
Traveller-digest     Saturday, October 23 1999     Volume 1999 : Number 1248



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Space Opera?
Re: Honoring J. Andrew Keith
Re: Traveller - the 1970's with starships? (longish)
Re: Space Opera?
Alderson Drives and other technology
Re: TML Members as resources
Traveller Inspirations (was Space Opera)
Re: WTF- "vingean singularity" (was Re: Re Traveller and the modern era
Re: WTF- "vingean singularity"
Re: "new" critter
Re: Standard forms for XML data
Re: WTF- "vingean singularity"
Re Nobility
Re: WTF- "vingean singularity" (was Re: Re Traveller and the modern era
RE: NZ LARPS
Re: WTF- "vingean singularity"
Traveller Software
RE: TML Members as resources

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 01:43:41 -0400
From: "Jory Earl" <j-man@iname.com>
Subject: Re: Space Opera?

>TOS didn't have fighters, true (unless you count Starfleet Battles).
>Neither did TNG, except for a brief glimpse of a squadron of small ships
>wiped out by a Borg cube.

It was my understanding that the BORG wiped out "destroyer" sized attack
craft, reminiscent of our attack class subs in use today.  Fighters were
used in Star fleet training in the episode where Wesley's group screwed
around with a dangerous manuever and a cadet was killed when his fighter
craft blew up.


___________________________________________________________
 J-Man
 ICQ# 2843475
 New Hampshire - U.S.A.
 Email : j-man@iname.com
 Home Page : http://www.geocities.com/~jman037/
___________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 00:53:30 -0500
From: "Chad Russell" <mindbreaker@unforgettable.com>
Subject: Re: Honoring J. Andrew Keith

Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:

> I suggested it, and come to think about it you're right. I will change the
> request to an IISS capital ship like the transferred Kokkiruk class
> dreadnought, or maybe we can change the number of AHL's transferred to the
> scouts by one...

Would you be willing to consider something smaller, more ubiquitous, and
even more associated with the IISS than the Donosev class?  How about an
X-Boat tender upgrade, or even one of those mentioned-in-passing-in-JTAS
Type S variants used for extra-special courier duties and having only 2
staterooms, no cargo or craft, and all the rest fuel (55 tons' worth under
CT, IIRC)?

Were the X-Boats themselves ever assigned a class name in any of the
various canons?  I don't seem to recall one...

Something essential to the very fabric of 3I civilization, in other
words... and something a little less ostentatious than a capital ship?



Just a thought...

Chad

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 02:42:24 -0000
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller - the 1970's with starships? (longish)

From: Leonard Erickson <shadow@krypton.rain.com>


>It pays to keep in mind that the "singularity" isn't going to be much
>like Vinge's (lack of) description.

>
>The whole *concept* of the singularity is that you reach a point where
>the changes combine to make the resulting world/culture completely
>incomprehensible to anyone from before that point.


The progression to a singularity, if such a thing exists, is a slow one.
It's simply a rationalization for what anybody who's looked into futurism,
science-fiction, political or social theories already knows: people have a
really hard time predicting the future correctly.

The concept of the Vingean singularity is extremely artificial, and
extremely speculative. The potential usefulness of the theory in the real
world aside, it's a really absurd idea to apply it to a roleplaying game
setting that quite probably has "singularity tech" in it anyway. Cheap
fusion power + antigrav? Sure we can "imagine" it, but I'd stake my life
savings that should such technologies appear the results will not be merely
air/rafts and the like. That's a revolution on an unprecedented scale.

I mean, does anyone really think that we're in the business of *real*
futurism here?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 23:48:45 -0700
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@home.com>
Subject: Re: Space Opera?

>>"Battle Beyond the Stars". It's a classic. Bad, but fun.
>
>	Is that the one where they flat-out swiped clips of the "Vipers"
>from Battlestar Galactica?

