From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 07:55:41 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer wrote:

Technically the Washington Post didn't literally ignore the five
candidates but it mentioned them only in passing in articles devoted
to the two candidates that it called "leading candidates" without
ever having explained why they were "leading." I wish I had saved
links to all of the Post's coverage to be able to demonstrate its
sly manipulation.

Was the Post able to prevent other rival papers from covering the
information it was not?

Well, that's the problem at this point, that there are so few papers
that there aren't many rivals to compete with. And as Mr. Reagan was
so fond of saying, competition builds better businesses.

The Washington Star is gone. The Washington Times is very much a
mouthpiece of the current administration and no real competition.
There is the City Paper weekly which is probably the best source
for local city election coverage. I would not be surprised if they
at least mentioned all the candidates.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In <11465s9$r55$1@panix2.panix.com> kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes: [snip]

The Washington Star is gone. The Washington Times is very much a
mouthpiece of the current administration and no real competition.
There is the City Paper weekly which is probably the best source
for local city election coverage. I would not be surprised if they
at least mentioned all the candidates.

how about dcist.com?

Oh, right... sniff
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Sat, 18 Jul 2026 20:11:52 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Is there a term for a name that was not in use at the time? For
instance World War I, the Angevin Empire, Old English, the Jurassic
Period, etc., none of which were used at the relevant time.

The entire rCLBCrCY era. Plus rCLADrCY up to about the 7th century.

The next time somebody tries to be a smartarse about claiming that the
21st century began in 2001, not 2000, point out to them that there was
no rCLyear 1rCY; the Gregorian Calendar didnrCOt actually start until 1582.
And in some places, not even then.

The rCLpre-RaphaelitesrCY, on the other hand ...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/26/26 21:13, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jul 2026 20:11:52 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Is there a term for a name that was not in use at the time? For
instance World War I, the Angevin Empire, Old English, the Jurassic
Period, etc., none of which were used at the relevant time.

The entire rCLBCrCY era. Plus rCLADrCY up to about the 7th century.

The next time somebody tries to be a smartarse about claiming that the
21st century began in 2001, not 2000, point out to them that there was
no rCLyear 1rCY; the Gregorian Calendar didnrCOt actually start until 1582. And in some places, not even then.

The rCLpre-RaphaelitesrCY, on the other hand ...

I assume you meant that there was no "year 0", unless you meant there
wasn't a "year 1" or a "year 2" or ...
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

The next time somebody tries to be a smartarse about claiming that
the 21st century began in 2001, not 2000, point out to them that
there was no rCLyear 1rCY; the Gregorian Calendar didnrCOt actually start
until 1582. And in some places, not even then.

I assume you meant that there was no "year 0", unless you meant
there wasn't a "year 1" or a "year 2" or ...

I'm not sure what he meant. There certainly was a year 1, of the
proleptic Gregorian Calendar. Meaning that nobody called it that at
the time. But yes, it immediately followed the year 1 BC, which was
also proleptic. But perfectly well defined.

Just as there certainly was a World War I, even though nobody called
it that at the time. And some people certainly did speak Old English,
even though nobody called it that at the time.

And Germany definitely exists, even though people in Germany don't
call it Germany.

There was indeed no year 0. 2000 years before the year 1000 was not
1000 BC, but 1001 BC. 2000 years after the year 1000 BC was not 1000
AD, but 1001 AD. That's not how I would have designed it, but nobody
consulted me.

Similarly with the Julian calendar.

"Proleptic" just means that if anyone tries to sell you a coin marked
something like AD 79 or 44 BC, you'll instantly know it's fake -- even
if the numbers are given as roman numerals.

The 21st century began in 2001, the 20th century began in 1901, ...
the 1st century began in the year 1. The fact that nobody at the time
called it the year 1 is irrelevant.

The 1st century BC, which should really be called the *last* century
BC, comprised the years 100 BC through 1 BC.

So if Lawrence thinks the 21st century didn't begin in 2001, he must
either think some centuries were longer or shorter than 100 years, or
that the 1st century AD included some dates from 1 BC, or that the
last century BC included some dates from 1 AD. Or that there was a
year 0. Or maybe 2 years 0, with 0 BC followed by 0 AD.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 12:34:07 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/25/2026 10:37 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 21:21:11 -0400, Cryptoengineer wrote:

There was a certain amount of pro-Nazi sentiment in a number of
Eastern European countries during WW2, seeing Germany potentially as
a better partner than the Soviets. When you're trapped between a
wolf and a bear, decisions get difficult.

Not just among them. Remember why the WWI Allies turned a blind eye as
Hitler began to re-arm Germany, contrary to the agreements from the
end of that War? It was because he was anti-Communist, and they saw
Communism as a greater threat than Fascism.

However, Russian media for internal consumption has taken
this history and run with it, describing the Kiev government
as 'Nazi', 'Satanic', 'Atheist', etc.

The Communists were Atheists. Hitler was not.

The current Russian line is to promote the Orthodox Church,
with Russia as the last bastion of true Christian values, and
a mission to correct Western decadence. The term to search is
'Russkiy Mir' (Russian World)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_world

Its proposals are very parallel to MAGA's.

Its proponents are influential in Russia as Nazis are influential in
Ukraine.

If you want to know more about the thinking behind it, have a look at
the philosophy of Traditionalism, in Russia represented primarily by
Alexandr Dugin.

...while the overwhelming bulk of attention devoted to Dugin
remains strictly political in interest (and most frequently in
character), a steadily growing body of literature has endeavored
to consider Dugin's actual intellectual profile and corpus. In
particular, light has been shed on Dugin's affiliation and
engagement with the current of Traditionalism, originally
expounded by the French intellectual Ren|- Gu|-non (1886-1951) and
popularly associated with such a range of authors as Ananda
Coomaraswamy (1877-1947), Frithjof Schuon (1907-1998), Julius
Evola (1898-1974), Hossein Nasr (1933-) as well as, to disputed
extents, Mircea Eliade (1907-1986) and others (Arnold 2020).
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 02:20:55 -0000 (UTC), "Keith F. Lynch"
<kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

The next time somebody tries to be a smartarse about claiming that
the 21st century began in 2001, not 2000, point out to them that
there was no rCLyear 1rCY; the Gregorian Calendar didnrCOt actually start >>> until 1582. And in some places, not even then.

I assume you meant that there was no "year 0", unless you meant
there wasn't a "year 1" or a "year 2" or ...

I'm not sure what he meant. There certainly was a year 1, of the
proleptic Gregorian Calendar. Meaning that nobody called it that at
the time. But yes, it immediately followed the year 1 BC, which was
also proleptic. But perfectly well defined.

In both the Julian and Gregorian Calendars, before they began to
diverge in AD 1582, the year 1 BC was followed by the year 1 AD, from
the the time that Dionysius Exiguus decided to renumber the current
Julian Calendar from the date he calculated as the birth of Christ (25
December 1 BC) instead of 25 December 753 AUC. I don't know if the
ancient Romans ever numbered years as BUC.

<snip>

The 21st century began in 2001, the 20th century began in 1901, ...
the 1st century began in the year 1. The fact that nobody at the time
called it the year 1 is irrelevant.

Indeed they did, if you are using the Gregorian or Julian calendars,
and it makes no difference whether you call it AD & BC or CE and BCE,
the calculation is the same.

The 1st century BC, which should really be called the *last* century
BC, comprised the years 100 BC through 1 BC.

So if Lawrence thinks the 21st century didn't begin in 2001, he must
either think some centuries were longer or shorter than 100 years, or
that the 1st century AD included some dates from 1 BC, or that the
last century BC included some dates from 1 AD. Or that there was a
year 0. Or maybe 2 years 0, with 0 BC followed by 0 AD.

Exactly.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 02:20:55 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

There was indeed no year 0.

Astronomers number the years to include a year 0.

DoesnrCOt mean there was a year 0. Just as numbering the year after that
as rCLyear 1rCY doesnrCOt mean there actually was a rCLyear 1rCY.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <11465bm$g5m$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/26/26 11:01, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/26/26 10:35, Scott Dorsey wrote:

It's true, you should never smoke tomato leaf cigars.

Or for that matter, tobacco leaf cigars.

Jesse Helms said on C-Span that tobacco produced carbon monoxide which
killed bacteria and prevented lung infections, and how tobacco was the
most healthful thing you could put in your body. And he should know,
given how close he was with the tobacco companies.

If cigars were bad for you, George Burns would not be alive today.

For those who don't get it, Burns died thirty years ago. (He did live to >>100, though.)

How do you know? He's probably sharing a fine Cohiba in Wyoming right now >with Fidel Castro and Huey Long. Even the man's name promotes cigar
smoking.

[Hal Heydt]
Oldest well documented age at death was 122 and about 4 months (I
could look up the exact number of days). It was a woman in
France.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 07:38:18 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer wrote:

That the press could control the government, or at least the
electoral process, as per Stead, is not implausible. Here in
Washington we just had a Democratic primary where seven candidates
were up for mayor. The press exerted its power simply by ignoring
five of them.

Surely there's nothing stopping you from setting up your own media
channel to publicize the "facts" that you feel the other channels are ignoring.

Isn't that what "freedom of the press" is supposed to be about?

'Freedom of the press' is that long ago that most Americans have
forgotten what it was like.
There is a World Press Freedom Index (WPFI) that keeps track of how bad
it is, really.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Freedom_Index>

The USA is down somewhere in the middle, barely ahead of the really
nasty counties. (and going down over the years)

Jan



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

The next time somebody tries to be a smartarse about claiming that
the 21st century began in 2001, not 2000, point out to them that
there was no |orCo-cyear 1|orCo-c; the Gregorian Calendar didn|orCo-Ot actually start
until 1582. And in some places, not even then.

I assume you meant that there was no "year 0", unless you meant
there wasn't a "year 1" or a "year 2" or ...

I'm not sure what he meant. There certainly was a year 1, of the
proleptic Gregorian Calendar. Meaning that nobody called it that at
the time. But yes, it immediately followed the year 1 BC, which was
also proleptic. But perfectly well defined.

Just as there certainly was a World War I, even though nobody called
it that at the time. And some people certainly did speak Old English,
even though nobody called it that at the time.

And Germany definitely exists, even though people in Germany don't
call it Germany.

There was indeed no year 0. 2000 years before the year 1000 was not
1000 BC, but 1001 BC. 2000 years after the year 1000 BC was not 1000
AD, but 1001 AD. That's not how I would have designed it, but nobody consulted me.

Similarly with the Julian calendar.

"Proleptic" just means that if anyone tries to sell you a coin marked something like AD 79 or 44 BC, you'll instantly know it's fake -- even
if the numbers are given as roman numerals.

But how about that letter from Marc Antony to Julius Caesar,
warning him about the upcoming year zero crisis?

Jan

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 02:20:55 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

There was indeed no year 0.

Astronomers number the years to include a year 0.

Doesn't mean there was a year 0. Just as numbering the year after that
as "year 1" doesn't mean there actually was a "year 1".

They way it is usually done is to add a - sign
and to leave off the BC or BCE.

Thus, the historians year 44 B.C. is the astronomers year -43,
(and it wasn't a leap year)

Jan

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 10:55:40 -0400, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

(To be more precise, potatoes are edible unless they are green or sprouting.)

From what I gather, potatoes can turn toxic even without visible
evidence of green colour or sprouting.

From what I have experienced, this is true. I was lucky to survive.
--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom


nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) posted:

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 07:38:18 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer wrote:

That the press could control the government, or at least the
electoral process, as per Stead, is not implausible. Here in
Washington we just had a Democratic primary where seven candidates
were up for mayor. The press exerted its power simply by ignoring
five of them.

Surely there's nothing stopping you from setting up your own media
channel to publicize the "facts" that you feel the other channels are ignoring.

Isn't that what "freedom of the press" is supposed to be about?

'Freedom of the press' is that long ago that most Americans have
forgotten what it was like.
There is a World Press Freedom Index (WPFI) that keeps track of how bad
it is, really.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Freedom_Index>

The USA is down somewhere in the middle, barely ahead of the really
nasty counties. (and going down over the years)

If Trump gets his way that great chunk of dark blue at the top of the map will disappear.



--
athel

Living in Marseilles for 39 years; mainly in England before that,
with long periods in Singapore, California, Chile and Canada
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 27/07/26 19:33, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

"Proleptic" just means that if anyone tries to sell you a coin
marked something like AD 79 or 44 BC, you'll instantly know it's
fake -- even if the numbers are given as roman numerals.

But how about that letter from Marc Antony to Julius Caesar, warning
him about the upcoming year zero crisis?

Back then they didn't have the concept of zero. But maybe that was
the crisis: hey, year zero has gone missing.

The thing that really shocked everyone was when they found Jesus's birth certificate, and the date said 4 BC.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <1rywl5o.ndllc41xllbciN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:

Thus, the historians year 44 B.C. is the astronomers year -43,
(and it wasn't a leap year)

Numerous events were held in 2010 to mark the 2,500th anniversary
of the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC. The Greek government even
minted a 2-euro coin with those dates on it.

-- Richard
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 05:38:06 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D|+Oliveiro
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 02:20:55 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

There was indeed no year 0.

Astronomers number the years to include a year 0.

DoesnrCOt mean there was a year 0. Just as numbering the year after that
as rCLyear 1rCY doesnrCOt mean there actually was a rCLyear 1rCY.

But there was a year that is numbered 1.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 11:33:49 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

"Proleptic" just means that if anyone tries to sell you a coin marked
something like AD 79 or 44 BC, you'll instantly know it's fake -- even
if the numbers are given as roman numerals.

But how about that letter from Marc Antony to Julius Caesar,
warning him about the upcoming year zero crisis?

A year in which time would be frozen and nothing would happen.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/27/26 02:24, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

In article <11465bm$g5m$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/26/26 11:01, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/26/26 10:35, Scott Dorsey wrote:

It's true, you should never smoke tomato leaf cigars.

Or for that matter, tobacco leaf cigars.

Jesse Helms said on C-Span that tobacco produced carbon monoxide which >>>> killed bacteria and prevented lung infections, and how tobacco was the >>>> most healthful thing you could put in your body. And he should know,
given how close he was with the tobacco companies.

If cigars were bad for you, George Burns would not be alive today.

For those who don't get it, Burns died thirty years ago. (He did live to >>> 100, though.)

How do you know? He's probably sharing a fine Cohiba in Wyoming right now >> with Fidel Castro and Huey Long. Even the man's name promotes cigar
smoking.

