things they would buy if they were rich. But the essence
of being rich is *not* spending. A billionaire may have three houses
and ten cars, but not 3000 houses and 10,000 cars.

Well, yeah, but here's the thing. To the guy who has no hope of
ever having even one house that he can ever call his own, that
second or third house that the billionaire just conjures up
with a flip of his wrist really, really rankles.

Would they also be pissed off at a millionaire that owns only one
(really nice) house?
----------------
You mean like with ten thousand rooms? If they don't have any and he
made them build it and then made them live there and pay rent?
Betcher fuckin' ass!

-Steve

Ten thousand rooms? Have you ever seen such a house? If such a thing,
were it to exist, would be out of the price range of a millionaire.
-----------------------

Even so, we're talking about mass deprivation. My analogy is accurate.
Don't be an ass who takes metaphor serioiusly to dodge the argument.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

R. Steve Walz · Nov 23, 2004

keith wrote:

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 17:37:31 -0800, Tom Seim wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message news:<41A04596.7677@armory.com>...
Tom Seim wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer <null@example.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.11.20.02.01.44.925063@neodruid.org>...
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:08:20 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:15:24 GMT, Rich The Philosophizer
[rich vs. poor stuff]

But spending isn't primarily what rich people do. Poor people think
about all the things they would buy if they were rich. But the essence
of being rich is *not* spending. A billionaire may have three houses
and ten cars, but not 3000 houses and 10,000 cars.

Well, yeah, but here's the thing. To the guy who has no hope of
ever having even one house that he can ever call his own, that
second or third house that the billionaire just conjures up
with a flip of his wrist really, really rankles.

Would they also be pissed off at a millionaire that owns only one
(really nice) house?
----------------
You mean like with ten thousand rooms? If they don't have any and he
made them build it and then made them live there and pay rent?
Betcher fuckin' ass!

-Steve

Ten thousand rooms? Have you ever seen such a house? If such a thing,
were it to exist, would be out of the price range of a millionaire. I
was thinking about a $0.5M house.

Let's say they would be pissed off about that, too. Would they be
pissed off at a starter house, say $125K (at least that would be a
starter in my area)?

Walz is pissed at the world. If it were $.29 he'd be pissed at anythign
he didn't have. Commies are like that. ;-)
Keith
--------------------------

Actually, IN EFFECT I want LESS than I already have. By your grasp I
must be quite happy with everyone.

That means you're wrong, idiot.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

R. Steve Walz · Nov 23, 2004

Tom Seim wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message news:<41A059D8.582@armory.com>...
Tom Seim wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message news:<419EC733.56E7@armory.com>...
Mark Fergerson wrote:

R. Steve Walz wrote:

That's what I was trying to tell RSW. It's approaching
the situation with royalty in the U.K. and other countries
that maintain them for show.

I can see a day when those genetically predisposed to
excessive wealth acquisition are kept in elaborately gilded
cages, smirkingly waited upon hand and foot and bowed and
scraped to, just to keep them out of everyone else's way.
Come to think of it, it's already happening...
--------------------------------
All it takes is to make theft of all types illegal and unfair wealth
acquisition simply won't be allowed. If these idiots want to work
every hour of every day so that they have no time to enjoy what they
earn, and they can buy unperishable wealth items of value that they
have no time to enjoy, they should probably be made to see a pshrink.

Ok, what's the maximum wealth that you would permit?
---------------
No owning land, democratic control

Is your government elected or appointed?
--------------------

Let's pretend you have a mind.
What does Democratic Majority mean everywhere in my writings?

of all land except residential.
Everyone is entitled to own their home and compound. No sale of
homes, only trade straight across through the aegis of the State
if one desires to relocate.

No owning corporate factories or any industrial equipment except
what you can pursue on your residential compound. No owning stocks
or bonds, no savable money, all exchange is in terms of labor hours

So you are going to dismantle the monetary system.
---------------------------

Hmmmm, you're certainly dense, aren't you?

rendered to the State for basic commodities and consumer items.
All grown and made products are rendered to the State for their
agreed labor hours credit amortized over the whole of each product.