No, it's the one with breasts on the ship. The one they swiped all the
space scenes from Battlestar Galactica from is "Space Mutiny", featured on
MST3K and among the worst movies ever made.
- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@home.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 15:02:24 -0700
From: "Antony Farrell" <Skaran@bigpond.com>
Subject: Alderson Drives and other technology

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Eris Reddoch
> Sent: Thursday, 21 October 1999 3:54 PM
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com
> Subject: Re: Jumpdrives was Re: Norris the Man...
>
>
> On 10/18/99 at 04:18 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:
>
> >> You know Eris, if you used something like Stutterwarp as
> jumpdrive, this
> >> would be really easy to do <grin>.
>
> >It'd be even easier with Alderson drives. Of course then you have to
> >deal with fixed jump points, which change system defence beyond
> >recognition.
>
> Also true. <g>  Fixed point jump points are just fine, too.
>
> Eris
>
>To build these ships in Traveller some explanation would have to be given
as to why the ships need virtually there entire power plant output to send a
maser signal in-system. The periods of the Codominium would also make an
interesting set of Traveller backgrounds.
Antony

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 00:35:19 -0700
From: "Kiri Aradia Morgan" <tiamat@tsoft.com>
Subject: Re: TML Members as resources

>In a message dated 10/22/99 8:56:32 PM !!!First Boot!!!, tiamat@tsoft.com
>writes:
>
><<  have a Master's Degree in
> Medieval History specializing in the occult, early science, mysticism,
> religion and women's issues.  >>
>
>and History 3 or 4...
>
So this is a skill in Traveller?

OK, here goes.

Kiri Aradia Morgan  (Solomani female)

Strength                 5
Dexterity                8
Endurance             4
Intelligence            B   (175 IQ according to the test)
Education              9-A   (MA, plus too much reading)
Social Status         7

History-3, Writing-3, Carousing-3, Linguistics-2 (I read, write and speakl
Japanese, not fluently but understandably, and read French fairly well and
Greek and Latin very poorly, but better than most people can), Streetwise-1,
Firearms-0, JOT-1, Computer-1, Sewing-1, Medical-0 (worked in hospitals/med
schools most of my adult life, even if I am an AA), Legal-0 (did 2 of my 3
divorces without help and have also worked for law firms, a law school, and
2 insurance companies).

Hm, definite NPC...

Kiri  =)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kiri Aradia Morgan            93!              Thou Art God...
tiamat@tsoft.com

the current fair warnings:

"No matter what, expect the unexpected.  And whenever
possible, BE the unexpected."     -- Lynda Barry

"Honest to the point of recklessness, and self-centered
 in the extreme."            -- Robert Hunter/Jerry Garcia

"God sent me to piss the world off!"  -- Eminem

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 03:52:09 EDT
From: GypsyComet@aol.com
Subject: Traveller Inspirations (was Space Opera)

>I have to agree that Traveller is pure Space Opera - but I'd love to know
>what MM says about the original sources for the idea. My bet would have very
>little to do with the Lensmen series at all. I'd back two main sources for
>just about all of the ideas in the game.
>
>Top of the list - E.C. Tubb's Dumarest Saga....
 <snip>

>Next on the list would be Jack Vance's many stories...
 <snip>

>Anyone care to suggest any others? Better yet, anyone who really knows the
>answer like to tell us?

 Very high on the "real" list you will find Poul Anderson's Falkayn/Van Rijn 
books
and the later (in the same timeline) Flandry books. Harry Harrison's Stainless
Steel Rat and Deathworld books are also specifically mentioned in an interview
w/Marc (in High Passage #2).

 Andre Norton's many SF books, of which the Solar Queen books are merely
the most obvious, also rate highly. You can bet Starship Troopers is also a 
factor.

GC

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 21:49:46 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: WTF- "vingean singularity" (was Re: Re Traveller and the modern era

In mail you write:

>>If any such beings end up existing then suddenly the future becomes
>>completely unpredictable, since such individuals will understand the
>>world in a fashion which we cannot grasp.  What would a being that was
>>more intelligent than the smartest human and capable of thinking 100 times
>>as fast be able to do?  What would a society run be such beings or perhaps
>>composes of such beings be like?  We have no clue...  That's what the
>>singularity is about.  Vinge has an excellent essay about this on the web.
>
> What you are forgetting is the most inherent and naturally limiting factor :
> Humans themselves.  The main distribution of people aren't very intelligent
> at all yet occupy most of the niches needed to push technologies to change
> humanity.  and these same people will fight change and do fight it.  The
> larger the changes, the more they fight it.  Why else is NASA and other
> needed agencies relegated a level of importance equal to watching cars go
> down the freeway, as far as Senators and other influential people are
> concerned, when it comes to divvying out the funds?