[Hal Heydt]
Oldest well documented age at death was 122 and about 4 months (I
could look up the exact number of days). It was a woman in
France.

Jeanne Calment.

Not only was she the world's oldest person, but her financial
arrangements turned out fairly amazing; from Wikipedia:

"In 1965, aged 90 and with no heirs left, Calment signed a life estate contract on her apartment with civil law notary Andr|--Fran|oois Raffray, selling the property in exchange for a right of occupancy and a monthly revenue of 2,500 francs (re4380) until her death. Raffray died on 25
December 1995, by which time Calment had received more than double the apartment's value from him, and his family had to continue making
payments. She commented on the situation by saying, "in life, one
sometimes makes bad deals". In 1985, she moved into a nursing home,
having lived on her own until the age of 110."

But nonetheless, Raffray's family still had to continue paying the 2,500 francs each month for another ten years.

As Calment said of Raffray, "In life, one sometimes makes bad deals."
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

If cigars were bad for you, George Burns would not be alive today.

[Hal Heydt]
Oldest well documented age at death was 122 and about 4 months (I
could look up the exact number of days). It was a woman in
France.

This just goes to show you that chain-smoking Gauloises is not as healthy
for you as cigars.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> wrote:

The thing that really shocked everyone was when they found Jesus's birth >certificate, and the date said 4 BC.

It was probably too late. Has ICE deported him yet?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom


"Evelyn C. Leeper" <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> posted:

On 7/27/26 02:24, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

In article <11465bm$g5m$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/26/26 11:01, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/26/26 10:35, Scott Dorsey wrote:

It's true, you should never smoke tomato leaf cigars.

Or for that matter, tobacco leaf cigars.

Jesse Helms said on C-Span that tobacco produced carbon monoxide which >>>> killed bacteria and prevented lung infections, and how tobacco was the >>>> most healthful thing you could put in your body. And he should know, >>>> given how close he was with the tobacco companies.

If cigars were bad for you, George Burns would not be alive today.

For those who don't get it, Burns died thirty years ago. (He did live to >>> 100, though.)

How do you know? He's probably sharing a fine Cohiba in Wyoming right now >> with Fidel Castro and Huey Long. Even the man's name promotes cigar
smoking.

[Hal Heydt]
Oldest well documented age at death was 122 and about 4 months (I
could look up the exact number of days). It was a woman in
France.

Jeanne Calment.

Not only was she the world's oldest person, but her financial
arrangements turned out fairly amazing; from Wikipedia:

"In 1965, aged 90 and with no heirs left, Calment signed a life estate contract on her apartment with civil law notary Andr|--Fran|oois Raffray, selling the property in exchange for a right of occupancy and a monthly revenue of 2,500 francs (re4380) until her death. Raffray died on 25 December 1995, by which time Calment had received more than double the apartment's value from him, and his family had to continue making
payments. She commented on the situation by saying, "in life, one
sometimes makes bad deals". In 1985, she moved into a nursing home,
having lived on her own until the age of 110."

But nonetheless, Raffray's family still had to continue paying the 2,500 francs each month for another ten years.

As Calment said of Raffray, "In life, one sometimes makes bad deals."

The film Le Viager, starring Michel Serrault and made long before anyone outside Arles had heard of Jeanne Calment, deals with that sort of story.
--
athel

Living in Marseilles for 39 years; mainly in England before that,
with long periods in Singapore, California, Chile and Canada
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom


kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) posted:

Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> wrote:

The thing that really shocked everyone was when they found Jesus's birth >certificate, and the date said 4 BC.

It was probably too late. Has ICE deported him yet?

A joke, OK, but unfortunately ICE is no joke.
--
athel

Living in Marseilles for 39 years; mainly in England before that,
with long periods in Singapore, California, Chile and Canada
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/27/2026 8:11 AM, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

On 7/27/26 02:24, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

In article <11465bm$g5m$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/26/26 11:01, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/26/26 10:35, Scott Dorsey wrote:

It's true, you should never smoke tomato leaf cigars.

Or for that matter, tobacco leaf cigars.

Jesse Helms said on C-Span that tobacco produced carbon monoxide which >>>>> killed bacteria and prevented lung infections, and how tobacco was the >>>>> most healthful thing you could put in your body.-a And he should know, >>>>> given how close he was with the tobacco companies.

If cigars were bad for you, George Burns would not be alive today.

For those who don't get it, Burns died thirty years ago. (He did
live to
100, though.)

How do you know?-a He's probably sharing a fine Cohiba in Wyoming
right now
with Fidel Castro and Huey Long.-a Even the man's name promotes cigar
smoking.

[Hal Heydt]
Oldest well documented age at death was 122 and about 4 months (I
could look up the exact number of days).-a It was a woman in
France.

Jeanne Calment.

Not only was she the world's oldest person, but her financial
arrangements turned out fairly amazing; from Wikipedia:

"In 1965, aged 90 and with no heirs left, Calment signed a life estate contract on her apartment with civil law notary Andr|--Fran|oois Raffray, selling the property in exchange for a right of occupancy and a monthly revenue of 2,500 francs (re4380) until her death. Raffray died on 25 December 1995, by which time Calment had received more than double the apartment's value from him, and his family had to continue making
payments. She commented on the situation by saying, "in life, one
sometimes makes bad deals". In 1985, she moved into a nursing home,
having lived on her own until the age of 110."

But nonetheless, Raffray's family still had to continue paying the 2,500 francs each month for another ten years.

As Calment said of Raffray, "In life, one sometimes makes bad deals."

Back in the 90s, there was a similar situation in NYC, in which HIV
sufferers 'sold' their condos to investors, with the stipulations
that they had free occupancy until they died.

In a lot of cases, HIV treatments were developed that greatly
extended the occupant's lives, to the consternation of the investors.

pt

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Le 27/07/2026 |a 13:11, Evelyn C. Leeper a |-crit :

On 7/27/26 02:24, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

Oldest well documented age at death was 122 and about 4 months (I
could look up the exact number of days).-a It was a woman in
France.

Jeanne Calment.

Not only was she the world's oldest person, but her financial
arrangements turned out fairly amazing; from Wikipedia:

"In 1965, aged 90 and with no heirs left, Calment signed a life estate contract on her apartment with civil law notary Andr|--Fran|oois Raffray, selling the property in exchange for a right of occupancy and a monthly revenue of 2,500 francs (re4380) until her death. Raffray died on 25 December 1995, by which time Calment had received more than double the apartment's value from him, and his family had to continue making
payments. She commented on the situation by saying, "in life, one
sometimes makes bad deals". In 1985, she moved into a nursing home,
having lived on her own until the age of 110."

But nonetheless, Raffray's family still had to continue paying the 2,500 francs each month for another ten years. [...]

How sporting of them not to bump the old girl off!

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 10:57:02 +0100, Liz Tuddenham wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 23:17:15 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 10:55:40 -0400, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

(To be more precise, potatoes are edible unless they are green or
sprouting.)

From what I gather, potatoes can turn toxic even without visible
evidence of green colour or sprouting.

From what I have experienced, this is true. I was lucky to survive.

Were the potatoes that poisoned you exposed to sunlight for very long?
(Not sure how long is too long -- days? weeks?) I gather that is what
brings on the toxicity. It might be accompanied by greening/sprouting
-- or it might not.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 13:06:41 -0400, Cryptoengineer wrote:

Back in the 90s, there was a similar situation in NYC, in which HIV
sufferers 'sold' their condos to investors, with the stipulations
that they had free occupancy until they died.

In a lot of cases, HIV treatments were developed that greatly
extended the occupant's lives, to the consternation of the
investors.

Only in the USA, it seems, could you set up successful businesses that
profit off sickness.

Something similar happened when COVID-19 broke out -- a whole bunch of
Efc|Efc+ medical personnel found themselves laid off, without a job. And this at a time when, you would think, they would be needed more than ever.

How come? Because the businesses they were working for were set up on
the basis of making lots of money from elective surgeries. And much of
the market for that disappeared in the face of more urgent priorities.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:36:35 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:

The thing that really shocked everyone was when they found Jesus's
birth certificate, and the date said 4 BC.

Not only that, the Roman Census that his parents went back to
Bethlehem for didnrCOt happen until 7 AD.

That just proves how rCLmiraculousrCY religion is, doesnrCOt it ...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 12:52:59 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 05:38:06 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 02:20:55 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

There was indeed no year 0.

Astronomers number the years to include a year 0.

DoesnrCOt mean there was a year 0. Just as numbering the year after
that as rCLyear 1rCY doesnrCOt mean there actually was a rCLyear 1rCY.

But there was a year that is numbered 1.

Nobody at the time said rCLthis is year 1rCY.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 23:25:27 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D|Oliveiro
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 13:06:41 -0400, Cryptoengineer wrote:

Back in the 90s, there was a similar situation in NYC, in which HIV
sufferers 'sold' their condos to investors, with the stipulations
that they had free occupancy until they died.

In a lot of cases, HIV treatments were developed that greatly
extended the occupant's lives, to the consternation of the
investors.

Only in the USA, it seems, could you set up successful businesses that
profit off sickness.

What? Is the US the only country where a business manufactures and
sells pharmaceuticals? For that matter, the only country where there
are businesses that sell the products that pharmaceutical company
makes?

"The biggest pharmaceutical manufacturers in New Zealand are Baxter
Healthcare Ltd, Douglas Manufacturing Ltd, Biomed Ltd, and API
Consumer Brands."

How about life and health insurance companies? The only reason that
they exist is that sickness occurs and sometimes results in death.

Something similar happened when COVID-19 broke out -- a whole bunch of
?? medical personnel found themselves laid off, without a job. And this
at a time when, you would think, they would be needed more than ever.

How come? Because the businesses they were working for were set up on
the basis of making lots of money from elective surgeries. And much of
the market for that disappeared in the face of more urgent priorities.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 28/07/26 09:28, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:36:35 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:

The thing that really shocked everyone was when they found Jesus's
birth certificate, and the date said 4 BC.

Not only that, the Roman Census that his parents went back to
Bethlehem for didnrCOt happen until 7 AD.

That just proves how rCLmiraculousrCY religion is, doesnrCOt it ...

It's entirely possible that there were two different prophets, whose
stories were merged in the oral tradition. Cross-contamination of
stories has been common enough in the past.

One of the two might even have been called Brian.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In Message-ID:<1148plg$3jt5q$7@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence D Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 12:52:59 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote:

<snip>

But there was a year that is numbered 1.

Nobody at the time said othis is year 1o.

You are correct, but I think you missed the nuance of the tenses:
But there *was* a year that *is* numbered 1.

And I'm likely to regret getting pulled into this, but it's better
for someone else to stand up for Steve than for him to have to for
himself.
--
Sue Dominus
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:13:23 -0400, Tony Cooper wrote:

How about life and health insurance companies?

Exhibit A: a certain murder trial going on in the US, where there is
remarkably widespread sympathy among the general public for a man who
has pretty much admitted killing a health-insurance company executive
in cold blood.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 03:12:27 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D|Oliveiro
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:13:23 -0400, Tony Cooper wrote:

How about life and health insurance companies?

Exhibit A: a certain murder trial going on in the US, where there is >remarkably widespread sympathy among the general public for a man who
has pretty much admitted killing a health-insurance company executive
in cold blood.

"Exhibit A" in what case? You wrote: "Only in the USA, it seems,
could you set up successful businesses that profit off sickness."

The "sympathy" in the Mangione case is that many Americans feel
healthcare insurance companies "delay", "deny", and "depose" (words
Mangione inscrimbed on the cartridge cases), and the victim - CEO of UnitedHealthcare - was representitive of a system that profits more
because they delay, deny, and depose.

But how is that an example of "Only in the USA"?

In any country in the world that has a business or organization that
authorizes benefits, and - on occasion - denies or delays those
benefits, there is going to be some resentment by some.

Successful businesses that profit off sickness are found in just about
every country. Look no further than your own pharmacist (or, as you
may call them, "chemist") who profits if you are sick and fill your prescription with them.





--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 28.07.2026 kl. 01.25 skrev Lawrence DrCOOliveiro:

Only in the USA, it seems, could you set up successful businesses that
profit off sickness.

Evelyn C. Leeper told us about a French woman and a businessman.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 12:52:59 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 05:38:06 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 02:20:55 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

There was indeed no year 0.

Astronomers number the years to include a year 0.

Doesn't mean there was a year 0. Just as numbering the year after
that as "year 1" doesn't mean there actually was a "year 1".

But there was a year that is numbered 1.

Nobody at the time said "this is year 1".

But they said so, at some other time, in France.
IIRC they didn't know it until it was over,
but they lived while year II was decreed to have started,

Jan


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/28/26 04:29, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 12:52:59 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 05:38:06 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 02:20:55 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

There was indeed no year 0.

Astronomers number the years to include a year 0.

Doesn't mean there was a year 0. Just as numbering the year after
that as "year 1" doesn't mean there actually was a "year 1".

But there was a year that is numbered 1.

Nobody at the time said "this is year 1".

But they said so, at some other time, in France.
IIRC they didn't know it until it was over,
but they lived while year II was decreed to have started,

For that matter, countries in which the years are numbered based on who
is the ruler will have several "Year 1"s.

For example, in Japan the Heisei Era year 1 is Gregorian year 1989.

(And how do I know this? Because Japanese kaiju films are often
described by the era in which they were made.)
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> wrote:

On 28/07/26 09:28, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:36:35 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:

The thing that really shocked everyone was when they found Jesus's
birth certificate, and the date said 4 BC.

Not only that, the Roman Census that his parents went back to
Bethlehem for didn't happen until 7 AD.

That just proves how "miraculous" religion is, doesn't it ...

It's entirely possible that there were two different prophets, whose
stories were merged in the oral tradition. Cross-contamination of
stories has been common enough in the past.

One of the two might even have been called Brian.

It is also quite possible that there were none,

Jan
-- <https://www.amazon.com/Obsolete-Paradigm-Historical-Jesus-ebook/dp/B0FXJ1KYDN>

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:13:23 -0400, Tony Cooper wrote:

How about life and health insurance companies?

Health insurance desn't really exist in most of the world in the sense that
it does in the US. There are some for-profit insurance companies elsewhere that basically insure against high-risk, low-probability events, or which provide coverage to travellers going to a country where they may not be able to use the local healthcare. But profit margins are nothing like they are
in the US.