If it takes a total of 300 labor hours to make 3000 widgets from
materials mined or harvested to parts composing it, to the final
assemblage, then each costs a tenth of an hour. Unless crippled,
veryone is required to work the democratically agreed minimum hours
to meet basic needs or else they don't eat and it is illegal to even
feed them.

From each according to their abilities, to each according to their
needs.
------------------------------

Nope. Read it again.
You're regugitating your brainwashing from high school.

If they want more they sign up for more labor hours over their
minimum, with which to buy consumer items. The only wealth that
would even be possible is in personal property. Used items can be
freely traded at weekly local flea markets.

The State mandates that repair parts be available indefinitely for
anything at cost.

How are you going to set costs without a monetary system?
----------------------------

Every product has a costs assessment in labor hours following it,
from wells, mines and farms to factories right up to delivery as
a product, and from that the price of each item in labor hours
is amortized.

Who pays to maintain an inventory of spare?
------------------------------

Who does now? We do. Now figure out how that can be done my way.
How stupid are you? Orders for spares stock are pre-ordered for
products by the repair facilities as their normal stock of supplies,
just as any factory does.

How do you account for the inevitable
loses incurred on providing spares "at cost"?
------------------------------------

Simple, you study that phenomenon and justify a slightly higher price
in labor hours of those goods because of it, represented by each
product item's price by division of its costs for the whole lot.

The State gains its costs for medical and care of the infirm in a
similar way, by costing each person an equal minimum labor hour
quota they must work to receive food, power, telecom, gas, recycle,
and water. This "tax" on things is price-inherent, not seen explicitly
for any one item.

If you can make something the rest of us want on
your compound then you can petition to work at home, and be paid for
supplies and tools as well, but otherewise you work at a publically
owned factory or farm.

If you want something and can find enough other people who do you
can get the State to assign labor credit to anyone who wants to make
that item at an agreed exchange rate based on how long other skilled
workers in similar fields agree it would cost in hours of labor.

So the State decides what will be produced.
--------------------------------

No, each person both orders things from the Catalog, and adds items
to it by submitting requests online in a kind of eco-political eBay
for people to organize who want some new kind of product, they present
it to everyone, and they ask that orders for such a product by collected
and that these orders become standing work-orders for that
product to be produced, then people who want more work can offer to
manufacture it at any factory with suitable space and tools, or they
can ask that a new factory be built for it and submit evidence that
it would be well-used. If a hobby group wants certain specialty items
produced, it simply submits its orders to the local Committee of the
People that meets several times a week. If approved, they compete for
any remaining materials and factory space, or they are requested to
pursue its manufacture as a hobby or avocation in their home compounds
for a bit longer till there is more demand. If they can show demand
and ability and get labor hour quotes approved those who manufacture
them, even on a small scale, can be paid labor hours to do so. If
they can simply show orders and provide an acceptable quote for labor
then they can be paid labor hours and they sell the product to the
State Catalog for sale.

Everything of this sort is decided locally at the Society meeting
twice a week by whomever shows up to do it. People are lenient
with each other because they want support for their own desires
as well.

You order things before they are produced, and they aren't produced
for your order unless you order them.

So mass production is gone. And, along with it, low-priced goods.
-------------

Not at all, we simply make things in huge lots when an order for that
many accumulates, unless the People vote it a critical commodity.

Products will be hand made at very high cost. Take you average car.
How can you organize a supply chain when your "vendors" have no idea
what quantities you will be ordering? And when you do order, the
vendors will have to supply the parts at cost.
------------------------------------------

In reality everything is done "at cost", profit is merely the rich
stealing a portion of the wage of the laborers and then partially
inflating the exchange medium without fully correcting for that.
Now that there are no rich to do so, cost is all that anything
requires. Investment is only done by the People as the State.