I suggest you consider how fast computers are currently spreading. They
let people do things they *want* to do, yet in the process, they open
the gateway for the sort of thing that leads to the singularity.

> You then tell these people that this or that is going to change their
> children or themselves physically and you'll have a near panic on your hands
> and the typical political knee-jerk reaction of covering it up and brushing
> it under the carpet. 

Who said anything about *physically*? The singularity could occur
merely from following the path of new and better *games*, and fancier
web offerings. 

Just *try* and tell me that gamers won't be all over neural interfaces
as soon as they get remotely practical. And between potential military
uses and the possible aids to the handicapped that could come from
them, neural interfaces *will* be developed, if they are possible.

> Were it not for short-sighted people in power, we
> would already have an international space station, a colony on the moon,
> industry in orbit and possibly a colony on Mars as well.  Sure technology is
> moving fast, but that's mainly research.  Implementation (unless it stands
> to make someone very rich or powerful) seems to drag slow as molasses in
> January.

See above. The interfaces have medical, military and entertainment
uses. A faster Internet is also going to make money. 

And once we have both, how much do you think people would pay to be
able just think a question and have the interface feed them the answer?
At first, it'd be just a handsfree calculator, datebook, and personal
secretary. As well as a cell phone.

If no one else does it, hackers will combine the game interface with
the comm links. And have someone resembling telepathy. From there, who
knows. Because at *that* point, we are already at the edge. Beyond, it
things get so weird, so fast that we can't predict the outcome.

But one possible "final step" will be if/when it becomes possible to
"upload" a personality into a computer. That'll remove the biggest
speed limitation. 

The steps leading up to the singularity are inevitable simply because
they *will* make money. And they'll also be desirable by even the
general public in most cases. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 22:11:10 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: WTF- "vingean singularity"

In mail you write:

> Of course, one would, if one wanted to be a "nice" person,  have to allow
> individuals to choose whether they wantd to be involved in the process, and
> allow them to hide out in their little backwater,
>
> But for some reason, that seems more religious or hysterical than anything
> else,  lots of people don't like the idea of genetic engineering, look at
> all the fuss in the UK where they've even banned (or tried to ban, more
> like) genetically modified foods, forgeting that all the food they've been
> eating for centuries is already genetically modified. There's even people
> trying to get that done over here in New Zealand.

People are scared of changes. Usually because we aren't taught how
risks *really* work. 

For an interesting take on how we might "evolve" into post-humanity
read Marc Steigler's "The Gentle Seduction". It follows an "average"
person through the transition. Heck, she starts out not even being sure
that stuff like neural interfaces should be *allowed*.

>> >I'm betting
>> >on intelligence enhanced humans within the next 40 or 50 years.
>> >I hope the process can be retrofitted, since I'd sure like to
>> >become such a being.
>>
>> I could be interesting, but it might be frightening too.
>> What if you find out that morality is silly?  I'm not
>> saying that such a conclusion would be a necessary
>> result of higher intelligence, but (as you pointed out)
>> we cannot imagine how brainiacs would see the world.
>
> Hey, we don't need brainiac to see that morality _is_ silly
> unless you're the one controlling what the current morality is.
> <grin>

Actualy, you are both confusing morals (does this conform with x set of
rules as handed down from 'on high') and ethics (conforming with a
mutually agreed upon, mutually benifical set of rules). 

I've mentioned metalaw before. It looks to be the best bet at a
universally applicable code of ethics. 

> The problem is not really that "higher intelligences" may see the world in a
> different way, but that humans have this terrible desire to enforce their
> own way of seeing things on other people and things, and not accepting
> other's ways of seeing things.

Metalaw again. As long as your way of seeing things doesn't interfer
with my way of seeing things, we get along just fine. 

> This is true, people who don't like computer intellligence keep redefining
> what intelligence is to deny computer capabilities. Their latest, and
> probably most interesting, attempt at redefining it, is "emotional"
> intelligence.

While I feel that one is *really* reaching, something useful may come
out of it.