Life insurance is a different matter, altogether.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 08:10:07 -0400 (EDT), kludge@panix.com (Scott
Dorsey) wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:13:23 -0400, Tony Cooper wrote:

How about life and health insurance companies?

Health insurance desn't really exist in most of the world in the sense that >it does in the US. There are some for-profit insurance companies elsewhere >that basically insure against high-risk, low-probability events, or which >provide coverage to travellers going to a country where they may not be able >to use the local healthcare. But profit margins are nothing like they are
in the US.

Life insurance is a different matter, altogether.
--scott

I agree with the "most of the world", but they do exist in some major
countries like the UK, Japan, and Germany.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom


Ar an t-ocht|| l|i is fiche de m|! I||il, scr|!obh Scott Dorsey:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:13:23 -0400, Tony Cooper wrote:

How about life and health insurance companies?

Health insurance desn't really exist in most of the world in the sense that it does in the US.

The Dutch, German and Swiss model of -+gesetzliche Krankenkassen-2 is similar, but, at least in Germany, it has the important characteristic that a third party (not the insurance companies themselves) determines what should be covered. Less of the pre-authorisations and very specific formularies of the drugs covered by a given insurance company that are the bane of doctorsrCO working lives in the US.

The model is under strain in Germany currently given the ageing population, meaning the proportion of younger, generally-healthy insured has reduced compared to the proportion of older, less-likely-to-be-generally-healthy insured. The weakness of a health insurance model is that most of us will get sick as we get older and it would be difficult to price the premium at a level that is both realistic and affordable for the average 85 year old.

There are some for-profit insurance companies elsewhere that basically insure against high-risk, low-probability events, or which provide coverage to travellers going to a country where they may not be able to use the local healthcare. But profit margins are nothing like they are in the US.

The other malign incentive in the US is that everyone is entitled to Medicare once they hit the age threshold for that, so if an intervention is only likely to give benefit after Medicare kicks in, it is not in the financial interest of the insurance company to offer it.

Life insurance is a different matter, altogether.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

--
rCyAs I sat looking up at the Guinness ad, I could never figure out /
How your man stayed up on the surfboard after fourteen pints of stoutrCO
(C. Moore)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <1ryycz7.10il1dmuprvg9N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:

Nobody at the time said "this is year 1".

But they said so, at some other time, in France.

And year 0 in Cambodia. Though Wikipedia both affirms and denies
that this happened.

-- Richard
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <1148pih$3jt5q$6@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

Not only that, the Roman Census that his parents went back to
Bethlehem for didn't happen until 7 AD.

And no Roman census required people to travel to their ancestors'
home.

Both that story and the one in Matthew are most naturally interpreted
as explanations of how Jesus could be born in Bethlehem (as required
by scripture) when he was already known as Jesus of Nazareth.

-- Richard
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 08:10:07 -0400 (EDT), kludge@panix.com (Scott
Dorsey) wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:13:23 -0400, Tony Cooper wrote:

How about life and health insurance companies?

Health insurance desn't really exist in most of the world in the sense that >it does in the US. There are some for-profit insurance companies elsewhere >that basically insure against high-risk, low-probability events, or which >provide coverage to travellers going to a country where they may not be able >to use the local healthcare. But profit margins are nothing like they are
in the US.

Before the Reagan/Thatcher years we had "Medical Aids" which were
cooperative mutial societies run by their members, though often set up
and subsidised by employers.

After the mid-90s there were a lot of "Medical Schemes" run on the US
model, with external shareholders making private profit out of public
misery.

Life insurance is a different matter, altogether.

Not so very different. There were mutual insurance societies,
cooperatives run by their members, but now there are more companies,
with external shareholders. Many of the mutual ones changed in the
1980s, again under the influence of the Reagan-Thatcher neoliberalism.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 06:44:10 -0400, "Evelyn C. Leeper" <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

For that matter, countries in which the years are numbered based on who
is the ruler will have several "Year 1"s.

For example, in Japan the Heisei Era year 1 is Gregorian year 1989.

(And how do I know this? Because Japanese kaiju films are often
described by the era in which they were made.)

And in the UK regnal years were used at least until the 19th century.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

<athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) posted:

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 07:38:18 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer wrote:

That the press could control the government, or at least the
electoral process, as per Stead, is not implausible. Here in
Washington we just had a Democratic primary where seven candidates
were up for mayor. The press exerted its power simply by ignoring
five of them.

Surely there's nothing stopping you from setting up your own media channel to publicize the "facts" that you feel the other channels are ignoring.

Isn't that what "freedom of the press" is supposed to be about?

'Freedom of the press' is that long ago that most Americans have
forgotten what it was like.
There is a World Press Freedom Index (WPFI) that keeps track of how bad
it is, really.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Freedom_Index>

The USA is down somewhere in the middle, barely ahead of the really
nasty counties. (and going down over the years)

If Trump gets his way that great chunk of dark blue at the top of the map will
disappear.

Fortunately, some European newspapers
(such as the British Guardian, or the Dutch NRC)
are protected with redactional statutes
that make it nearly impossible for owners
to interfere with the independence of the editors.

There is no way that Trump or his cronies can do anything about that,

Jan



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <1ryz6pb.k895kv1luko14N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:

Fortunately, some European newspapers
(such as the British Guardian, or the Dutch NRC)
are protected with redactional statutes
that make it nearly impossible for owners
to interfere with the independence of the editors.

There is no way that Trump or his cronies can do anything about that,

Unless he contrives to sue them out of existence.

-- Richard
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/28/26 15:57, Richard Tobin wrote:

In article <1ryz6pb.k895kv1luko14N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:

Fortunately, some European newspapers
(such as the British Guardian, or the Dutch NRC)
are protected with redactional statutes
that make it nearly impossible for owners
to interfere with the independence of the editors.

There is no way that Trump or his cronies can do anything about that,

Unless he contrives to sue them out of existence.

Although he has discovered that that route is fraught with danger...

Or, in other words, "Danger, thy name is "Discovery."
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 08:10:07 -0400 (EDT), kludge@panix.com (Scott
Dorsey) wrote:

Life insurance is a different matter, altogether.

Not so very different. There were mutual insurance societies,
cooperatives run by their members, but now there are more companies,
with external shareholders. Many of the mutual ones changed in the
1980s, again under the influence of the Reagan-Thatcher neoliberalism.

Life insurance is different in that everybody is going to get one and only
one payout, but everyone gets a payout. So the bet is only on how long a person is going to live.

Because of this a lot of life insurance companies have started making derivative securities and things like annuities because the customer
base for their primary product is limited.

US Health insurance started out life as just that... insurance against
sickness or injury, but it expanded into preventative care which turns
it into something very different. It's no longer insurance in the sense
that fire or burglary insurance is.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

In article <1ryz6pb.k895kv1luko14N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:

Fortunately, some European newspapers
(such as the British Guardian, or the Dutch NRC)
are protected with redactional statutes
that make it nearly impossible for owners
to interfere with the independence of the editors.

There is no way that Trump or his cronies can do anything about that,

Unless he contrives to sue them out of existence.

He would need to go through British or Belgian courts for that,
I guess. [1]
They wouldn't go along, I guess again,

Jan

[1] Most Dutch newspapers and magazines are owned nowadays
by Belgians

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 13:59:43 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> wrote:

It's entirely possible that there were two different prophets,
whose stories were merged in the oral tradition.
Cross-contamination of stories has been common enough in the past.

One of the two might even have been called Brian.

It is also quite possible that there were none,

Oh, there were lots of prophets, all right. Some of them were likely
even named rCLJoshuarCY.

Remember, the followers are only going to remember the successful
ones.

Religious argument = circular argument, again.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 18:12:24 -0000 (UTC), Richard Tobin wrote:

Both that story and the one in Matthew are most naturally
interpreted as explanations of how Jesus could be born in Bethlehem
(as required by scripture) when he was already known as Jesus of
Nazareth.

Or just random historical references stuck in (incompetently) to try
to make the mythology seem more like fact rather than fiction.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

Oh, there were lots of prophets, all right. Some of them were likely
even named rCLJoshuarCY.

Anybody can prophecy. I do it it all the time.

Remember, the followers are only going to remember the successful
ones.

Oh, sometimes they remember the unsuccessful ones very very distinctly,
and not in a good way.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 23:34:03 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:

Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

In article <1ryz6pb.k895kv1luko14N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:

Fortunately, some European newspapers
(such as the British Guardian, or the Dutch NRC)
are protected with redactional statutes
that make it nearly impossible for owners
to interfere with the independence of the editors.

There is no way that Trump or his cronies can do anything about that,

Unless he contrives to sue them out of existence.

He would need to go through British or Belgian courts for that,
I guess. [1]
They wouldn't go along, I guess again,

But Trump did sue the BBC. The case was filed in Florida.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-bbc-lawsuit-defamation-a9fd196c4f242decd8f28e8d0ce74442

The suit was withdrawn with plans to re-submit in a different form.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/donald-trump-backtracks-10b-bbc-142000502.html

Trump also sued the Guardian, filing in Florida, but

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/13/trump-media-guardian-lawsuit but that case was dropped.


According to "Search Assist", Trump also sued the NRC Handelsblad
newspaper for defamation, but I can't find a corraborating article:

Search Assist

commons.wikimedia.org
Daniel Torok / Public domain


Donald Trump has filed a lawsuit against the Dutch newspaper NRC
Handelsblad, claiming defamation over an article that he alleges
misrepresented his actions and statements. The lawsuit seeks damages
for harming his reputation and is part of his broader pattern of legal
actions against media outlets.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/28/26 19:12, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

Oh, there were lots of prophets, all right. Some of them were likely
even named rCLJoshuarCY.

Anybody can prophecy. I do it it all the time.

It's like the exchange from Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part 1, Act III,
Scene 1:

Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man,
But will they come when you do call for them?
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 17:08:46 -0400 (EDT), kludge@panix.com (Scott
Dorsey) wrote:

Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 08:10:07 -0400 (EDT), kludge@panix.com (Scott
Dorsey) wrote:

Life insurance is a different matter, altogether.

Not so very different. There were mutual insurance societies,
cooperatives run by their members, but now there are more companies,
with external shareholders. Many of the mutual ones changed in the
1980s, again under the influence of the Reagan-Thatcher neoliberalism.

Life insurance is different in that everybody is going to get one and only >one payout, but everyone gets a payout. So the bet is only on how long a >person is going to live.

That's not always the case. My wife and have 20-year whole life
policies for $5,000 each with Metropolitan Insurance company that we
purchased in 1964. We no longer pay premiums and haven't since 1984.
The death benefits are now about $25,000 each, and we receive
quarterly dividends. The amount has changed over the years, but it's
currently about $31.00 each.

Because of this a lot of life insurance companies have started making >derivative securities and things like annuities because the customer
base for their primary product is limited.

US Health insurance started out life as just that... insurance against >sickness or injury,

Well, they don't insure against sickness or injury, but do insure
against the costs if sickness or injury.

but it expanded into preventative care which turns
it into something very different. It's no longer insurance in the sense
that fire or burglary insurance is.

?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 29/07/26 09:28, Tony Cooper wrote:

Donald Trump has filed a lawsuit against the Dutch newspaper NRC
Handelsblad, claiming defamation over an article that he alleges misrepresented his actions and statements. The lawsuit seeks damages
for harming his reputation and is part of his broader pattern of legal actions against media outlets.

If "harming his reputation" is the basis of his suits, he should be
suing himself.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <otei6lt3g4is8ocls3sm9uqfi3aet5hvgb@4ax.com>,
Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

That's not always the case. My wife and have 20-year whole life
policies for $5,000 each with Metropolitan Insurance company that we >purchased in 1964. We no longer pay premiums and haven't since 1984.
The death benefits are now about $25,000 each, and we receive
quarterly dividends. The amount has changed over the years, but it's >currently about $31.00 each.

[Hal Heydt]
On another take... I received a letter today from an insurance
company offering life insurance to my wife. Problem? She *died*
exactly 49 months ago. You'd think they'd do at least minimal
due diligence...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 29/07/26 12:19, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

[Hal Heydt]
On another take... I received a letter today from an insurance
company offering life insurance to my wife. Problem? She*died*
exactly 49 months ago. You'd think they'd do at least minimal
due diligence...

Accept their offer, pay one month's premium, and then send them the
death certificate.

If they claim that her death was a pre-existing condition, it's bad
publicity for them.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 23:34:03 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:

Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

In article <1ryz6pb.k895kv1luko14N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:

Fortunately, some European newspapers
(such as the British Guardian, or the Dutch NRC)
are protected with redactional statutes
that make it nearly impossible for owners
to interfere with the independence of the editors.

There is no way that Trump or his cronies can do anything about that,

Unless he contrives to sue them out of existence.

He would need to go through British or Belgian courts for that,
I guess. [1]
They wouldn't go along, I guess again,

But Trump did sue the BBC. The case was filed in Florida.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-bbc-lawsuit-defamation-a9fd196c4f242decd8f28e

8d0ce74442

The suit was withdrawn with plans to re-submit in a different form.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/donald-trump-backtracks-10b-bbc-1

42000502.html

Trump also sued the Guardian, filing in Florida, but

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/13/trump-media-guardian-lawsuit but that case was dropped.

According to "Search Assist", Trump also sued the NRC Handelsblad
newspaper for defamation, but I can't find a corraborating article:

Search Assist

commons.wikimedia.org
Daniel Torok / Public domain

Donald Trump has filed a lawsuit against the Dutch newspaper NRC
Handelsblad, claiming defamation over an article that he alleges misrepresented his actions and statements. The lawsuit seeks damages
for harming his reputation and is part of his broader pattern of legal actions against media outlets.

The Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad no longer exists,
it is just NRC nowadays. [1]
They have informal collaborations with English-language newspapers,
such as the New York Times and the Guardian.
They also republish selected pieces from the Economist.

So it is not surprising that they irked him.
If I am not mistaken damages assigned by an American court
are not collectible in the Netherlands,

Jan

[1] Both the Nieuwe Rotterdamse Courant
and Het Algemeen Handelsblad (Amsterdam)
were 'liberal' in the Dutch sense.

That is, 'liberal' in cultural contexts,
and 'conservative' in the economic sense.
Their views generally aligned with those
of the progressive 'harbour barons'.