If we all decide we have enough
stuff for a month or two, we go home and pursue our hobbies after our
minimum hour jobs until enough people want new things. They literally
arrange with others who ALSO want more "stuff" to make it for one
another, via the computerized ordering system

Forget about computers - this is an extremely heavily capitalized
industry that will be vaporized by your system.
----------------------------------------

Nonsense. No "capital" from "rich" is required. The People's State
alots extra labor to begin new endeavors or tool-up for a new run.
This is done in factories all the time.

That is actually what is happening anyway, it is simply disguised
as the "rich" funding new endeavors by their stolen wealth and by
their greed dictating what the society will next produce.

between factories that
records all orders for manufacture and all labor hour credit. High
ticket items can be partly paid in advance by labor and partly by
promised future labor, time payment out of your wage to save storage
costs. If you don't work the hours, you forfeit the item till you
do.

All this can be done quite locally in terms of a govt of perhaps
only 5000 people either at public meetings or over the Net. Larger
governance are done via the Net or by study committees that report
back to everyone for grassroots approval.

-Steve

What size population are you talking about? It takes 5000 people just
to issue Social Security checks when all steps in the process are
considered.
--------------------------------------------

But not in one town or city. Nor do we need any such without "money".
It is totally scalable.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

R. Steve Walz · Nov 23, 2004

Pig Bladder wrote:

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:07:34 -0800, Tom Seim wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message news:<41A059D8.582@armory.com>...
Tom Seim wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message news:<419EC733.56E7@armory.com>...
Mark Fergerson wrote:

R. Steve Walz wrote:
...
All this can be done quite locally in terms of a govt of perhaps
only 5000 people

What size population are you talking about? It takes 5000 people just
to issue Social Security checks when all steps in the process are
considered.

How much money could be saved if citizens were allowed to keep their
own money and bank it instead of having Uncle Sugardaddy take it away
and pay 5000 parasites to give half of it back to you?
-------------------------------

That doesn't happen.
It only looks that way to slow-witted simpletons like you.
What actually happens to it is it flows toward the rich and
away from you. And banks are how they do it.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

John Larkin · Nov 23, 2004

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 06:27:08 GMT, Pig Bladder
<pig_bladder@anyspammer.org> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:23:47 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:47:19 -0700, Jim Thompson
thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 22:38:55 GMT, Bob Stephens
stephensyomamadigital@earthlink.net> wrote:

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 23:00:10 +0100, Simon Cussonnet wrote:

yeah Beaujolais nouveau isn't for red necks.
Best to keep fur us French

"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> a écrit dans le message news:
gaupp0pdt5s4h7i4ild3ig711r48526kdf@4ax.com...
Don't waste your money supporting the French enemy. Buy American or
Aussie !-)

...Jim Thompson

I say we reposses our California grapevines. They probably never payed for
them anyway...

Bob

Good point. Most people don't know that French vineyards were
destroyed by rot and vine cuttings from California were sent to France
to re-plant them.

But you know how it is... we bad Americans never bail out the
Europeans ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Hey, speaking of rotten French things, we just had a Safeway Select
Creme Bruille for dessert. Comes frozen in a box with two beautiful
big flat ceramic ramekins with the custard inside, and each has its
own sugar packet. You thaw it, sprinkle the sugar on top, and blast it
with a propane torch to crystalize the sugar. Takes a bit of practice
to get the knack, just like learning to solder. It was *really good*.
And I can reuse the ramekins for my Kozyshack Bruille version.

It was, er, made in France. We had it with, er, Pouilly Fuisse.

Ah, now get it! You just don't give a shit _who_ you piss off, do you?

Do you ever say anything interesting, or nice, or funny, or
thoughtful, or related to electronics? I thought not.

And why are you obsessed with excrement and urine? Given the choice,
I'll stick with to food and wine.

Excuse me... gotta go stir the grits.