> Currently, computers can out perform humans in all quantative measures of
> human intelligence, except perhaps inductive reasoning and some random
> information retrrieval but they don't exhibit "original thought".

> One possibility is that original thought may not actually be neccessary for
> us to be fooled into thinking something is "intelligent". The converse is
> that anything we can't communicate with is considered "un-intelligent"
> unless it shows us some fancy technological tricks.

This will also happen when we encounter aliens for the first time.
Especially if it's a case of us meeting non-industrialized aliens on
their home world. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 21:41:07 +0100
From: Martin Hardgrave <martin@deira.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: "new" critter

In message <991020.180314.8K5.rnr.w165w@krypton.rain.com>, Leonard
Erickson <shadow@krypton.rain.com> writes
>It should be fairly simple. just insert mammoth DNA into an elephant
>ovum, implant the ovum in a female elephant, and in a year or so,
>you'll have a baby mammoth.

Have they ever managed to implant an elephant ovum into an elephant?
- -- 
Martin Hardgrave

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 21:59:51 +1300
From: "Frank Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz>
Subject: Re: Standard forms for XML data

> I was working on an XML schema but held back since that technology is
still
> too young. I'll take a look at the DTD and XML and give you what feedback
my
> schedule allows.

Include me on the review, please.

I have some spare time and am currently addding a module on XML to one of my
courses, so need to play with it a bit.

BTW, you guys got the free Java XML parser from Alphaworks yet ?

Frankie

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 22:28:21 +1300
From: "Frank Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz>
Subject: Re: WTF- "vingean singularity"

<snip>
> > The problem is not really that "higher intelligences" may see the world
in a
> > different way, but that humans have this terrible desire to enforce
their
> > own way of seeing things on other people and things, and not accepting
> > other's ways of seeing things.
>
> Metalaw again. As long as your way of seeing things doesn't interfer
> with my way of seeing things, we get along just fine.

I agree.

But what is our response to those that insist on interfering, such as
aggressively expansionist empires and mobs of frightened peasants with
pitchforks ?

> > This is true, people who don't like computer intellligence keep
redefining
> > what intelligence is to deny computer capabilities. Their latest, and
> > probably most interesting, attempt at redefining it, is "emotional"
> > intelligence.
>
> While I feel that one is *really* reaching, something useful may come
> out of it.

Well, I did try and refrain from giving my opinion of it, I mainly find it
interesting because it brings up the idea that "intelligence" may mean
different things depending on context.

> > One possibility is that original thought may not actually be neccessary
for
> > us to be fooled into thinking something is "intelligent". The converse
is
> > that anything we can't communicate with is considered "un-intelligent"
> > unless it shows us some fancy technological tricks.
>
> This will also happen when we encounter aliens for the first time.
> Especially if it's a case of us meeting non-industrialized aliens on
> their home world.

Exactly. There are several SF novels that cover this sort of thing, but a
lot of people don't realize how much it goes on between humans as well.

One example is the Organian's in the old Star Trek series, with both the
Federation and the Klingons's thinking they're low tech because they had no
obvious technology, both sides wanting to exploit them and the planet.

Frankie

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 06:29:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Nobility

>Here's an interesting question:
>
>Canon is pretty clear on how many there are of the highest ranks of the
>Imperial nobility -- one duke per subsector, a count for every two or three
>worlds, a marquis for every single important world.
>
>Meanwhile, the baronage is the main pool from which the upper ranks
>of Imperial bureaucracy are drawn.  There must be a lot of barons, since
>the Imperium has a huge population to be administered.  How many?

Canon also states that titles (all the way through duke) can be awarded as
rewards for service(s), in a manner not unlike british orders of nighthood.
Also, children of a noble recieve courtesy titles, as well. (See CT library
data for the article on nobility... it is a great resource to look at
here). Based upon CT and MT Careers, it is likely that the following are
true:

1)	Nobility who hold their own see (not fief, see detail below) are
fairly rare; it is hard to get a position and even harder to get promoted
as a "serving" noble.

2) The navy and Marines tend to get "Courtesy Titles", especially upon
attaining high ranks in the service; according to the article in Library
Data, whether or not they get a fief is questionable.

3) Reward nobility have skills based upon their career; The noble career
seems to be one of an administrator who dabbles in a lot of other things...
very reminiscent of the Barrayarran Imperial Auditor (from Bujold's
VorKosigan novels).

4) Career nobility carries with it the appropriate courtesy rank when you
leave it, and possibly a feif, to boot.

Nobles without a see are adressed as Baron John Doe, of Regni.
Nobles with a see are addressed as: Duke Regina, or Norris, Archduke of
Deneb. (Effectively, the office replaces the surname, except in very formal
circumstances).

Canon doesn't specify the nature or size of feifs. A feif is a parcel of
land that is associated with a noble patent.
<my interpretation begins here>
A noble office is a position that only a nobleman can hold (if a non-noble
manages to get in, he'd be granted an appropriate title to go with the
office, and get the courtesy rank along with). An office has a "See" in the
same manner a bishop does; the see is that area under the administration of
the holder of a particular office, or whatever tthe &^&*(& the noble does,
he does for that area. The See of the Emperor is the Imperium, his fief is
(AFAI understand) Captol City, plus several estates throughout the Capitol
system. An office may also have an "official fief", ie a fief that is
attached to the office, not to the title. When you leave an office, you
would lose any official fief, as well, but if your patent of nobility
includes a fief, you retain the fief from your patent.

One thing I have done several times is to make fiefs that sometimes include
no land, or very little; one baron in a game I ran had a 23 story Apartment
building as a feif; another baron got the Isle of Adak (Terra/Spinward
Marches) as a fief, which puts it two hous by air-raft from Scout Base
Anchorage; most of his money was made on catering to scouts who wanted to
get away from the base, but still be near anough for recall. Yet another
had a 5 room flat, and a pile of megacorporate stocks as his feif... not a
lot of space, no land, but the stocks, and the staff that managed them made
enough for him to travel extensively.

William F. Hostman  |  "Smith & Wesson: THe original Point and Click
interface!"
Aramis 0602 C55A364-C S kk+ as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
533
Mailto:aramis@gci.net http://home.gci.net/~aramis http://www.alaska.net/~mhaa
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis	ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn- t4-- tt+ to- tg-- ru+ ge 3i+ c+ jt-() au+ st- ls
pi+() ta+ he+(-) kk+ as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 23:59:42 +1300
From: "Frank Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz>
Subject: Re: WTF- "vingean singularity" (was Re: Re Traveller and the modern era

> See above. The interfaces have medical, military and entertainment
> uses. A faster Internet is also going to make money.
>
> And once we have both, how much do you think people would pay to be
> able just think a question and have the interface feed them the answer?
> At first, it'd be just a handsfree calculator, datebook, and personal
> secretary. As well as a cell phone.
>
> If no one else does it, hackers will combine the game interface with
> the comm links. And have someone resembling telepathy.

I was just thinking yesterday in the car while using my voice-activated
"hands free" cellular headset, that with the addition of an intelligent
voice-activated name triggered phone number search, I could say "Eleonore?"
(my wife's name) and have the system automatically connect me with her.
Currently I have to have her number already on a preset to do this.

As I have actually written the server code to support finding users on a
mobile radio net,  I know that it would not be _difficult_  to add that
interface,  the hard code that finds the cell phone in the net is already
writeen, someone else has already written voice recognition software, and we
done;t have to install it on the phones, merely on the server you'd get when
you used "Voice Phonebook",

It would not be as fast as a direct number to begin with, and we might have
to allow the user a choice if we have multiple original matches, but that's
no real problem, we have voice activated and recognising IVR sytstems now,
it's just a matter of writing one with a soundex algorithm that searches an
electronic phone book . Excuse me while I call Telecom's marketing
department

Couple that with making the headset and cellphone wearable or embedded, plus
everyone you want to talk to wearing one, and full planetary coverage, alll
of which are physically possible and only a little away from being
financially possible, (how much does an Iridium phone cost ?) though I'll
admit not everyone would want to be contactable at all times.

What effect does being able to talk to anyone, anywhere, just by saying
their name have on the way communication is conducted and on our social
conventions ?

I picture hundreds of people walking down the street, all talking to people
who aren't there .....

Add some "specs", so you could see a holographic representation of what the
person you're talking to looks like, and you get virtual meetings. All this
tech is here, now, the specs are available in 1024 x 768, laser reflecting
on retina, we can do simple VRML down existing mobile modems, it will get
better.

Teleworking by all working in the same _virtual_ room...

Anyne remember the scene from Earth 2 where they have a "ball" ?

Lenny, you got ya gear on?

> From there, who
> knows. Because at *that* point, we are already at the edge. Beyond, it
> things get so weird, so fast that we can't predict the outcome.

When you can vist the Umbra or the land of Faerie by saying "O my magic
genie , take me to the world behind the veils" and you are there, has the
mythological age returned ?


> But one possible "final step" will be if/when it becomes possible to
> "upload" a personality into a computer. That'll remove the biggest
> speed limitation.

This is the hardest, and most unlikely step IMO. There is currently no
forseeeable technoogy that will allow it, the rest is all possible with just
a little more work, either technicial or marketing, but this, it's just too
far out right now. We'll need to be able to accurately model the human mind,
which basically implies we'll have AI long before we get this far.

> The steps leading up to the singularity are inevitable simply because
> they *will* make money. And they'll also be desirable by even the
> general public in most cases.

You may not need the final step though, everything could change so much
merely with existing technology being applied. Like, f'rinstance, that shirt
that monitors your vital signs, the anti-theft device for cars (Smart Cars)
currently being marketed in Australia, the autonav system on Deep Space 1,
the automated gun  that was mentioned on here a while ago, combine this with
the automated sniper detection and targetting system that was developed a
year or two ago, the.., hell there's so many of them.

Are the stories of Faerie and Avalon merely premonitions of what we will
create, or memories of what the Atlanteans created before their fall ?

Damn, I'll have to write a novel about it now. <grin>

"Universal Soldier" just fiinished playing on TV,

Body Count     Body Count
Body Count's in the House !
Body Count     Body Count

Frankie

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 13:03:30 +0200
From: Volker Greimann <volker@greimann.de>
Subject: RE: NZ LARPS

>> Featuring the king of Gearheads : Peter Jackson! (with Fusion
THE Peter Jackson?
Who is right now busy filming the Lord of the Rings in NZ?

WOW, didn t know he was a gamer, too!
Volker
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Volker A. Greimann --- http://www.greimann.de --- volker@greimann.de

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 05:20:26 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: WTF- "vingean singularity"

In mail you write:

> <snip>
>>> The problem is not really that "higher intelligences" may see the
>>> world in a different way, but that humans have this terrible desire
>>> to enforce their own way of seeing things on other people and
>>> things, and not accepting other's ways of seeing things.

>> Metalaw again. As long as your way of seeing things doesn't interfer
>> with my way of seeing things, we get along just fine.
>
> I agree.
>
> But what is our response to those that insist on interfering, such as
> aggressively expansionist empires and mobs of frightened peasants with
> pitchforks ?

Defending yourself against others *is* permitted. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 08:46:03 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@accesstoledo.com>
Subject: Traveller Software

I've been playing with a piece of software called SSV, a sector viewer that 
works well undr Linux.  I was wondering if the authors, Mark F. Cook and Dan 
Corrin, are around.  Anybody seen them?

Keven

- -- 
tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 07:56:56 -0500
From: "William Barnett-Lewis" <wlewis@mailbag.com>
Subject: RE: TML Members as resources

Heh, interesting idea...

William Barnett-Lewis
787C68    Cr: 5000

4 Terms Army (Regular & Reserve), 1 Term Bureaucrat

Computer 3, Recon 3, Ground Vehicle (Motorcycle) 2, Tracked Vehicle 1,
Electronics 1, Mechanic 1, Rifle 1, Pistol 1, SMG 0, Heavy Weapons 1, FO 1,
Tactics 1, Admin 0, Blade 1

Amazin' what a couple of years as a cav troopie will teach...


- --
Live without fear; your Creator loves you     | William Barnett-Lewis
as a mother. Go in peace to follow the good   | mailto://wlewis@mailbag.com
road and may God's blessing be with           |
you always.                                   |
St. Claire                                    |

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1248
***********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe
"local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