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 11:35:49 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:

Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 23:34:03 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:

Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

In article <1ryz6pb.k895kv1luko14N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:

Fortunately, some European newspapers
(such as the British Guardian, or the Dutch NRC)
are protected with redactional statutes
that make it nearly impossible for owners
to interfere with the independence of the editors.

There is no way that Trump or his cronies can do anything about that,

Unless he contrives to sue them out of existence.

He would need to go through British or Belgian courts for that,
I guess. [1]
They wouldn't go along, I guess again,

But Trump did sue the BBC. The case was filed in Florida.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-bbc-lawsuit-defamation-a9fd196c4f242decd8f28e

8d0ce74442

The suit was withdrawn with plans to re-submit in a different form.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/donald-trump-backtracks-10b-bbc-1

42000502.html

Trump also sued the Guardian, filing in Florida, but

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/13/trump-media-guardian-lawsuit >> but that case was dropped.


According to "Search Assist", Trump also sued the NRC Handelsblad
newspaper for defamation, but I can't find a corraborating article:

Search Assist

commons.wikimedia.org
Daniel Torok / Public domain


Donald Trump has filed a lawsuit against the Dutch newspaper NRC
Handelsblad, claiming defamation over an article that he alleges
misrepresented his actions and statements. The lawsuit seeks damages
for harming his reputation and is part of his broader pattern of legal
actions against media outlets.

The Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad no longer exists,
it is just NRC nowadays. [1]
They have informal collaborations with English-language newspapers,
such as the New York Times and the Guardian.
They also republish selected pieces from the Economist.

So it is not surprising that they irked him.
If I am not mistaken damages assigned by an American court
are not collectible in the Netherlands,

Ross Clark, in another post, wrote:

"The recent Chinese "test" firing of a missile deep into the south
Pacific was described by our Prime Minister as "performative".
Having been accustomed only to the linguistic/philosophical use of
this
term (where it applies to verbs or utterances), I was puzzled; but
there
does seem to be another actual usage, which is "done very publicly to
make a point"."

That's Trump's motivation in filing many of these lawsuits. He has no expectation of winning them or receiving settlements.

If he simply denies something, it's a one-day story. (Of course, he
can and does repeat the denial, but it's buried in a slew of other
repeated "injustices".)

By filing an unwinnable lawsuit for an outrageous amount, the denial
gets more attention and the progress of the suit is covered. The
other party incurs expenses responding to the suit. The cost of
filing or legal fees is not borne by Trump, US taxpayers pay that.




--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

begin fnord
djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:

On another take... I received a letter today from an insurance
company offering life insurance to my wife. Problem? She *died*
exactly 49 months ago. You'd think they'd do at least minimal
due diligence...

The AARP seems to finally have stopped trying to get my mother to join.
I don't see why, she's only been dead for ten years.
--
Steve Coltrin spcoltri@omcl.org
"A group known as the League of Human Dignity helped arrange for Deuel
to be driven to a local livestock scale, where he could be weighed."
- Associated Press
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/29/26 10:52, Steve Coltrin wrote:

begin fnord
djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:

On another take... I received a letter today from an insurance
company offering life insurance to my wife. Problem? She *died*
exactly 49 months ago. You'd think they'd do at least minimal
due diligence...

The AARP seems to finally have stopped trying to get my mother to join.
I don't see why, she's only been dead for ten years.

A year ago Mark got a call to jury duty. He had been dead for six months.

I think I answered it in the manner he would. I said he wasn't a
resident of Middlesex County and gave his address as Mount Sinai
Cemetery in Marlboro (Monmouth County). I said he wasn't a citizen,
could not read or understand English, and could not mentally and
physically perform the functions of a juror. Oh, and he was also more
than 75 years old (which I guess was accurate), and that would have been excuse enough.

I think he'd be proud of me.

P.S. He got excused.

P.P.S. Oh, and apparently to fill in the questionnaire on-line (though
there was a phone number), the person had to have a cell phone and an
email address.

(At least it was the right county. In the past, Monmouth County has sent
us jury duty notices because our mailing address is in the Matawan ZIP
code.)
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/29/2026 7:52 AM, Steve Coltrin wrote:

begin fnord
djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:

On another take... I received a letter today from an insurance
company offering life insurance to my wife. Problem? She *died*
exactly 49 months ago. You'd think they'd do at least minimal
due diligence...

The AARP seems to finally have stopped trying to get my mother to join.
I don't see why, she's only been dead for ten years.

That fits, as I recall, they started trying to recruit me in my mid
30s(for those who don't know, the minimum age for membership is 50).
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:

In article <otei6lt3g4is8ocls3sm9uqfi3aet5hvgb@4ax.com>,
Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

That's not always the case. My wife and have 20-year whole life
policies for $5,000 each with Metropolitan Insurance company that we >>purchased in 1964. We no longer pay premiums and haven't since 1984.
The death benefits are now about $25,000 each, and we receive
quarterly dividends. The amount has changed over the years, but it's >>currently about $31.00 each.

Yes, this is what I mean by branching out into other investments. This is
not traditional life insurance but it's a good thing.

[Hal Heydt]
On another take... I received a letter today from an insurance
company offering life insurance to my wife. Problem? She *died*
exactly 49 months ago. You'd think they'd do at least minimal
due diligence...

You should definitely apply immediately.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:

Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

That's not always the case. My wife and have 20-year whole life
policies for $5,000 each with Metropolitan Insurance company that
we purchased in 1964. We no longer pay premiums and haven't since
1984. The death benefits are now about $25,000 each, and we
receive quarterly dividends. The amount has changed over the
years, but it's currently about $31.00 each.

Yes, this is what I mean by branching out into other investments.
This is not traditional life insurance but it's a good thing.

No, Tony is describing a typical Whole Life policy. It never expires.
The customer may or may not keep paying a fixed amount for life, or
only until age 65 or whenever, depending on the policy. Some of them eventually pay dividends, especially if the payments are invested into
a stock portfolio that does well.

As contrasted with a Term Life policy, which expires, leaving you with
nothing, at the end of the term. But the payments tend to be a lot
less. It's most useful for people with minor children, to fund their
education until they're self-supporting if the parents die young.

[Hal Heydt]
On another take... I received a letter today from an insurance
company offering life insurance to my wife. Problem? She *died*
exactly 49 months ago. You'd think they'd do at least minimal due
diligence...

You should definitely apply immediately.

Only if he wants to go to prison.

Anyhow, the fine print of most life insurance policies, whether whole
or term, automatically exclude anyone who is dead within six months of
when the contract is signed. And some also require a physical exam.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

No, Tony is describing a typical Whole Life policy. It never expires.
The customer may or may not keep paying a fixed amount for life, or
only until age 65 or whenever, depending on the policy. Some of them >eventually pay dividends, especially if the payments are invested into
a stock portfolio that does well.

Yes, this is a new thing. This didn't happen in the 18th century. The
notion of paying dividends on life insurance didn't happen until almost
the 20th century, I don't think.

Anyhow, the fine print of most life insurance policies, whether whole
or term, automatically exclude anyone who is dead within six months of
when the contract is signed. And some also require a physical exam.

He's not really dead, he's just pining for the fjords.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 21:36:25 -0000 (UTC), "Keith F. Lynch"
<kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:

Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

That's not always the case. My wife and have 20-year whole life
policies for $5,000 each with Metropolitan Insurance company that
we purchased in 1964. We no longer pay premiums and haven't since
1984. The death benefits are now about $25,000 each, and we
receive quarterly dividends. The amount has changed over the
years, but it's currently about $31.00 each.

Yes, this is what I mean by branching out into other investments.
This is not traditional life insurance but it's a good thing.

No, Tony is describing a typical Whole Life policy. It never expires.
The customer may or may not keep paying a fixed amount for life, or
only until age 65 or whenever, depending on the policy. Some of them >eventually pay dividends, especially if the payments are invested into
a stock portfolio that does well.

As contrasted with a Term Life policy, which expires, leaving you with >nothing, at the end of the term. But the payments tend to be a lot
less. It's most useful for people with minor children, to fund their >education until they're self-supporting if the parents die young.

The above does not describe the type of policy I have, and it is not
correct about Term.

Ours are 20-year Pay Life Policies that we took out in 1964. In that
type of policy, the premium is set at the time of purchase based on
the age of the insured, the premium is a fixed rate for 20 years, and
the policy is completely paid up after 20 years and no more premiums
are paid. The face amount is payable at death whenever that is. The
age of 65 has nothing to do with it. Ours were paid-up when were in
our 40s.

The face amount remains the same, but the actual payable amount is
larger. The payable amount has increased based on how the insurance
company has funded the face amount.

Some Term policies expire after a designated number of years, but
there are also Term policies that remain in effect as long as the
premiums are paid. If the premiums are kept up, the policy never
expires. The premium is set based on the insured's age and remains
fixed at that amount.

We have that kind of Term policies with Prudential. We got them when
we had kids (1967 and 1969), but have kept them up and continue to pay
premiums and they are still in effect.

Like many Americans, I never sought out life insurance coverage. The
agents seek us out. Often - as in our case - it's a college or
social friend went into insurance sales and "networked"* his friends
to make a sale. They always push Whole Life (which really are
better), but Term has cheaper premiums so the buyer may opt for Term.


*"networked" was not a phrase used in this context then.

Anyhow, the fine print of most life insurance policies, whether whole
or term, automatically exclude anyone who is dead within six months of
when the contract is signed. And some also require a physical exam.

I dunno about the six month clause, but many exclude payment if the
death is a suicide, or exclude payment for death by suicide for a
determined amount of time.

It's not unknown for sometime to deliberately crash a car to commit
suicide that appears to be an accident.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <114drop$ftl$1@reader1.panix.com>,
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

Anyhow, the fine print of most life insurance policies, whether whole
or term, automatically exclude anyone who is dead within six months of
when the contract is signed. And some also require a physical exam.

[Hal Heydt]
The problem would be the signing. Death within six months of
start date wouldn't, since she died over 4 years ago.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/29/26 20:37, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

In article <114drop$ftl$1@reader1.panix.com>,
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

Anyhow, the fine print of most life insurance policies, whether whole
or term, automatically exclude anyone who is dead within six months of
when the contract is signed. And some also require a physical exam.

[Hal Heydt]
The problem would be the signing. Death within six months of
start date wouldn't, since she died over 4 years ago.

It depends if the policy says that the date of death is within six
months of signing, or that the person is dead within six months of signing.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:

The problem would be the signing. Death within six months of start
date wouldn't, since she died over 4 years ago.

I assume it's phrased so that if she's dead at that time, it's not
valid. Insurance companies can afford the best lawyers. And if there
are any ambiguities in the contracts, some previous client has almost
certinly already found them, causing it to have long since been
corrected.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:

The problem would be the signing. Death within six months of start
date wouldn't, since she died over 4 years ago.

I assume it's phrased so that if she's dead at that time, it's not
valid. Insurance companies can afford the best lawyers. And if there
are any ambiguities in the contracts, some previous client has almost >certinly already found them, causing it to have long since been
corrected.

This is clearly a case of a biased jury, your honor. There is no way my
client can receive a fair trial. My client, you must understand, is dead
and every single one of the jury members selected is still living.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

This is clearly a case of a biased jury, your honor. There is
no way my client can receive a fair trial. My client, you must
understand, is dead and every single one of the jury members
selected is still living.

"Indeed, he should have had a jury of his peers. And where could the
court have dug up a dozen dead people? Oh, right."

Of course these days trials are always of the living, since this
isn't the age of the posthumous trial of Pope Formosus. Or of Oliver
Cromwell. (Cromwell's corpse was beheaded, and hiw victim Charles I's
corpse had its head sewn back on. Cromwell's head was displayed in
various places, and was reburied more than three centuries later.)
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 03:57:03 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Of course these days trials are always of the living, since this
isn't the age of the posthumous trial of Pope Formosus.

There was one story in Stanislaw LemrCOs collection rCLThe CyberiadrCY about
a character who was so villainous, he was regularly recreated only to
be tortured to death again -- one death sentence wasnrCOt deemed enough
for him.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In Message-ID:<114d566$qkpc$1@dont-email.me>,
"Evelyn C. Leeper" <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

I think he'd be proud of me.

P.S. He got excused.

I'm a random Internet person, and I'm definitely proud of you. Well
done!
--
Sue Dominus
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Le 30/07/2026 |a 05:39, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro a |-crit :

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 03:57:03 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

There was one story in Stanislaw LemrCOs collection rCLThe CyberiadrCY about a character who was so villainous, he was regularly recreated only to
be tortured to death again -- one death sentence wasnrCOt deemed enough
for him.

I recall a documentary by Michael Portillo (he of the jazzy jackets)
about the death penalty. He tried to find the most humane way of killing someone and (this from memory) found that breathing an inert gas led to unconsciousness and death without distress. He advanced this as an
alternative to the flawed methods in use in the USA (electrocution,
lethal injectionrCa), but found no takers. It seemed the public wanted its criminals to suffer.

Found it: <https://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/executions/> :

"To do so he examines the key methods of execution available today: he discovers why convicts can catch on fire in the electric chair, learns
how easy it is to botch a hanging and inhales a noxious gas to
experience first hand the terror of the gas chamber."

'How a Michael Portillo BBC film inspired a US push for nitrogen-gas executions' - <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/06/nitrogen-gas-executions-michael-portillo>

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/30/26 00:39, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 03:57:03 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Of course these days trials are always of the living, since this
isn't the age of the posthumous trial of Pope Formosus.

There was one story in Stanislaw LemrCOs collection rCLThe CyberiadrCY about a character who was so villainous, he was regularly recreated only to
be tortured to death again -- one death sentence wasnrCOt deemed enough
for him.

I would have sworn that I read a story like that in Asimov's many years
ago, where they were resurrecting Hitler (I think) so they could execute
him again, once for each victim.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/29/26 23:57, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

This is clearly a case of a biased jury, your honor. There is
no way my client can receive a fair trial. My client, you must
understand, is dead and every single one of the jury members
selected is still living.

"Indeed, he should have had a jury of his peers. And where could the
court have dug up a dozen dead people? Oh, right."

And the jury scene in THE DEVIL AND DANIEL WEBSTER (a.k.a. ALL THAT
MONEY CAN BUY) came to mind.

Of course these days trials are always of the living, since this
isn't the age of the posthumous trial of Pope Formosus. Or of Oliver Cromwell. (Cromwell's corpse was beheaded, and hiw victim Charles I's
corpse had its head sewn back on. Cromwell's head was displayed in
various places, and was reburied more than three centuries later.)