John

Mark Fergerson · Nov 23, 2004

R. Steve Walz wrote:

Mark Fergerson wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

That's what I've been trying to tell you. Do you or do
you not believe in free will? What you've been proposing is
tantamount to "relieving" every being of it, not just its
consequences. Free will is totally valueless unless we learn
the lesson of _consequences_. That's what timebound
existence is all about.

One: You have NO fucking idea what "timebound" existence is all
about, and neither does anyone else.

Of course not. Rich and I are comparing what aren't even
hypotheses, because of the lack of "objective" evidence.
These are _guesses_ based on our personal experiences. Until
you grok that, kindly butt out.

Two: Consequences have nothing
whatsoever to do with the philosophical question of so-called "free
will".

That's your opinion. Yet you propose that "criminals"
suffer torture (consequences) as "warnings" to others. If
those others are incapable of deciding whether to take those
warnings seriously, there's no point other than satisfying
your perverse enjoyment of others' pain.

Also, no one can relieve a being of their fate, or the consequences
of that fate. If you effect their fate that is YOUR fate to do so,
it is caused as theirs is caused, by physical laws.

And there's no point in your saying anything at all
except as a predictable output of your mental "state
machine", such as the following:

There is only one future for us, just as there is only one tomorrow
that follows today, just as there have been only one tomorrow for
each previous yesterday.

You cannot merely "decide" to do other than you had previously
thought that you would, that was CAUSED by internal processes in
you beyond your awareness and manipulation; you have no fucking
control of that at all.

There is NO such thing as "your will". The thoughts you think own
and produce you, you not you "control" them. The thoughts you have
include your entire notion of you, thus they PRODUCE the entire aware
construct you being aware of who and what you are.

They arise due to your past and the processes your mind does with
that past according to physical laws that it follows, the chemistry
of the brain is every bit as Determined as any other physical
phenomenon which cannot disobey physical law.

To prove this to yourself, that you do not control your thoughts
but that they "think" you into being, simply note that you are unable
to voluntarily change what you believe right now, even the tiniest
belief, except that it may change in a manner totally beyond your
ability to stop it doing so. Not only do you not WANT to change it,
and would have to lie to say you did, but if it changed due to other
causation you would also not be able to stop it! Note that you cannot
even change whether you WANT to change it or not, OR stop THAT if it
is determined to change! And so on, it's elephants all the way down,
and none of them are yours!

Um, if I have no free will, how can I lie?

And don't EVEN try to give me some bullshit about QM "rescuing" "free
will" from Determinism, it never happened, and the morons who claim
it did are NOT even reputable physicists!

Kindly don't pre-blame me for others' foolishness.

Nothing like this had ever done before. And this was the
point at which it was discovered that Pain Hurts.

That's the Lesson of Consequences All had to learn.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with anything you're trying to say.

You're somewhat out of your depth here.

Mark L. Fergerson

Mark Fergerson · Nov 23, 2004

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 08:04:24 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 19:57:08 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 05:21:49 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Yup. Get your priorities in order; resolve your own
pain(s) and cause as few new ones for others as possible.
Leave others to do the same at their own pace.

You are getting close, but there are beings who are experiencing
the feeling of being at the bottom of a well with no way out.
He cries for help, and all the blessed ones walk by and yell
down at him, "Just pull yourself up by your bootstraps, like
we did."

I should also point out that dying horribly may be _the
only way out_, because the being involved deliberately
painted itself into that corner in order to learn not to do
it again next time around, or didn't get it last time
around. Did we go over reincarnation yet?

gently, not stridently

So are you and I. The well has no bottom or top.
"Blessedness" is relative...

Not to the guy at the bottom of the well. "Blessedness" means not
drowning.

Once again, there is no bottom. You just think there is
because of the limited perspective from your POV. Why else
would you try to linearize such a concept?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No, no, no, no, no. It's not linear at all. The reason I say that
there is a bottom is because you can't get any denser than a proton
without dropping out of space entirely. For Will, this means eternal
death.