--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Of course these days trials are always of the living, since this
isn't the age of the posthumous trial of Pope Formosus.

There was one story in Stanislaw LemrCOs collection rCLThe CyberiadrCY
about a character who was so villainous, he was regularly recreated
only to be tortured to death again -- one death sentence wasnrCOt
deemed enough for him.

I would have sworn that I read a story like that in Asimov's many
years ago, where they were resurrecting Hitler (I think) so they
could execute him again, once for each victim.

There was an episde of Itchy and Scratchy -- a cat and mouse cartoon
within The Simpsons -- in which the mouse kept resurrecting the cat
in order to repeatedly kill it in new, cruel, and creative ways.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <nd06v8F2e5lU4@mid.individual.net>,
Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

Le 30/07/2026 |a 05:39, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro a |-crit :

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 03:57:03 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

There was one story in Stanislaw LemrCOs collection rCLThe CyberiadrCY about >> a character who was so villainous, he was regularly recreated only to
be tortured to death again -- one death sentence wasnrCOt deemed enough
for him.

I recall a documentary by Michael Portillo (he of the jazzy jackets)
about the death penalty. He tried to find the most humane way of killing >someone and (this from memory) found that breathing an inert gas led to >unconsciousness and death without distress. He advanced this as an >alternative to the flawed methods in use in the USA (electrocution,
lethal injectionrCa), but found no takers. It seemed the public wanted its >criminals to suffer.

[Hal Heydt]
I think capital puhishment is a bad idea. However...

If it is going to be used, the method should reflect the reason
for doing so. If the intent is to deter others from committing
the same crime, then the execution should be public and painful.
If the intent is to avoid any chance of the criminal from ever
having a chance to do more crimes (the "mad dog" situation), then
the execution should be private and as pain free as possible. If
the reason is to exact revenge, then the execution should be
private, painful, and messy.

I think that pretty much covers the reasons for capital
punishment.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 19:20:12 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

If it is going to be used, the method should reflect the reason for
doing so. If the intent is to deter others from committing the same
crime, then the execution should be public and painful. If the
intent is to avoid any chance of the criminal from ever having a
chance to do more crimes (the "mad dog" situation), then the
execution should be private and as pain free as possible. If the
reason is to exact revenge, then the execution should be private,
painful, and messy.

At one time, they used to hang pickpockets. It didnrCOt seem to be much
of a deterrent to others committing the same crime.

If a legal penalty doesnrCOt have a deterrent effect, then what point
does it have?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:

[Hal Heydt]
I think capital puhishment is a bad idea. However...
If it is going to be used, the method should reflect the reason for
doing so. If the intent is to deter others from committing the same
crime, then the execution should be public and painful.

If public and painful punishments deterred crime, the past would have
been much more crime-free than it actually was. Guy Fawkes wasn't
deterred from attempting to blow up parliament and the king by knowing
he would be drawn and quartered if he was caught. Which he was.

If the intent is to avoid any chance of the criminal from ever
having a chance to do more crimes (the "mad dog" situation), then
the execution should be private and as pain free as possible.
If the reason is to exact revenge, then the execution should
be private, painful, and messy.

The current justice system in the US is profoundly broken. I have
no faith that a conviction means the convict was actually guilty of
anything. It happened to me, and since I'm out of the closet as a
wrongfully convicted felon, lots of people have confided in me that
similar or worse things have happened to them.

I lost two rounds of "prisoner's dilemma," a game that was already
ancient when it was used to convict people in the Salem witch trials.
The only thing special about those trials is that we know for a fact
that everyone was innocent, since witchcraft is not a thing.

I think that pretty much covers the reasons for capital punishment.

The number one reason for capital punishment in the US is to coerce
people into pleading guilty in return for a life sentence. In most
cases, prosecutors don't actually want to execute anyone. They just
want them to plead guilty, to avoid the risk that the prosecutors will
lose at trial.

Similarly with lesser punishments. North Carolina's Bob Kelly was
told that if he pled guilty to a misdemeanor, to which he could be
sentenced to not more than one year in jail, all other charges would
be dropped. He refused. And was convicted at trial and sentenced to
twelve consecutive life sentences. Even though he wasn't accused of
killing anyone, or of attempting to do so. He too wasn't actually
guilty of anything.

Every defendant has a right to a trial. But a right with an attached
penalty isn't much of a right. It's as if on voting day, there was
a scowling cop right outside the voting booth. He warns you that he
won't stop you from voting, but as soon as you exit the voting booth
the handcuffs will go on.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In Message-ID:<tJ05po.sIq@kithrup.com>,
djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:

[Hal Heydt]
I think capital puhishment is a bad idea. However...

From Neil Gaiman's American Gods:
I believe [...] that while all human life is sacred thereAs nothing
wrong with the death penalty if you can trust the legal system
implicitly, and that no one but a moron would ever trust the legal
system.
--
Sue Dominus
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <114ghp4$24ndu$12@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence D Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 19:20:12 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

If it is going to be used, the method should reflect the reason for
doing so. If the intent is to deter others from committing the same
crime, then the execution should be public and painful. If the
intent is to avoid any chance of the criminal from ever having a
chance to do more crimes (the "mad dog" situation), then the
execution should be private and as pain free as possible. If the
reason is to exact revenge, then the execution should be private,
painful, and messy.

At one time, they used to hang pickpockets. It didnrCOt seem to be much
of a deterrent to others committing the same crime.

[Hal Heydt]
I'm aware of the stories that pickpockets eagerly worked crowds
gathered to watch pickpockets being hanged.

Note that I made no claims that deterrence *works*,
and--indeed--the evidence I'm aware of is that it doesn't.
Further, in present day US, the time from conviction (let along
the time since the crime) is so long that it is hard to connect
the execution with the criminal act.

If a legal penalty doesnrCOt have a deterrent effect, then what point
does it have?

Deterrence is only one (of three) potential reason that I cited.
As I noted, those are the reasons I can think of for imposing
capital punishment...not that I agree with any of them.

I long since decided that, in the unlikely case that I were on a
jury deciding a capital case, (1) I would want to know *why* the
state should execute the guilty party, and (2) I would only vote
for the death penalty if I am *personnaly* convinced enough that
I'd be willing carry it out in person. If you can't convince me
to that exetent as a juror, I won't vote for the state to act for
me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/30/2026 3:04 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 19:20:12 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

If it is going to be used, the method should reflect the reason for
doing so. If the intent is to deter others from committing the same
crime, then the execution should be public and painful. If the
intent is to avoid any chance of the criminal from ever having a
chance to do more crimes (the "mad dog" situation), then the
execution should be private and as pain free as possible. If the
reason is to exact revenge, then the execution should be private,
painful, and messy.

At one time, they used to hang pickpockets. It didnrCOt seem to be much
of a deterrent to others committing the same crime.

Famously, pickpockets working the crowd at the public hanging of one or
more pickpockets.

If a legal penalty doesnrCOt have a deterrent effect, then what point
does it have?

--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

At one time, they used to hang pickpockets. It didnrCOt seem to be much
of a deterrent to others committing the same crime.

If a legal penalty doesnrCOt have a deterrent effect, then what point
does it have?

In the case of the death penalty, it definitely prevents that person from reoffending. It may not deter others, but it definitely stops the original offender.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 22:04:21 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D|+Oliveiro
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 19:20:12 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

If it is going to be used, the method should reflect the reason for
doing so. If the intent is to deter others from committing the same
crime, then the execution should be public and painful. If the
intent is to avoid any chance of the criminal from ever having a
chance to do more crimes (the "mad dog" situation), then the
execution should be private and as pain free as possible. If the
reason is to exact revenge, then the execution should be private,
painful, and messy.

At one time, they used to hang pickpockets. It didnrCOt seem to be much
of a deterrent to others committing the same crime.

If a legal penalty doesnrCOt have a deterrent effect, then what point
does it have?

Prevents recidivism, so they say.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <114gvoq$sd0$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

At one time, they used to hang pickpockets. It didnrCOt seem to be much
of a deterrent to others committing the same crime.

If a legal penalty doesnrCOt have a deterrent effect, then what point
does it have?

In the case of the death penalty, it definitely prevents that person from >reoffending. It may not deter others, but it definitely stops the original >offender.

[Hal Heydt]
That's what I refer to as the "mad dog" reason.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 31/07/26 12:03, Scott Dorsey wrote:

In the case of the death penalty, it definitely prevents that person
from reoffending. It may not deter others, but it definitely stops
the original offender.

It also stops the courts being clogged up with appeals, when new
evidence shows that the convicted person was innocent.

Overall, I think it's a good thing that all civilised countries have now abolished the death penalty. However, I have some sympathy for
reintroducing it for internet scammers, telemarketers, and people who
deal in cryptocurrency.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Le 31/07/2026 |a 07:46, Peter Moylan a |-crit :

On 31/07/26 12:03, Scott Dorsey wrote:

In the case of the death penalty, it definitely prevents that person
from reoffending.-a It may not deter others, but it definitely stops
the original offender.

It also stops the courts being clogged up with appeals, when new
evidence shows that the convicted person was innocent.

Overall, I think it's a good thing that all civilised countries have now abolished the death penalty. However, I have some sympathy for
reintroducing it for internet scammers, telemarketers, and people who
deal in cryptocurrency.

Arsonists too, perhaps, especially if they're also firemen. Scammers, certainly. As I recall, the Lilliputians considered fraud a worse crime
than theft, because it exploited the trust that is needed for society to function.

SearchesrCa

"They look upon fraud as a greater crime than theft, and therefore
seldom fail to punish it with death; for they allege, that care and
vigilance, with a very common understanding, may preserve a man's goods
from thieves, but honesty has no fence against superior cunning; and,
since it is necessary that there should be a perpetual intercourse of
buying and selling, and dealing upon credit, where fraud is permitted
and connived at, or hath no law to punish it, the honest dealer is
always undone, and the knave gets the advantage."

AnywayrCa. Oubliettes are, I think, an idea that we have neglected. They,
too, prevent knaves reoffending.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 30.07.2026 kl. 21.20 skrev Dorothy J Heydt:

If it is going to be used, the method should reflect the reason
for doing so. If the intent is to deter others from committing
the same crime, then the execution should be public and painful.
If the intent is to avoid any chance of the criminal from ever
having a chance to do more crimes (the "mad dog" situation), then
the execution should be private and as pain free as possible. If
the reason is to exact revenge, then the execution should be
private, painful, and messy.

I think that pretty much covers the reasons for capital
punishment.

You've forgotten the Darwin reason: prevent the perpetrator fropm having children.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 31.07.2026 kl. 00.04 skrev Lawrence DrCOOliveiro:

At one time, they used to hang pickpockets. It didnrCOt seem to be much
of a deterrent to others committing the same crime.

Of course not. The public hanging gave them the perfect opportunity to
empty people's pockets.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 09:23:03 +0200, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

You've forgotten the Darwin reason: prevent the perpetrator fropm
having children.

Again, is that much of a deterrent against crime?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 31.07.2026 kl. 08.46 skrev Peter Moylan:

Overall, I think it's a good thing that all civilised countries have now abolished the death penalty. However, I have some sympathy for
reintroducing it for internet scammers, telemarketers, and people who
deal in cryptocurrency.

Add the people who have scores of computers set up to make deals on the
stock market every microsecond.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 22:15:45 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

The number one reason for capital punishment in the US is to coerce
people into pleading guilty in return for a life sentence. In most
cases, prosecutors don't actually want to execute anyone. They just
want them to plead guilty, to avoid the risk that the prosecutors
will lose at trial.

Plea bargaining is commonly seen as something that corrupts the
justice system.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:

The problem would be the signing. Death within six months of start
date wouldn't, since she died over 4 years ago.

I assume it's phrased so that if she's dead at that time, it's not
valid. Insurance companies can afford the best lawyers. And if there
are any ambiguities in the contracts, some previous client has almost >certinly already found them, causing it to have long since been
corrected.

This is clearly a case of a biased jury, your honor. There is no way my client can receive a fair trial. My client, you must understand, is dead
and every single one of the jury members selected is still living.

No problem, for a Snark,

Jan


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/30/2026 10:03 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

At one time, they used to hang pickpockets. It didnrCOt seem to be much
of a deterrent to others committing the same crime.

If a legal penalty doesnrCOt have a deterrent effect, then what point
does it have?

In the case of the death penalty, it definitely prevents that person from reoffending. It may not deter others, but it definitely stops the original offender.
--scott

So does a life sentence without the possibility of parole.

...and that's often cheaper than the massive legal machinery that a
death sentence activates in the US.

...and allows the possibility of partial restitution if a false
conviction is later proved.

pt

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/31/2026 3:09 AM, Hibou wrote:

Le 31/07/2026 |a 07:46, Peter Moylan a |-crit :

On 31/07/26 12:03, Scott Dorsey wrote:

In the case of the death penalty, it definitely prevents that person
from reoffending.-a It may not deter others, but it definitely stops
the original offender.

It also stops the courts being clogged up with appeals, when new
evidence shows that the convicted person was innocent.

Overall, I think it's a good thing that all civilised countries have now
abolished the death penalty. However, I have some sympathy for
reintroducing it for internet scammers, telemarketers, and people who
deal in cryptocurrency.

Arsonists too, perhaps, especially if they're also firemen. Scammers, certainly. As I recall, the Lilliputians considered fraud a worse crime
than theft, because it exploited the trust that is needed for society to function.

"I have a little list..."

pt
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 31.07.2026 kl. 19.03 skrev Cryptoengineer:

In the case of the death penalty, it definitely prevents that person from
reoffending.-a It may not deter others, but it definitely stops the
original
offender.
--scott

So does a life sentence without the possibility of parole.

...and that's often cheaper than the massive legal machinery that a
death sentence activates in the US.

https://latestcost.com/cost-keeping-prisoner-u-s-facilities/

The average is $40'000. If a muderer is jailed at the age of 25 and
lives to be 75 the total will be $2'000'000. What's the going rate on
the street for killing a person?
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <114hisk$2g9un$3@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence D Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 22:15:45 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

The number one reason for capital punishment in the US is to coerce
people into pleading guilty in return for a life sentence. In most
cases, prosecutors don't actually want to execute anyone. They just
want them to plead guilty, to avoid the risk that the prosecutors
will lose at trial.

Plea bargaining is commonly seen as something that corrupts the
justice system.

[Hal Heydt]
I would like to see laws in place that forbid pleading away DUI
charges. Far to many horrible cases come up where the offender
has "no prior convictions for DUI". That's because, by pleading
guilty to other offenses, the DUI charge was dropped. That needs
to be banned.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/31/2026 1:31 PM, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

Den 31.07.2026 kl. 19.03 skrev Cryptoengineer:

In the case of the death penalty, it definitely prevents that person
from
reoffending.-a It may not deter others, but it definitely stops the
original
offender.
--scott

So does a life sentence without the possibility of parole.

...and that's often cheaper than the massive legal machinery that a
death sentence activates in the US.

https://latestcost.com/cost-keeping-prisoner-u-s-facilities/

The average is $40'000. If a muderer is jailed at the age of 25 and
lives to be 75 the total will be $2'000'000. What's the going rate on
the street for killing a person?

Your source gives no info on the cost of litigating a death penalty.

Fortunately, The Cato Institute (hardly a bleeding-heart institution)
has done the math:

The Financial Implications of the Death Penalty https://www.cato.org/blog/financial-implications-death-penalty
(2023 article)

First, remember that the average death penalty case remains on
death row for 19 years, at 60k-70k a year (death row inmates are
not in the general population, and have special accommodations.
They are much more expensive, day-to-day, than a lifer).

Second, the excess legal costs of a death penalty trial are
between 1.1 million and 1.5 million higher than a life sentence.

So, accommodating a lifer in the general population for 50 years
is about $2M, as you say.

A death row inmate:
19 years @ 65k/year = 1.2M
Add 1.3 M extra litigation cost, and the total comes to 2.5M

So, life without parole still comes out cheaper.

...and on top of that, you haven't killed an innocent if
later evidence (such as DNA) turns up exculpating them.

pt


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/31/2026 9:27 AM, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

Den 31.07.2026 kl. 08.46 skrev Peter Moylan:

Overall, I think it's a good thing that all civilised countries have now
abolished the death penalty. However, I have some sympathy for
reintroducing it for internet scammers, telemarketers, and people who
deal in cryptocurrency.

Add the people who have scores of computers set up to make deals on the stock market every microsecond.

I do not understand why stock markets permit this kind of trading.
Why not impose a series of (say) half-hour slots, where each trader
is only permitted to act at most once per slot?

/Anders, Denmark
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 23:38:38 +0200, Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> wrote:

Den 31.07.2026 kl. 22.29 skrev Anders D. Nygaard:

Add the people who have scores of computers set up to make deals on
the stock market every microsecond.

I do not understand why stock markets permit this kind of trading.

Neither do I. According to Preben Wilhjelm the Saxo Bank every day has
more money passing through than our BNP, and none of the money do
anything useful.

Why not impose a series of (say) half-hour slots, where each trader
is only permitted to act at most once per slot?

Good idea. Now we're at it we could also forbid trading with quota.

I don't understand the objection.

The people making the trades are individuals who make their living (or
try to) by stock trades. What detrimental effect does that have on
anyone else?

What benefit, or what loss would be prevented, if the trades were
slotted into half-hour segments?

There is a benefit. Fees are charged for trades. The firm that
charges the fees surely feels the fees received are useful. The
traders who make money on the transaction, surely feel it's useful.
They also risk losing money.

Day-traders sometimes use computer programs that automatically trigger
buy or sell orders based on price points they set. (I suppose some
now use AI to set the proints.) If the individual wants to incur the
cost of equipment and software to do this, why is it a problem to
anyone else, let alone society in general?

Based on what I know, a trading quota is a good thing, not something
that should be stopped. A trading quota halts trades when they get to
the point the excessive price fluctuation.

https://trader.academy/public/blog/quota-definition-understanding-the-importance-of-quotas-in-finance-and-stock-market
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 01/08/26 06:29, Anders D. Nygaard wrote:

On 7/31/2026 9:27 AM, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

Den 31.07.2026 kl. 08.46 skrev Peter Moylan:

Overall, I think it's a good thing that all civilised countries
have now abolished the death penalty. However, I have some
sympathy for reintroducing it for internet scammers,
telemarketers, and people who deal in cryptocurrency.

Add the people who have scores of computers set up to make deals on
the stock market every microsecond.

I do not understand why stock markets permit this kind of trading.
Why not impose a series of (say) half-hour slots, where each trader
is only permitted to act at most once per slot?

The rule here used to be that share prices over the internet were always
twenty minutes out of date. This was to prevent unstable feedback. I
don't know whether they still do it.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> wrote:

Add the people who have scores of computers set up to make deals on
the stock market every microsecond.

I do not understand why stock markets permit this kind of trading.

Neither do I. According to Preben Wilhjelm the Saxo Bank every day
has more money passing through than our BNP, and none of the money
do anything useful.

I don't understand the objection.

The people making the trades are individuals who make their living
(or try to) by stock trades. What detrimental effect does that have
on anyone else?

I too don't understand the objection.

"Microsecond" is a great exaggeration. It takes about 67 milliseconds
just to get a signal from one side of the planet to the other. For
instance from Madrid to Wellington or vice versa -- those two cities
being almost directly opposite each other.

If someone manages to invent a neutrino telegraph, it could reduce
that delay to 43 milliseconds, since neutrinos can go right
through the Earth, rather than around the outside. Similarly
with gravitational waves.

And even if there were something objectionable about rapid stock
trading, I certainly don't think it warrants the death penalty.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> wrote:

Back then they didn't have the concept of zero. But maybe that was
the crisis: hey, year zero has gone missing.

They couldn't notice that it was missing if they didn't have the concept.

And indeed they did not. Zero was invented by Brahmagupta in the 7th
century. (And to think that some people claim that India discovered
nothing!)

The thing that really shocked everyone was when they found Jesus's
birth certificate, and the date said 4 BC.

Never mind the date; who was listed as his father?

And who was listed as his godfather?
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/31/26 19:53, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> wrote:

Back then they didn't have the concept of zero. But maybe that was
the crisis: hey, year zero has gone missing.

They couldn't notice that it was missing if they didn't have the concept.

And indeed they did not. Zero was invented by Brahmagupta in the 7th century. (And to think that some people claim that India discovered nothing!)

The thing that really shocked everyone was when they found Jesus's
birth certificate, and the date said 4 BC.

Never mind the date; who was listed as his father?

And who was listed as his godfather?

I always found it peculiar that the gospels of Matthew and Luke spent so
much time listing Joseph's lineage, when he supposedly wasn't related to
Jesus at all.

And that they disagreed on it.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/31/2026 7:26 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 23:38:38 +0200, Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> wrote:

Den 31.07.2026 kl. 22.29 skrev Anders D. Nygaard:

Add the people who have scores of computers set up to make deals on
the stock market every microsecond.

I do not understand why stock markets permit this kind of trading.

Neither do I. According to Preben Wilhjelm the Saxo Bank every day has
more money passing through than our BNP, and none of the money do
anything useful.

Why not impose a series of (say) half-hour slots, where each trader
is only permitted to act at most once per slot?

Good idea. Now we're at it we could also forbid trading with quota.

I don't understand the objection.

The people making the trades are individuals who make their living (or
try to) by stock trades. What detrimental effect does that have on
anyone else?

What benefit, or what loss would be prevented, if the trades were
slotted into half-hour segments?

There is a benefit. Fees are charged for trades. The firm that
charges the fees surely feels the fees received are useful. The
traders who make money on the transaction, surely feel it's useful.
They also risk losing money.

Day-traders sometimes use computer programs that automatically trigger
buy or sell orders based on price points they set. (I suppose some
now use AI to set the proints.) If the individual wants to incur the
cost of equipment and software to do this, why is it a problem to
anyone else, let alone society in general?

Based on what I know, a trading quota is a good thing, not something
that should be stopped. A trading quota halts trades when they get to
the point the excessive price fluctuation.

https://trader.academy/public/blog/quota-definition-understanding-the-importance-of-quotas-in-finance-and-stock-market

The term you're looking for is 'high speed trading'.

There's a related game in arbitrage - taking advantage of mementary
differences of commodity prices in different markets to profit
from trading contracts - buy in the low market while selling in
the high one.

One example is the Chicago Board of Trade and the NT commodity
markets.

A fiber link has a round-trip latency of about 14.1 ms. One
company installed a microwave relay, with a latency of only
8.2 ms, and put the trading computers at the halfway point.

They make steady profits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_Networks

pt
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/31/2026 8:22 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:

On 7/31/2026 7:26 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 23:38:38 +0200, Bertel Lund Hansen
<rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> wrote:

Den 31.07.2026 kl. 22.29 skrev Anders D. Nygaard:

Add the people who have scores of computers set up to make deals on
the stock market every microsecond.

I do not understand why stock markets permit this kind of trading.

Neither do I. According to Preben Wilhjelm the Saxo Bank every day has
more money passing through than our BNP, and none of the money do
anything useful.

Why not impose a series of (say) half-hour slots, where each trader
is only permitted to act at most once per slot?

Good idea. Now we're at it we could also forbid trading with quota.

I don't understand the objection.

The people making the trades are individuals who make their living (or
try to) by stock trades.-a What detrimental effect does that have on
anyone else?

What benefit, or what loss would be prevented, if the trades were
slotted into half-hour segments?

There is a benefit.-a Fees are charged for trades.-a The firm that
charges the fees surely feels the fees received are useful.-a The
traders who make money on the transaction, surely feel it's useful.
They also risk losing money.

Day-traders sometimes use computer programs that automatically trigger
buy or sell orders based on price points they set.-a (I suppose some
now use AI to set the proints.)-a If the individual wants to incur the
cost of equipment and software to do this, why is it a problem to
anyone else, let alone society in general?

Based on what I know, a trading quota is a good thing, not something
that should be stopped.-a A trading quota halts trades when they get to
the point the excessive price fluctuation.

https://trader.academy/public/blog/quota-definition-understanding-the-
importance-of-quotas-in-finance-and-stock-market

The term you're looking for is 'high speed trading'.

There's a related game in arbitrage - taking advantage of mementary differences of commodity prices in different markets to profit
from trading contracts - buy in the low market while selling in
the high one.

One example is the Chicago Board of Trade and the NT commodity
markets.

A fiber link has a round-trip latency of about 14.1 ms. One
company installed a microwave relay, with a latency of only
8.2 ms, and put the trading computers at the halfway point.

They make steady profits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_Networks

pt

^NY commodity markets, of course.

pt
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 01/08/26 10:05, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

On 7/31/26 19:53, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> wrote:

Back then they didn't have the concept of zero. But maybe that
was the crisis: hey, year zero has gone missing.

They couldn't notice that it was missing if they didn't have the
concept.

And indeed they did not. Zero was invented by Brahmagupta in the
7th century. (And to think that some people claim that India
discovered nothing!)

The thing that really shocked everyone was when they found
Jesus's birth certificate, and the date said 4 BC.

Never mind the date; who was listed as his father?

And who was listed as his godfather?

I always found it peculiar that the gospels of Matthew and Luke spent
so much time listing Joseph's lineage, when he supposedly wasn't
related to Jesus at all.

"Genetic father" wasn't a thing back then. "Legal father" was probably sufficient to satisfy the prophecies.

And that they disagreed on it.

Descent through two distinct lines isn't so unusual. And David probably
had so many descendants that most of the country was related to him.

Assuming that David existed. What's the current state of evidence?
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In Message-ID:<114ikga$2tq6o$1@dont-email.me>,
Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/30/2026 10:03 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

<snip>

In the case of the death penalty, it definitely prevents that person from
reoffending. It may not deter others, but it definitely stops the original >> offender.
--scott

So does a life sentence without the possibility of parole.

Because, as we all know, no crimes are committed by prisoners.

<snip>

...and allows the possibility of partial restitution if a false
conviction is later proved.

But I definitely agree with this point.
--
Sue Dominus
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 22:29:02 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard" <news2012adn@google.com> wrote:

On 7/31/2026 9:27 AM, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

Den 31.07.2026 kl. 08.46 skrev Peter Moylan:

Overall, I think it's a good thing that all civilised countries have now >>> abolished the death penalty. However, I have some sympathy for
reintroducing it for internet scammers, telemarketers, and people who
deal in cryptocurrency.

Add the people who have scores of computers set up to make deals on the
stock market every microsecond.

I do not understand why stock markets permit this kind of trading.
Why not impose a series of (say) half-hour slots, where each trader
is only permitted to act at most once per slot?

/Anders, Denmark\

"THis Thing of Darkness" by Harry Bingham is a Fiona Griffiths
mystery story that includes sabotage of an undersea cable,
intended to give the villains a fraction of a second advantage
in the markets.

The book includes arguments about high-speed trading, which
I can't say I remmeber.

What I recall from elsewhere is that the one thing that might
put a big dent in the practice would be a tiny TAX laid on
every BID made in every market, because (IIRC) the high-speed
traders make an enormous number of bids, compared to the
number of actual bids-won.
--
Rich Ulrich
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 01.08.2026 kl. 01.26 skrev Tony Cooper:

Add the people who have scores of computers set up to make deals on
the stock market every microsecond.

I do not understand why stock markets permit this kind of trading.

Neither do I. According to Preben Wilhjelm the Saxo Bank every day has
more money passing through than our BNP, and none of the money do
anything useful.

Why not impose a series of (say) half-hour slots, where each trader
is only permitted to act at most once per slot?

Good idea. Now we're at it we could also forbid trading with quota.

I don't understand the objection.

The people making the trades are individuals who make their living (or
try to) by stock trades. What detrimental effect does that have on
anyone else?

Lack of money for those who lose in the deal. But my main point is that
the money do not work. They just circle around - except of course as you
point out that some people earn their living through servicing the market.

If you buy shares in a new company, your money will help the company
grow and be more efficient. If you buy 'old' shares, it won't help the
company in the production.

What benefit, or what loss would be prevented, if the trades were
slotted into half-hour segments?

The problem with the microdeals is that such algorithms register if a
buy order has been placed on some shares and then the computer buys such shares driving the price up. Next they sell the shares to the buyer at
the increased price. The only 'work' they do is increase the price for
anyone else.

There is a benefit. Fees are charged for trades. The firm that
charges the fees surely feels the fees received are useful. The
traders who make money on the transaction, surely feel it's useful.
They also risk losing money.

True. The same is true of financial crime. The only difference is that
one set is legal and the other is not.

Day-traders sometimes use computer programs that automatically trigger
buy or sell orders based on price points they set. (I suppose some
now use AI to set the proints.) If the individual wants to incur the
cost of equipment and software to do this, why is it a problem to
anyone else, let alone society in general?

Because it drives prices without any beneficial effect except those
derived from the otherwise useless operation.

Based on what I know, a trading quota is a good thing,

I should have explained better. The quotas I have in mind, are CO2
quotas and fishing quotas. Instead of helping regulate emission of CO2
and the fishing the quotas have become a new kind of shares that can be
bought and sold without serving the intended purpose.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 01.08.2026 kl. 01.48 skrev Keith F. Lynch:

"Microsecond" is a great exaggeration. It takes about 67 milliseconds
just to get a signal from one side of the planet to the other. For
instance from Madrid to Wellington or vice versa -- those two cities
being almost directly opposite each other.

That's why people try to set up their computers as close as possible to
the stock exchange. It's actually a race towards getting the shortest
possible line.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 01.08.2026 kl. 01.27 skrev Peter Moylan:

The rule here used to be that share prices over the internet were always twenty minutes out of date. This was to prevent unstable feedback. I
don't know whether they still do it.

Traders will drop that exchange and find one with no restriction.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 01.08.2026 kl. 06.56 skrev Someone Else:

<snip>

...and allows the possibility of partial restitution if a false
conviction is later proved.

But I definitely agree with this point.

So do I. I was not defending having death penalty. I was merely
interested in the financial argument.

I've read the 50% of the death row prisoners in USA who had their case
retried based on DNA testing were found to be innocent.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 23:53:42 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> wrote:

Back then they didn't have the concept of zero. But maybe that was the
crisis: hey, year zero has gone missing.

They couldn't notice that it was missing if they didn't have the
concept.

And indeed they did not. Zero was invented by Brahmagupta in the 7th century. (And to think that some people claim that India discovered nothing!)

The thing that really shocked everyone was when they found Jesus's
birth certificate, and the date said 4 BC.

Never mind the date; who was listed as his father?

According to Allen Ginsberg, "the cat who really laid it on us"

And who was listed as his godfather?

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Sat, 1 Aug 2026 07:25:41 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer wrote:

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 23:53:42 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> wrote:

Back then they didn't have the concept of zero. But maybe that was
the crisis: hey, year zero has gone missing.

They couldn't notice that it was missing if they didn't have the
concept.

And indeed they did not. Zero was invented by Brahmagupta in the 7th
century. (And to think that some people claim that India discovered
nothing!)

The thing that really shocked everyone was when they found Jesus's
birth certificate, and the date said 4 BC.

Never mind the date; who was listed as his father?

According to Allen Ginsberg, "the cat who really laid it on us"

Correction: It was Lawrence Ferlinghetti who wrote that.

And who was listed as his godfather?

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 7/31/26 21:13, Peter Moylan wrote:

I always found it peculiar that the gospels of Matthew and Luke spent
so much time listing Joseph's lineage, when he supposedly wasn't
related to Jesus at all.

"Genetic father" wasn't a thing back then. "Legal father" was probably sufficient to satisfy the prophecies.

And that they disagreed on it.

Descent through two distinct lines isn't so unusual. And David probably
had so many descendants that most of the country was related to him.

Assuming that David existed. What's the current state of evidence?

The number of descendants of David doesn't enter into it: Matthew says
that JosephrCOs father was Jacob (Matthew 1:16), but Luke says Joseph's
father was Heli (Luke 3:23).

(There are other contradictions, but that is the most obvious one.)
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/1/26 02:17, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

Den 01.08.2026 kl. 06.56 skrev Someone Else:

-a <snip>

...and allows the possibility of partial restitution if a false
conviction is later proved.

But I definitely agree with this point.

So do I. I was not defending having death penalty. I was merely
interested in the financial argument.

I've read the 50% of the death row prisoners in USA who had their case retried based on DNA testing were found to be innocent.

But the set of death row prisoners in USA who had their case retried
based on DNA testing is not a representative sample of the set of death
row prisoners in USA. It would be heavily weighted towards those who
were in fact innocent and who therefore thought that retrying the case
with DNA evidence would should prove that.

That 50% were still found guilty is what I find surprising.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 01/08/26 20:47, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

On 7/31/26 21:13, Peter Moylan wrote:

I always found it peculiar that the gospels of Matthew and Luke spent
so much time listing Joseph's lineage, when he supposedly wasn't
related to Jesus at all.

"Genetic father" wasn't a thing back then. "Legal father" was probably
sufficient to satisfy the prophecies.

And that they disagreed on it.

Descent through two distinct lines isn't so unusual. And David probably
had so many descendants that most of the country was related to him.

Assuming that David existed. What's the current state of evidence?

The number of descendants of David doesn't enter into it: Matthew says
that JosephrCOs father was Jacob (Matthew 1:16), but Luke says Joseph's father was Heli (Luke 3:23).

Ah, yes, I'd forgotten that. At least one of them got his results from
an untrustworthy web site.

(There are other contradictions, but that is the most obvious one.)

--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <114kis8$3gtbe$1@dont-email.me>,
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) wrote:

The number of descendants of David doesn't enter into it: Matthew
says that Joseph_s father was Jacob (Matthew 1:16), but Luke says
Joseph's father was Heli (Luke 3:23).

Maybe he was in trouble with the law and was using an alias.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

I've read the 50% of the death row prisoners in USA who had their
case retried based on DNA testing were found to be innocent.

I think that claim is slightly garbled. For one thing, if DNA testing definitely proves their innocence, in some US states that's an
automatic exoneration with no new trial. And in other US states,
factual innocence is legally irrelevant. For instance in Texas Robert
Roberson was proven innocent, but they're going to execute him anyway.
(In Texas, unlike most US states, the governor does not have the power
to pardon a prisoner.)

Anyhow, the presence of one's DNA is not always incriminating, and its
absence is not always exonerating. It depends on the circumstances of
the case. And on whether there is any other evidence.

Especially puzzling are some of the cold cases in which trace amounts
of DNA were proven to be from someone with a clean record. Sure, if
it matched someone with a record of similar crimes, I'm okay with
convicting them. But if it matched someone with no record at all,
before or since, I don't think that alone should be enough to convict
them, given that all it takes is a single molecule of DNA, in there
are lots of innocent ways DNA can move around. For instance look up
the Phantom of Heilbronn.

Anyhow, in the great majority of felony cases, especially ones that
don't involve rape or murder, there either never was any DNA evidence,
or they didn't bother to check for it. And there's no reason to think
the error rate is any lower in those cases. If the narrow beam of
your flashlight reveals several cockroaches in your kitchen, that's
not proof that that's all the cockroaches that are in your kitchen.

But the set of death row prisoners in USA who had their case retried
based on DNA testing is not a representative sample of the set of
death row prisoners in USA. It would be heavily weighted towards
those who were in fact innocent and who therefore thought that
retrying the case with DNA evidence would should prove that.

If a death row prisoner is simply trying to delay their execution,
they may try anything and everything, whether they're guilty or not.

What I find most concerning is how much completely bogus forensic
"science" is used to convict people. And how "prisoner's dilemma"
continues to be used, in which people are rewarded for testifying the
way prosecutors want them to, and threatened with perjury charges if
they testify for the defense.

In my case, for instance, I was told that all charges against me would
be dropped if I agreed to truthfully testify that my cellmate, Michael
G. Simoneau, had confessed to murder. I attempted to get him to
confess, but he didn't, so I didn't testify. He was convicted anyway,
I don't know on what evidence, nor do I know if he was guilty. (At
least he didn't get the death penalty.)

I don't understand how any jury can believe such evidence, but they
often do.

Also concerning is the continued use of the Reid Technique of
interrogation, which can get about 1/3 of guilty people and about
2/3 of innocent people to confess.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <114jh8f$37eg6$1@dont-email.me>,
Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> wrote:

Assuming that David existed. What's the current state of evidence?

The Tel Dan stele appear to refer to a "house of David":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_stele

Some have argued that the Mesha stele also refers to David, but that
is much less clear:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesha_Stele

-- Richard
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Sat, 1 Aug 2026 08:08:11 +0200, Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> wrote:

Den 01.08.2026 kl. 01.26 skrev Tony Cooper:

Add the people who have scores of computers set up to make deals on
the stock market every microsecond.

I do not understand why stock markets permit this kind of trading.

Neither do I. According to Preben Wilhjelm the Saxo Bank every day has
more money passing through than our BNP, and none of the money do
anything useful.

Why not impose a series of (say) half-hour slots, where each trader
is only permitted to act at most once per slot?

Good idea. Now we're at it we could also forbid trading with quota.

I don't understand the objection.

The people making the trades are individuals who make their living (or
try to) by stock trades. What detrimental effect does that have on
anyone else?

Lack of money for those who lose in the deal.

That hardly convinces me that the system should be changed. You only
win or lose because you play, and the players choose to play.

But my main point is that
the money do not work. They just circle around - except of course as you >point out that some people earn their living through servicing the market.

That's not any different from any other form of business. Some make a
profit on the trades and spend that money on some other business,
which, in turn, spends money on some other business. Rinse and
repeat.

If you buy shares in a new company, your money will help the company
grow and be more efficient. If you buy 'old' shares, it won't help the >company in the production.

So what? If you buy a used car you are not helping the company that manufacturered the car. If you buy a previously-owned house you are
not helping the company that built the house. Purchasing anything
that has previously been purchased from the manufacturer doesn't
benefit the manufacturers or the companies that sold them the material
to make the product.

You could make the case that the manufactuer does gain because their
reputation is enhanced because their product retains value. Toyota,
for example, sells some vehicles because their product has strong
value retention and resale price.

But, if you use that logic, then the company whose stock is re-sold at
a higher price gains because the shares they retain increase in value
and future offerings will sell at a higher price. Tesla's value
increases or decreases based on the market for their shares much more
than from the profit they make on selling a Tesla.

What benefit, or what loss would be prevented, if the trades were
slotted into half-hour segments?

The problem with the microdeals is that such algorithms register if a
buy order has been placed on some shares and then the computer buys such >shares driving the price up. Next they sell the shares to the buyer at
the increased price. The only 'work' they do is increase the price for >anyone else.

But also the value of the shares already owned. I own some stock. If
that stock becomes "hot" and shoots up in price-per-share, my
portfolio increases in value.

I'm not saying your theory is right or wrong. I'm saying you have not
shown - in my opinion - why it is right.


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Anders D. Nygaard <news2012adn@google.com> wrote:

On 7/31/2026 9:27 AM, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

Add the people who have scores of computers set up to make deals on the
stock market every microsecond.

I do not understand why stock markets permit this kind of trading.
Why not impose a series of (say) half-hour slots, where each trader
is only permitted to act at most once per slot?

Because stock markets make money per-transaction. High speed trading means more transactions per day and more money for the people running the market. --scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

"Microsecond" is a great exaggeration. It takes about 67 milliseconds
just to get a signal from one side of the planet to the other. For
instance from Madrid to Wellington or vice versa -- those two cities
being almost directly opposite each other.

Yes, this is why the high volume traders have their data centers as close
as possible to the market as they can... often within the same block,
because the propagation delay is critical. 67 milliseconds is enough to
get hundreds of trades through.

Some folks have been talking about HF radio links for high volume trading because the latency is lower than a satellite link or a non-direct leased
line, and they have got funding and frequency allocations but they don't
seem to be doing all that well.

And even if there were something objectionable about rapid stock
trading, I certainly don't think it warrants the death penalty.

I would not support the death penalty for high speed trading. Now, email
spam, I might support the death penalty for that.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Rich Ulrich <rich.ulrich@comcast.net> wrote:

"THis Thing of Darkness" by Harry Bingham is a Fiona Griffiths
mystery story that includes sabotage of an undersea cable,
intended to give the villains a fraction of a second advantage
in the markets.

The book includes arguments about high-speed trading, which
I can't say I remmeber.

The absolute best discussion about this comes from the days when stock information arrived much more slowly in the late 19th century. I highly recommend Reminiscences of a Stock Operator by Lefevre. It is fascinating
and amusing and it describes the craziness of the first Gilded Age, at
how technology was rapidly changing finance, and how scammers took great advantage of the changes.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <memo.20260801123400.29904B@pauldormer.cix.co.uk>,
Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

In article <114kis8$3gtbe$1@dont-email.me>,
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) wrote:

The number of descendants of David doesn't enter into it: Matthew
says that Joseph_s father was Jacob (Matthew 1:16), but Luke says
Joseph's father was Heli (Luke 3:23).

Maybe he was in trouble with the law and was using an alias.

You mean like Saul?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) wrote:

The number of descendants of David doesn't enter into it: Matthew
says that Joseph_s father was Jacob (Matthew 1:16), but Luke says
Joseph's father was Heli (Luke 3:23).

Maybe he was in trouble with the law and was using an alias.

You mean like Saul?

Or like nearly every pope?
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/1/26 12:07, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) wrote:

The number of descendants of David doesn't enter into it: Matthew
says that Joseph_s father was Jacob (Matthew 1:16), but Luke says
Joseph's father was Heli (Luke 3:23).

Maybe he was in trouble with the law and was using an alias.

You mean like Saul?

Or like nearly every pope?

Or Edward VII and George VI?

(Admittedly, they had those as middle names before being crowned, and
"Albert" was considered "too German" for the times.)
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Call me crazy but maybe two men who fathered 17 children with
6 different women between them shouldn't be lecturing us about
family values. --@rajazohaibmehtab
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

Maybe he was in trouble with the law and was using an alias.

You mean like Saul?

Or like nearly every pope?

Or Edward VII and George VI?

Don't forget Queen Victoria, whose real first name was Alexandrina.

(Admittedly, they had those as middle names before being crowned,
....)

As did Victoria.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

"Microsecond" is a great exaggeration. It takes about 67
milliseconds just to get a signal from one side of the planet to
the other. For instance from Madrid to Wellington or vice versa --
those two cities being almost directly opposite each other.

Yes, this is why the high volume traders have their data centers as
close as possible to the market as they can... often within the same
block, because the propagation delay is critical. 67 milliseconds
is enough to get hundreds of trades through.

Being closer to one market means you're further from another.

Granted, 67 milliseconds is short by most standards. We've come
a long way since the Battle of New Orleans was fought because the
combatants didn't realize that the peace treaty had been signed 15
days earlier.

Some folks have been talking about HF radio links for high volume
trading because the latency is lower than a satellite link or a
non-direct leased line, and they have got funding and frequency
allocations but they don't seem to be doing all that well.

One problem with HF is the relatively low bandwidth. Another is that
it's intermittent, depending on what the sun is doing. Yet another is
that modern digital electronics tends to make lots of radio noise that
jams faint signals.

One advantage of HF is that fewer people are using it than used to.

But neutrinos and gravitational waves have the advantage that they go
right through the planet, rather than having to go around its outside.
They have the disadvantage that they're difficult to generate and very difficult to detect.

I would not support the death penalty for high speed trading.
Now, email spam, I might support the death penalty for that.

The punishment should match the crime. If there is absolutely no
doubt that someone is guilty of persistent spamming or persistent
telemarketing to people on the do-not-call list, I would advocate
having their brain's language center surgically removed. If they
are keeping honest people from communicating with each other, they
should be made permanently unable to communicate with anyone.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 02/08/26 00:43, Tony Cooper wrote:

On Sat, 1 Aug 2026 08:08:11 +0200, Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> wrote:

Den 01.08.2026 kl. 01.26 skrev Tony Cooper:

The people making the trades are individuals who make their
living (or try to) by stock trades. What detrimental effect does
that have on anyone else?

Lack of money for those who lose in the deal.

That hardly convinces me that the system should be changed. You
only win or lose because you play, and the players choose to play.

Not always. In this country, superannuation companies have large
holdings in shares. These are the companies that manage your retirement savings. So a lot of people are shareholders by proxy. They don't choose
to play, but they need to have their retirement funds managed somehow.

(They can't just stick it in a bank. The tax system treats
superannuation differently from other kinds of savings.)

But my main point is that the money do not work. They just circle
around - except of course as you point out that some people earn
their living through servicing the market.

That's not any different from any other form of business. Some make
a profit on the trades and spend that money on some other business,
which, in turn, spends money on some other business. Rinse and
repeat.

That's true for ordinary businesses, and it's important for the national economy that the money circulates that way. But share trading is not an ordinary business. There, the money circulates in the little
micro-economy that is the money market. It is effectively withdrawn from
the main economy, and does not circulate in a way that would be
beneficial for the national economy.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 01/08/26 21:43, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

I don't understand how any jury can believe such evidence, but they
often do.

My experience as a juror left my with no trust at all in the jury
system. What justice can you get from a bunch of people who ignore the
evidence and vote based on their gut feeling?

I've heard it said that if you're guilty you should try to get a jury
trial, but if innocent you should fight for a judge-only trial. That's
based on an assumption that a jury will get it wrong.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

"Microsecond" is a great exaggeration. It takes about 67
milliseconds just to get a signal from one side of the planet to
the other. For instance from Madrid to Wellington or vice versa --
those two cities being almost directly opposite each other.

Yes, this is why the high volume traders have their data centers as
close as possible to the market as they can... often within the same
block, because the propagation delay is critical. 67 milliseconds
is enough to get hundreds of trades through.

Being closer to one market means you're further from another.

Yes, you don't use the datacenter that is trading on commodities in
Chicago for trading on the NYSE.

Some folks have been talking about HF radio links for high volume
trading because the latency is lower than a satellite link or a
non-direct leased line, and they have got funding and frequency
allocations but they don't seem to be doing all that well.

One problem with HF is the relatively low bandwidth. Another is that
it's intermittent, depending on what the sun is doing. Yet another is
that modern digital electronics tends to make lots of radio noise that
jams faint signals.

The intermittent problem is the big one.... most of the licenses that
have been granted are in the 20-26 MHz range which is often nice during
the trading day but often not so. The low bandwidth isn't a big deal
since you're just sending go/no-go messages.

But yeah, the ticker tape at 45 baud is not sufficient to keep up
with the trading rates if you're wanting a full market feed, so the
key is to either get higher data rates or to get reports only on a
limited number of stocks.

But neutrinos and gravitational waves have the advantage that they go
right through the planet, rather than having to go around its outside.
They have the disadvantage that they're difficult to generate and very >difficult to detect.

Neutrinos are easy to generate! They're getting generated all around us.
Which is part of the problem.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <114j0id$32797$1@dont-email.me>,
Anders D. Nygaard <news2012adn@google.com> wrote:

I do not understand why stock markets permit this kind of trading.
Why not impose a series of (say) half-hour slots, where each trader
is only permitted to act at most once per slot?

Because the stock markets make their money on transaction fees. More transactions = more income for the markets, which are themselves
listed companies whose incentive is to operate the most liquid market
possible (to encourage listings and thus listing fees) and execute the
most transactions possible (from which they directly earn income).

Historically the stock markets were effectively cooperatives owned by
their members (the people who actually executed trades on the floor),
and also regulators of the securities industry through their
imposition of rules on those same members and on the companies seeking
listing. After a wave of financial deregulation across the globe in
the 1990s, essentially all of them hived off their regulatory
functions,[1] demutualized, and were floated on the markets -- many of
them later merging with other exchanges, across types of securities,
borders, and even oceans. (The Nasdaq was not a stock market, but
rather, the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated
Quotation system, but it too was demutualized and spun off from the
NASD as a for-profit business that later acquired markets in Europe.)

-GAWollman

[1] Finra is the union of the former regulatory arms of the New York
Stock Exchange and the NASD.
--
Garrett A. Wollman | "Act to avoid constraining the future; if you can, wollman@bimajority.org| act to remove constraint from the future. This is Opinions not shared by| a thing you can do, are able to do, to do together."
my employers. | - Graydon Saunders, _A Succession of Bad Days_ (2015) --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/1/2026 5:15 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

"Microsecond" is a great exaggeration. It takes about 67
milliseconds just to get a signal from one side of the planet to
the other. For instance from Madrid to Wellington or vice versa --
those two cities being almost directly opposite each other.

Yes, this is why the high volume traders have their data centers as
close as possible to the market as they can... often within the same
block, because the propagation delay is critical. 67 milliseconds
is enough to get hundreds of trades through.

Being closer to one market means you're further from another.

Granted, 67 milliseconds is short by most standards. We've come
a long way since the Battle of New Orleans was fought because the
combatants didn't realize that the peace treaty had been signed 15
days earlier.

Some folks have been talking about HF radio links for high volume
trading because the latency is lower than a satellite link or a
non-direct leased line, and they have got funding and frequency
allocations but they don't seem to be doing all that well.

One problem with HF is the relatively low bandwidth. Another is that
it's intermittent, depending on what the sun is doing. Yet another is
that modern digital electronics tends to make lots of radio noise that
jams faint signals.

One advantage of HF is that fewer people are using it than used to.

There are already at least a couple of arbitrage houses that have
built microwave relay chains in as close to a Great Circle route
between Chicago and NYC as possible. The trading computer sits half way
along, and knows the prices in both markets before either end
can hear from the other.

They make bank, trading commodity futures contracts.

pt

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Sun, 2 Aug 2026 10:23:27 +1000, Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org>
wrote:

On 01/08/26 21:43, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

I don't understand how any jury can believe such evidence, but they
often do.

My experience as a juror left my with no trust at all in the jury
system. What justice can you get from a bunch of people who ignore the >evidence and vote based on their gut feeling?

I've heard it said that if you're guilty you should try to get a jury
trial, but if innocent you should fight for a judge-only trial. That's
based on an assumption that a jury will get it wrong.

The book to read is:

Paton, Alan. 1973 [1948] Cry, the beloved country. Harmondsworth:
Penguin.
ISBN: 0-14-001274-5
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 01.08.2026 kl. 16.43 skrev Tony Cooper:

Lack of money for those who lose in the deal.

That hardly convinces me that the system should be changed. You only
win or lose because you play, and the players choose to play.

Maybe they don't. When I bought my house, I took a loan in a financial institute. Technically they sell me some bonds which I then pay for each quarter. If a microdealer bought those bonds microseconds before my part
was bought, they landed me with a higher debt for thirty years, and they
drove up house prices everywhere making it more difficult for young
people to get a house.

You can argue that my buying a house is a gamble where I have to risk suffering a loss, but I see it as a normal way of getting a house to
live in.

Furthermore once in a while there will be a global, financial crisis
which drains money from 'small' people for no reason at all except
nervousness in investors. There was the it bubble and the housing bubble
and there will be more to come.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 23:53:42 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

They couldn't notice that it was missing if they didn't have the
concept.

And indeed they did not. Zero was invented by Brahmagupta in the 7th
century.

So how did this Brahmagupta notice it was missing, if they didnrCOt have
the concept?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 20:05:22 -0400, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

I always found it peculiar that the gospels of Matthew and Luke
spent so much time listing Joseph's lineage, when he supposedly
wasn't related to Jesus at all.

And that they disagreed on it.

That happens with made-up stories all the time.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 02.08.2026 kl. 10.30 skrev Lawrence DrCOOliveiro:

And indeed they did not. Zero was invented by Brahmagupta in the 7th
century.

So how did this Brahmagupta notice it was missing, if they didnrCOt have
the concept?

How could Einstein notice the theory of relativism if nobody knew about it?
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my drive?

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 23:53:42 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

They couldn't notice that it was missing if they didn't have the
concept.

And indeed they did not. Zero was invented by Brahmagupta in the 7th century.

So how did this Brahmagupta notice it was missing, if they didn't have
the concept?

By introspection?

Jan

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> wrote:

Den 02.08.2026 kl. 10.30 skrev Lawrence D'Oliveiro:

And indeed they did not. Zero was invented by Brahmagupta in the 7th
century.

So how did this Brahmagupta notice it was missing, if they didn't have
the concept?

How could Einstein notice the theory of relativism if nobody knew about it?

By trying very hard to run along with a light wave,
and finding he couldn't, so it had to be an absolute,

Jan


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Sun, 2 Aug 2026 09:40:55 +0200, Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> wrote:

Den 01.08.2026 kl. 16.43 skrev Tony Cooper:

Lack of money for those who lose in the deal.

That hardly convinces me that the system should be changed. You only
win or lose because you play, and the players choose to play.

Maybe they don't. When I bought my house, I took a loan in a financial >institute. Technically they sell me some bonds which I then pay for each >quarter. If a microdealer bought those bonds microseconds before my part
was bought, they landed me with a higher debt for thirty years, and they >drove up house prices everywhere making it more difficult for young
people to get a house.

Never heard of that type of mortgage, but I'd hardly be familiar with
how things might be done in other countries.

In the US, one applies for a mortgage, receives an offer with
specified terms, and - if the offer is accepted - those terms are held
to. The only "surprise" is when the borrower has not read and
understood the terms.

I haven't applied for a mortgage in years, but when I did there were
fixed rate and variable rate mortgages. With a fixed rate mortgage,
the initial interest percent is never changed. With a variable rate,
the interest percent can go up or down.

When one applies here, the transaction is between the buyer and a
financial institution. That financial institution can sell that
mortgage to another financial institution, but the terms and interest
do not change. On my last mortgage, I think at least five different
firms owned the mortgage over the years.

In the US, it's common to have the real estate taxes paid by the
mortgage holder. The mortgage holder's monthly payment includes an
amount added to escrow that pays the taxes. The real estate tax may
vary over the years which means the mortgage payment changes.

Some also have homeowner's insurance costs added to the mortgage
payment, and that - too - can change and affect the monthly payment.

Interest rate does not change, though, with a fixed mortgage.

All above pertains only to standard mortgages with reputable financial institutions. It doesn't apply to situations where the borrower does
not qualify for a standard mortgage, and may have to go to some firm
or source that dictates non-standard terms.

The general rule is that the more you need it, and the less qualified
you are, the worse the terms will be.

You can argue that my buying a house is a gamble where I have to risk >suffering a loss, but I see it as a normal way of getting a house to
live in.

Furthermore once in a while there will be a global, financial crisis
which drains money from 'small' people for no reason at all except >nervousness in investors. There was the it bubble and the housing bubble
and there will be more to come.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Den 02.08.2026 kl. 16.24 skrev Tony Cooper:

Maybe they don't. When I bought my house, I took a loan in a financial
institute. Technically they sell me some bonds which I then pay for each
quarter. If a microdealer bought those bonds microseconds before my part
was bought, they landed me with a higher debt for thirty years, and they
drove up house prices everywhere making it more difficult for young
people to get a house.

Never heard of that type of mortgage, but I'd hardly be familiar with
how things might be done in other countries.

In the US, one applies for a mortgage, receives an offer with
specified terms, and - if the offer is accepted - those terms are held
to. The only "surprise" is when the borrower has not read and
understood the terms.

I can negotiate the mortgage with my bank (who represents the real
estate financial company) but it's the price on the day that decides
what it will cost. I chose a fixed interest of 1.5% which was possible
at the time - a lucky time for me.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my drive?

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Sun, 2 Aug 2026 18:23:50 +0200, Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> wrote:

Den 02.08.2026 kl. 16.24 skrev Tony Cooper:

Maybe they don't. When I bought my house, I took a loan in a financial
institute. Technically they sell me some bonds which I then pay for each >>> quarter. If a microdealer bought those bonds microseconds before my part >>> was bought, they landed me with a higher debt for thirty years, and they >>> drove up house prices everywhere making it more difficult for young
people to get a house.

Never heard of that type of mortgage, but I'd hardly be familiar with
how things might be done in other countries.

In the US, one applies for a mortgage, receives an offer with
specified terms, and - if the offer is accepted - those terms are held
to. The only "surprise" is when the borrower has not read and
understood the terms.

I can negotiate the mortgage with my bank (who represents the real
estate financial company) but it's the price on the day that decides
what it will cost. I chose a fixed interest of 1.5% which was possible
at the time - a lucky time for me.

I'm not sure on what "the day" means in that. In the US, you apply
for a mortage, receive an offer with the interest rate stated, and -
if you accept that - the mortgage goes through at that rate.

You may actually close several days later, and it's at closing that
the money transfers. If the prevailing interest rate changes between
the offer/acceptance, what was in the offer is the interest rate, not
the current rate.


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/2/2026 1:30 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 23:53:42 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

They couldn't notice that it was missing if they didn't have the
concept.

And indeed they did not. Zero was invented by Brahmagupta in the 7th
century.

So how did this Brahmagupta notice it was missing, if they didnrCOt have
the concept?

Speculation: By looking at, and counting, physical objects, subtracting
one (removing an object) repeatedly until he got to one, then removing
one more, and realizing there needed to be a way to record what was left.
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2