Poor choice of words; perhaps "think there's a
singularity of that kind relevant to"? ISTM that you're
hopping between your local and All's POV without noticing.

"Eternal death"=zero degrees of freedom=inability to
change, yes?

You are asking less-complex things to make extremely
complex decisions they are simply inequipped for.

< I'm not going to quibble about the densities of quarks and
leptons, not to mention virtual particles _in their FOR_,
quantum black holes, and like that. We could go on forever
trying to correlate sensitivity to different forces as
degrees of free will, but that's a very bright red herring
AFAICT; that way lies foolishness like the QM/consciousness
connection I told RSW I don't accept.>

Spirit couldn't give a shit less, because spirit is the fucking
aether. It's the infinite, infinitely rigid, electrical matrix that
thinks it's the boss, and thinks it knows best what Will is supposed
to do, but it has been wrong about this since before the beginning of
time.

Good thing, too. Yes, suffering came into existence as a
direct consequence of Original Separation, but as I said,
that's the Lesson All learned by it. But Rich, don't you see
that it's also the _only_ lesson All could learn at that
point, because that's the only degree of freedom it had?

Since then, we timebounds have learned all sorts of other
lessons that we take back with us when we reintegrate.

You can tune into this Infinite Consciousness any time you want
to, by just letting yourself become aware of it. And you can tune into
Infinite Sentience any time you want, except your software keeps insisting
that your hardware is wrong.

Trouble with that sort of "tuning in" is that as far as
living my life is concerned, it's a distraction (I stopped
doing LSD some decades ago partly for that reason). In that
sense, my hardware is right because of its priorities like
day-to-day survival and interaction with other timebounds
with similar priorities.

Well, which has had more time to evolve through experimentation?

Interesting question. ISTM both evolved in tandem with
each other and still are. You think otherwise?

That just does not work, has never worked, and never will. And
every time it happens, it exacerbates the problem. She gets
buried that much deeper. On top of all the shit that she got
buried under that you left behind so that the part of you that
thinks it's the only part, could lift out and not feel the pain
that it itself has caused.

You still cannot feel another's pain. That's a horribly
wasteful illusion.

DOOOOOOOD!!!!

I am here to tell you, I Feel Them ALL! That's the point of this
whole exercise! What you feel is the _only_ reality there is!

It's still only _your_ reality. It isn't necessarily
anyone else's.

Have you asked your own anus about this? I'll bet _it_ knows it exists.

So? That has no bearing in comparing its reality with
mine. Just like any subpart of a larger whole, its
subjective reality is limited by its ability to acquire and
integrate experiences. It is simply not capable of
experiencing what _all of me_ does. But I see no
contradiction in the fact that I cannot have the same
reality it does, because not only is my scope of attention
wider, but my priorities are different, which weights
experiences differently in assembling my version of reality.

It does not suffer my troubles except as they affect its
functionality, and I only suffer its troubles as they affect
our _mutual_ functioning on the physical level because it's
part of my self. If I spend any time worrying about its
"life" beyond that, it's wasted because it can handle it
better than I can micromanage it for it.

Now don't start with "mutual" being applicable to all
lifeforms, and go all hazy about how "self" means the same
thing when I said my anus is part of myself that it means
when we say that all lifeforms are part of All's self. It
simply does not.

Mark L. Fergerson

EAGLE Netlist conversion

John Fields

Guest

Tim Wescott

Guest

keith

Guest

Pig Bladder

Guest

Pig Bladder

Guest

Clarence

Guest

Tom Del Rosso

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Pig Bladder

Guest

Chuck Harris

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

R. Steve Walz

Guest

R. Steve Walz

Guest

R. Steve Walz

Guest

R. Steve Walz

Guest

R. Steve Walz

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Mark Fergerson

Guest

Mark Fergerson

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor