Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.misc > #3039 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.TheWorld.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-05-23 16:39 -0400 |
| Last post | 2014-05-26 17:54 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 240 — 49 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.misc
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.TheWorld.com> - 2014-05-23 16:39 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2014-05-23 16:32 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-23 23:28 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-24 08:23 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-23 23:55 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2014-05-24 00:17 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> - 2014-05-24 10:21 -0300
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2014-05-24 14:37 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 16:29 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-24 14:16 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-05-24 14:45 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-25 11:25 +0200
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-25 10:32 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-25 21:40 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 12:35 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-26 13:34 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 21:35 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-26 21:47 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-27 00:09 +0200
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-28 16:07 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2014-05-29 02:16 +0200
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Will Honea <whonea@whonea.net> - 2014-05-28 23:23 -0600
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-29 11:26 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 10:30 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-29 20:05 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-29 20:31 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-29 22:36 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 19:16 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 12:19 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-31 15:31 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-31 23:54 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 11:31 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-06-01 10:27 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-01 12:15 +0200
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 09:14 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 09:12 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 12:19 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 08:00 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2014-05-30 14:44 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-31 15:42 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-31 07:29 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 07:36 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-31 17:47 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 09:37 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-01 00:00 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 11:34 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-01 12:31 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-06-01 12:48 -0800
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 09:22 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-06-02 07:09 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-06-02 16:27 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2014-06-02 13:00 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-06-02 13:16 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-06-02 13:57 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Alan Bowler <atbowler@thinkage.ca> - 2014-08-29 13:38 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 22:14 +0300
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? greymaus <greymausg@mail.com> - 2014-08-29 20:55 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-08-30 01:21 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-31 23:54 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-06-01 09:23 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-06-01 09:44 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-31 23:54 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 11:21 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-06-01 09:59 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-06-02 07:03 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-06-04 09:33 -0800
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-06-01 09:35 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 09:31 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2014-06-01 21:59 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 16:46 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-31 07:26 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-31 12:48 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 07:44 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 07:32 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-06-01 12:18 -0800
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 18:59 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-30 07:28 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 09:26 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-30 15:24 -0800
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 17:40 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 16:24 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2014-05-30 15:57 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 16:14 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-31 12:46 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-31 21:41 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-01 12:31 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 09:19 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-06-02 07:06 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2014-05-29 21:46 +0200
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-29 21:31 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 20:49 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-30 02:00 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 11:42 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-30 06:32 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 16:22 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-30 22:43 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-30 08:06 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 12:29 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-30 13:23 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 09:44 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 15:52 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> - 2014-05-30 07:18 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 21:09 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-05-30 16:17 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-30 13:19 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-30 21:47 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-30 23:01 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-30 18:44 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 17:17 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-30 07:51 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 09:47 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-30 08:03 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 09:48 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-31 15:03 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-30 12:53 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 15:14 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-05-29 13:33 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 14:40 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Will Honea <whonea@whonea.net> - 2014-05-26 20:38 -0600
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 13:32 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 05:58 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-25 15:09 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-24 09:41 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 20:37 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-24 14:05 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-24 18:48 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-25 12:34 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-25 13:57 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-25 17:15 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-25 15:44 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> - 2014-05-25 16:28 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 06:39 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-24 21:22 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 08:19 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-25 08:10 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 20:44 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-25 16:11 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 04:16 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-25 10:28 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-25 15:09 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> - 2014-05-25 16:32 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-25 17:39 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-05-25 12:20 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-25 18:55 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-25 20:02 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2014-05-25 22:29 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-05-25 17:20 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-26 05:06 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-26 11:45 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-26 12:34 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Joe Makowiec <makowiec@invalid.invalid> - 2014-05-26 14:28 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-26 16:05 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 12:35 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-26 13:41 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-26 14:39 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-26 16:03 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-05-26 11:27 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-26 12:26 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-26 13:36 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-26 18:46 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-26 21:27 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-26 15:46 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-05-26 17:01 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-27 11:40 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-26 14:59 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-27 12:17 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn ERSHC <ershc123@invalid.invalid> - 2014-05-27 03:50 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 05:50 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-26 12:54 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-26 17:49 +0000
Re: a long way from a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2014-05-26 17:55 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-26 19:48 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-26 18:59 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-27 09:03 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-27 16:01 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-27 16:03 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-27 16:55 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-27 17:47 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-27 21:34 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-27 21:20 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2014-05-27 20:16 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-28 11:22 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-28 13:27 +0300
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2014-05-29 15:20 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-30 11:39 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 12:19 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-30 07:43 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-30 13:19 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 12:29 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-30 16:57 +0300
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-27 17:28 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-27 17:48 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-05-27 18:12 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-27 17:05 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-28 00:12 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-28 08:08 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-28 11:01 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn cb@bobby.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2014-05-28 11:02 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-27 08:53 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rob Brown <brown@greenslade.gmcl.internal> - 2014-05-27 21:05 +0000
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2014-05-27 22:21 +0000
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-05-28 14:38 -0500
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-29 01:50 +0100
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-29 07:34 +0100
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-29 10:08 +0100
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-29 10:15 +0100
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-29 09:40 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-26 20:58 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-27 09:35 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-26 20:58 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-26 21:16 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-26 20:22 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-27 11:33 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-27 10:49 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-26 23:46 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-27 06:39 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2014-05-27 10:45 +0000
Re: components not found in a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2014-05-25 19:05 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-25 22:23 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-26 17:20 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-27 13:01 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-29 00:24 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-29 12:52 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-29 15:00 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2014-05-29 14:21 -0700
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-30 11:40 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Andy Burns <usenet.feb2014@adslpipe.co.uk> - 2014-05-25 17:30 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-25 20:38 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 16:29 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-24 14:28 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-26 07:54 -0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-24 22:37 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> - 2014-05-25 07:16 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2014-05-25 10:26 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-05-24 07:28 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-25 16:08 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-25 19:33 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn polygonum <rmoudndgers@vrod.co.uk> - 2014-05-31 09:06 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-31 10:28 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-26 17:54 +0100
Page 2 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 12 Next page →
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-29 02:16 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <fsai5b-i6r.ln1@wair.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #3329 |
In article <lm5j6g$41p$1@dont-email.me>, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >On 26-May-14 16:35, Peter Flass wrote: >> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>> On 26-May-14 07:35, Peter Flass wrote: >>> Of course; organic decomposition releases smelly gases, which >>> neighbors would complain about--by suing them into bankruptcy. >>> >>> Some landfills _do_ pipe water and bacteria down and gases back >>> out, which they then burn off (either openly or to generate power), >>> but that's really only feasible after the entire thing has been >>> capped off. >> >> Local landfill was capped and pipes put in, I guess to vent methane. >> Someone then built nice, expensive, apartment houses across the >> street. I don't know what the "official" name is, but I cLl them >> "dumpview apartments." It seems like there's nothing they can do >> with the old landfill, although it would seem if it has enough dirt >> on it they could use it as a park. > >... until some journalist figured it out and ran a story about how some >evil corporation/politician is trying to trick you into letting your >kids play on top of a pile of toxic waste. It's far cheaper to fence it >off than deal with the lawsuits and PR nightmare that comes from trying >to do something productive with it. Or the park grounds start to move about. A lot. About 4 km from where I grew up was the old city dump, closed and capped in 1958, and with football fields on top. The dump fills in a valley about 80m deep at the max. They still have to level it every year; it sets and bulges in new places, but it has stopped giving off gas, ca 1995 the amounts were below trace levels after 2 and a half decade of reasonable methane production. This winter it set and bulged about a meter at the most. It still happens a lot down there, even if it is not biology that is primary agent any more. There are some thousand tonnes of scap metal rusting away there. And noone has any plans of suing anyone else about anything. Everyone moving there or playing football there are informed about the place. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Will Honea <whonea@whonea.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-28 23:23 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <Qvzhv.239442$rF6.128786@fx04.iad> |
| In reply to | #3333 |
Morten Reistad wrote: > Or the park grounds start to move about. A lot. > > About 4 km from where I grew up was the old city dump, closed and > capped in 1958, and with football fields on top. The dump fills in a > valley about 80m deep at the max. > > They still have to level it every year; it sets and bulges in new > places, but it has stopped giving off gas, ca 1995 the amounts were > below trace levels after 2 and a half decade of reasonable methane > production. > > This winter it set and bulged about a meter at the most. It still > happens a lot down there, even if it is not biology that is primary > agent any more. There are some thousand tonnes of scap metal rusting > away there. > > And noone has any plans of suing anyone else about anything. Everyone > moving there or playing football there are informed about the place. > The dump I mentioned in an earlier post was sited on a acreage which has become a desirable location as the city has expanded. I was somewhat amused when someone proposed building a hospital on the site. That plan was scrapped when the engineer they hired to do an analysis of the cost of building on it. He got as far as trying to determine a way to construct a stable foundation and declared 60 meter pilings to reach bedrock were not feasible, especially since the soil is based on expansive betonite clay. It's funny how many brilliant ideas founder in the face of reality. -- Will Honea
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-29 11:26 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <1836503163423055012.414850peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #3333 |
Morten Reistad <first@last.name> wrote: > In article <lm5j6g$41p$1@dont-email.me>, > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >> On 26-May-14 16:35, Peter Flass wrote: >>> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>>> On 26-May-14 07:35, Peter Flass wrote: > >>>> Of course; organic decomposition releases smelly gases, which >>>> neighbors would complain about--by suing them into bankruptcy. >>>> >>>> Some landfills _do_ pipe water and bacteria down and gases back >>>> out, which they then burn off (either openly or to generate power), >>>> but that's really only feasible after the entire thing has been >>>> capped off. >>> >>> Local landfill was capped and pipes put in, I guess to vent methane. >>> Someone then built nice, expensive, apartment houses across the >>> street. I don't know what the "official" name is, but I cLl them >>> "dumpview apartments." It seems like there's nothing they can do >>> with the old landfill, although it would seem if it has enough dirt >>> on it they could use it as a park. >> >> ... until some journalist figured it out and ran a story about how some >> evil corporation/politician is trying to trick you into letting your >> kids play on top of a pile of toxic waste. It's far cheaper to fence it >> off than deal with the lawsuits and PR nightmare that comes from trying >> to do something productive with it. > > Or the park grounds start to move about. A lot. > > About 4 km from where I grew up was the old city dump, closed and > capped in 1958, and with football fields on top. The dump fills in a > valley about 80m deep at the max. > > They still have to level it every year; it sets and bulges in new > places, but it has stopped giving off gas, ca 1995 the amounts were > below trace levels after 2 and a half decade of reasonable methane > production. > > This winter it set and bulged about a meter at the most. It still > happens a lot down there, even if it is not biology that is primary > agent any more. There are some thousand tonnes of scap metal rusting > away there. > > And noone has any plans of suing anyone else about anything. Everyone > moving there or playing football there are informed about the place. > Of course this is not the US, where everyone sues everyone else about anything. It would seem like other uses might be better than sports fields: walking and biking trails, etc. Then you wouldn't have to worry so much about bulging and subsidence. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-29 10:30 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <lm7jr2$iuv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3342 |
On 29-May-14 06:26, Peter Flass wrote: > Morten Reistad <first@last.name> wrote: >> In article <lm5j6g$41p$1@dont-email.me>, >> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>> On 26-May-14 16:35, Peter Flass wrote: >>>> Local landfill was capped and pipes put in, I guess to vent methane. >>>> Someone then built nice, expensive, apartment houses across the >>>> street. I don't know what the "official" name is, but I cLl them >>>> "dumpview apartments." It seems like there's nothing they can do >>>> with the old landfill, although it would seem if it has enough dirt >>>> on it they could use it as a park. >>> >>> ... until some journalist figured it out and ran a story about how some >>> evil corporation/politician is trying to trick you into letting your >>> kids play on top of a pile of toxic waste. It's far cheaper to fence it >>> off than deal with the lawsuits and PR nightmare that comes from trying >>> to do something productive with it. >> >> Or the park grounds start to move about. A lot. >> ... >> And noone has any plans of suing anyone else about anything. Everyone >> moving there or playing football there are informed about the place. > > Of course this is not the US, where everyone sues everyone else about > anything. It would seem like other uses might be better than sports > fields: walking and biking trails, etc. Then you wouldn't have to worry > so much about bulging and subsidence. Doesn't address the "toxic waste" issue above, plus with trails you have to worry about the ground shifting and making bumps in the trails, so when someone trips and falls, they'll sue you for that too--and likely win. The US legal system is a travesty, largely due to the defendant having to pay thousands or even millions of dollars regardless of whether he wins or loses; it's often cheaper to settle a bullshit lawsuit than fight it, and that encourages more bullshit lawsuits. If plaintiffs (and prosecutors!) had to post a bond for the defendant's costs, things would be radically different here. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-29 20:05 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <290520142005385162%timstreater@greenbee.net> |
| In reply to | #3349 |
In article <lm7jr2$iuv$1@dont-email.me>, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > The US legal system is a travesty, largely due to the defendant having > to pay thousands or even millions of dollars regardless of whether he > wins or loses; it's often cheaper to settle a bullshit lawsuit than > fight it, and that encourages more bullshit lawsuits. If plaintiffs > (and prosecutors!) had to post a bond for the defendant's costs, things > would be radically different here. You also need to cease electing judges and DAs and appoint them instead. As it is, all too often in the US you don't get justice; you get law - and plenty of it. -- Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web, when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another computer, another word processor, or another network. -- Tim Berners-Lee
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-29 20:31 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <306077316423087851.257611peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #3357 |
Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote: > In article <lm7jr2$iuv$1@dont-email.me>, Stephen Sprunk > <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > >> The US legal system is a travesty, largely due to the defendant having >> to pay thousands or even millions of dollars regardless of whether he >> wins or loses; it's often cheaper to settle a bullshit lawsuit than >> fight it, and that encourages more bullshit lawsuits. If plaintiffs >> (and prosecutors!) had to post a bond for the defendant's costs, things >> would be radically different here. > > You also need to cease electing judges and DAs and appoint them > instead. As it is, all too often in the US you don't get justice; you > get law - and plenty of it. It's not the elected judges, etc. that are' the problem, but rather the jurors, who are inconsistent and follow emotion rather than logic. Other than that the problem is the "contingent fee" system where a lawyer takes a case on speculation and gets a percentage of the award if he wins and nothing if he loses, so it encourages lawsuits. I'd day we need more compulsory arbitration with a specific scale of awards. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-29 22:36 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <290520142236469265%timstreater@greenbee.net> |
| In reply to | #3360 |
In article <306077316423087851.257611peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.o rg>, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote: > > In article <lm7jr2$iuv$1@dont-email.me>, Stephen Sprunk > > <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > > > >> The US legal system is a travesty, largely due to the defendant having > >> to pay thousands or even millions of dollars regardless of whether he > >> wins or loses; it's often cheaper to settle a bullshit lawsuit than > >> fight it, and that encourages more bullshit lawsuits. If plaintiffs > >> (and prosecutors!) had to post a bond for the defendant's costs, things > >> would be radically different here. > > > > You also need to cease electing judges and DAs and appoint them > > instead. As it is, all too often in the US you don't get justice; you > > get law - and plenty of it. > > It's not the elected judges, etc. that are' the problem, but rather the > jurors, who are inconsistent and follow emotion rather than logic. The cases I'm thinking of don't even get to the jury. Here's the sequence as seen from here: 1) One of our citizens gets extradited to the US. The original inditement comes from a US Grand Jury (a notion we scrapped over 60 years ago). You're unaware this is taking place and would in any event not be allowed representation at this obsolete performance. 2) because you resisted extradition (and why not, that's a democratic right) you get considered by the US court as a "flight risk", meaning refusal of bail. 3) Being in the chokey and not on bail means it gets very hard to prepare a defence 4) All your potential witnesses are 3000 miles away and not subject to subpoena anyway. 5) At the first hearing, the judge threatens you with 40 years in the slammer if you are found guilty. After all, he has to get re-elected and nailing you for some white collar crime is an easy touch. 6) After some consideration you settle for a plea-bargain. Three years - job done. 7) I rest my case. -- "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-29 19:16 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <lm8ilm$nvr$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3364 |
On 29-May-14 16:36, Tim Streater wrote: > The cases I'm thinking of don't even get to the jury. Here's the > sequence as seen from here: It's not much different from over here. > 1) One of our citizens gets extradited to the US. The original > inditement comes from a US Grand Jury (a notion we scrapped over 60 > years ago). You're unaware this is taking place and would in any > event not be allowed representation at this obsolete performance. Same grand jury process, unless the prosecutor _wants_ to drop the case but has to _appear_ to prosecute it for political reasons; then they'll do a preliminary hearing so they can blame the judge for dismissing it. > 2) because you resisted extradition (and why not, that's a > democratic right) you get considered by the US court as a "flight > risk", meaning refusal of bail. They rarely refuse bail for citizens, but they'll set it so high you can't possibly pay it. But having set bail, they are allowed to ignore that pesky right to a speedy trial; expect to spend several months or even _years_ in jail awaiting one. > 3) Being in the chokey and not on bail means it gets very hard to > prepare a defence Same. > 4) All your potential witnesses are 3000 miles away and not subject > to subpoena anyway. The vast majority of defendants are too poor to hire a private attorney, so they're stuck with a Plea Dealer, who refuses to prepare a defense or contact any potential witnesses; he just sends you back to your cell each time you refuse the latest plea bargain. Also, even if you weren't poor before, being in jail means you lose your job, your home, etc., so you're poor _now_. > 5) At the first hearing, the judge threatens you with 40 years in > the slammer if you are found guilty. After all, he has to get > re-elected and nailing you for some white collar crime is an easy > touch. > > 6) After some consideration you settle for a plea-bargain. Three > years - job done. Hah! Once you've been in jail awaiting trial for longer than the minimum sentence, the prosecutor will offer a plea bargain for "time served"--and you walk out a free man within hours. If you insist on claiming you're innocent, feel free to stay in jail for several more months/years. For violent felonies, you may actually get a trial before that point, but that's about it; maybe 1% of cases actually go to trial, and the state loses the _vast_ majority of them--most often because one of the cops moved, retired, died, etc. in the years since the arrest and is not available to perjure himself^W^Wtestify against you. > 7) I rest my case. Same. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-30 12:19 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <906653634423143035.324040peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #3367 |
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > On 29-May-14 16:36, Tim Streater wrote: >> The cases I'm thinking of don't even get to the jury. Here's the >> sequence as seen from here: > > It's not much different from over here. > >> 1) One of our citizens gets extradited to the US. The original >> inditement comes from a US Grand Jury (a notion we scrapped over 60 >> years ago). You're unaware this is taking place and would in any >> event not be allowed representation at this obsolete performance. > > Same grand jury process, unless the prosecutor _wants_ to drop the case > but has to _appear_ to prosecute it for political reasons; then they'll > do a preliminary hearing so they can blame the judge for dismissing it. > >> 2) because you resisted extradition (and why not, that's a >> democratic right) you get considered by the US court as a "flight >> risk", meaning refusal of bail. > > They rarely refuse bail for citizens, but they'll set it so high you > can't possibly pay it. But having set bail, they are allowed to ignore > that pesky right to a speedy trial; expect to spend several months or > even _years_ in jail awaiting one. > >> 3) Being in the chokey and not on bail means it gets very hard to >> prepare a defence > > Same. > >> 4) All your potential witnesses are 3000 miles away and not subject >> to subpoena anyway. > Look at the Amanda Knox case and the cockamamie Italian legal system - she's acquitted and some judge says "wait a minute, I want another go at her!" I've never heard of something so stupid. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-31 15:31 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <but7q6Fmtg1U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3396 |
"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:906653634423143035.324040peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >> On 29-May-14 16:36, Tim Streater wrote: >>> The cases I'm thinking of don't even get to the jury. Here's the >>> sequence as seen from here: >> >> It's not much different from over here. >> >>> 1) One of our citizens gets extradited to the US. The original >>> inditement comes from a US Grand Jury (a notion we scrapped over 60 >>> years ago). You're unaware this is taking place and would in any >>> event not be allowed representation at this obsolete performance. >> >> Same grand jury process, unless the prosecutor _wants_ to drop the case >> but has to _appear_ to prosecute it for political reasons; then they'll >> do a preliminary hearing so they can blame the judge for dismissing it. >> >>> 2) because you resisted extradition (and why not, that's a >>> democratic right) you get considered by the US court as a "flight >>> risk", meaning refusal of bail. >> >> They rarely refuse bail for citizens, but they'll set it so high you >> can't possibly pay it. But having set bail, they are allowed to ignore >> that pesky right to a speedy trial; expect to spend several months or >> even _years_ in jail awaiting one. >> >>> 3) Being in the chokey and not on bail means it gets very hard to >>> prepare a defence >> >> Same. >> >>> 4) All your potential witnesses are 3000 miles away and not subject >>> to subpoena anyway. >> > > Look at the Amanda Knox case and the cockamamie Italian legal system - > she's acquitted and some judge says "wait a minute, I want another go at > her!" That is nothing like what actually happened. > I've never heard of something so stupid. We have, OJ Simpson.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-31 23:54 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <844510412423272037.573363peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #3432 |
"ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> wrote: > "Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:906653634423143035.324040peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... >> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>> On 29-May-14 16:36, Tim Streater wrote: >>>> The cases I'm thinking of don't even get to the jury. Here's the >>>> sequence as seen from here: >>> >>> It's not much different from over here. >>> >>>> 1) One of our citizens gets extradited to the US. The original >>>> inditement comes from a US Grand Jury (a notion we scrapped over 60 >>>> years ago). You're unaware this is taking place and would in any >>>> event not be allowed representation at this obsolete performance. >>> >>> Same grand jury process, unless the prosecutor _wants_ to drop the case >>> but has to _appear_ to prosecute it for political reasons; then they'll >>> do a preliminary hearing so they can blame the judge for dismissing it. >>> >>>> 2) because you resisted extradition (and why not, that's a >>>> democratic right) you get considered by the US court as a "flight >>>> risk", meaning refusal of bail. >>> >>> They rarely refuse bail for citizens, but they'll set it so high you >>> can't possibly pay it. But having set bail, they are allowed to ignore >>> that pesky right to a speedy trial; expect to spend several months or >>> even _years_ in jail awaiting one. >>> >>>> 3) Being in the chokey and not on bail means it gets very hard to >>>> prepare a defence >>> >>> Same. >>> >>>> 4) All your potential witnesses are 3000 miles away and not subject >>>> to subpoena anyway. >>> >> >> Look at the Amanda Knox case and the cockamamie Italian legal system - >> she's acquitted and some judge says "wait a minute, I want another go at >> her!" > > That is nothing like what actually happened. Yes it is. She was convicted and the conviction was overturned. She was retried and acquitted. Then some judge decided that he didn't like that verdict and ordered a retrial. No matter how bad our system is, something like that couldn't happen here. > >> I've never heard of something so stupid. > > We have, OJ Simpson. Well, *we* do, Rod. I'm sure you have equally bad decisions on Oz. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-01 11:31 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <buve41F6h5pU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3452 |
"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:844510412423272037.573363peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... > "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> wrote: >> "Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:906653634423143035.324040peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... >>> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>>> On 29-May-14 16:36, Tim Streater wrote: >>>>> The cases I'm thinking of don't even get to the jury. Here's the >>>>> sequence as seen from here: >>>> >>>> It's not much different from over here. >>>> >>>>> 1) One of our citizens gets extradited to the US. The original >>>>> inditement comes from a US Grand Jury (a notion we scrapped over 60 >>>>> years ago). You're unaware this is taking place and would in any >>>>> event not be allowed representation at this obsolete performance. >>>> >>>> Same grand jury process, unless the prosecutor _wants_ to drop the case >>>> but has to _appear_ to prosecute it for political reasons; then they'll >>>> do a preliminary hearing so they can blame the judge for dismissing it. >>>> >>>>> 2) because you resisted extradition (and why not, that's a >>>>> democratic right) you get considered by the US court as a "flight >>>>> risk", meaning refusal of bail. >>>> >>>> They rarely refuse bail for citizens, but they'll set it so high you >>>> can't possibly pay it. But having set bail, they are allowed to ignore >>>> that pesky right to a speedy trial; expect to spend several months or >>>> even _years_ in jail awaiting one. >>>> >>>>> 3) Being in the chokey and not on bail means it gets very hard to >>>>> prepare a defence >>>> >>>> Same. >>>> >>>>> 4) All your potential witnesses are 3000 miles away and not subject >>>>> to subpoena anyway. >>>> >>> >>> Look at the Amanda Knox case and the cockamamie Italian legal system - >>> she's acquitted and some judge says "wait a minute, I want another go at >>> her!" >> >> That is nothing like what actually happened. > Yes it is. No it isnt. > She was convicted and the conviction was overturned. It was only overturned because the judge who overturned the conviction did that because of the dubious DNA evidence and just ignored all the other evidence that she was there when the crime was committed and lied about where she was at the time. > She was retried and acquitted. No, that never happened. She got off when the original conviction was overturned. She was retried and found guilty. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_Knox#Meredith_Kercher_murder_case > Then some judge decided that he didn't > like that verdict and ordered a retrial. No, that judge decided that it was stupid to throw the conviction out because of a problem with the DNA evidence and to ignore all the other evidence like the fact that she was there in the house when the murder happened and lied about where she was at the time. And under Italian law, and US law, when she was present at the time of the murder, she is guilty of the murder even if she didn’t personally stab Kercher to death. > No matter how bad our system is, something > like that couldn't happen here. Wrong. >>> I've never heard of something so stupid. >> We have, OJ Simpson. > Well, *we* do, Rod. I'm sure you have equally bad decisions on Oz. Nothing like the result Simpson got.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-01 10:27 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <010620141027114912%timstreater@greenbee.net> |
| In reply to | #3452 |
In article <844510412423272037.573363peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.o rg>, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> wrote: > > "Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message > >> Look at the Amanda Knox case and the cockamamie Italian legal system - > >> she's acquitted and some judge says "wait a minute, I want another go at > >> her!" > > > > That is nothing like what actually happened. > > Yes it is. She was convicted and the conviction was overturned. She was > retried and acquitted. Then some judge decided that he didn't like that > verdict and ordered a retrial. No matter how bad our system is, something > like that couldn't happen here. Because of the double jeopardy rule, something that has to some extent been dismantled here. Don't forget that Italy probably follows the continental Europe notion of justice - guilty til proved innocent. -- "The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them into it in the first place." - Douglas Adams
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-01 12:15 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <n3br5b-6dq1.ln1@news.chingola.ch> |
| In reply to | #3460 |
On 2014-06-01, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote: > In article ><844510412423272037.573363peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.o > rg>, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> wrote: >> > "Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message > >> >> Look at the Amanda Knox case and the cockamamie Italian legal system - >> >> she's acquitted and some judge says "wait a minute, I want another go at >> >> her!" >> > >> > That is nothing like what actually happened. >> >> Yes it is. She was convicted and the conviction was overturned. She was >> retried and acquitted. Then some judge decided that he didn't like that >> verdict and ordered a retrial. No matter how bad our system is, something >> like that couldn't happen here. > > Because of the double jeopardy rule, something that has to some extent > been dismantled here. > > Don't forget that Italy probably follows the continental Europe notion > of justice - guilty til proved innocent. I gather there's a bit of "guilty 'til you find the right person to bung" as well. -- Paul Sture The final step of #heartbleed recovery is to call your mother, and advise her to change her maiden name -- @gojomo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-02 09:14 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <bv1qfmFlt7rU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3461 |
"Paul Sture" <nospam@sture.ch> wrote in message news:n3br5b-6dq1.ln1@news.chingola.ch... > On 2014-06-01, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote: >> In article >><844510412423272037.573363peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.o >> rg>, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > "Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> >>> >> Look at the Amanda Knox case and the cockamamie Italian legal >>> >> system - >>> >> she's acquitted and some judge says "wait a minute, I want another go >>> >> at >>> >> her!" >>> > >>> > That is nothing like what actually happened. >>> >>> Yes it is. She was convicted and the conviction was overturned. She >>> was >>> retried and acquitted. Then some judge decided that he didn't like that >>> verdict and ordered a retrial. No matter how bad our system is, >>> something >>> like that couldn't happen here. >> >> Because of the double jeopardy rule, something that has to some extent >> been dismantled here. >> >> Don't forget that Italy probably follows the continental Europe notion >> of justice - guilty til proved innocent. > > I gather there's a bit of "guilty 'til you find the right person to bung" > as well. Not in this case. They had already tried and convicted one individual before Knox was even tried for the first time. The question was whether she was involved in the murder too and the evidence of her lying about where she was at the time of the murder indicates that she was involved, otherwise she would not have lied about where she was at the time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-02 09:12 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <bv1qa9FlsgqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3460 |
"Tim Streater" <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote in message news:010620141027114912%timstreater@greenbee.net... > In article > <844510412423272037.573363peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.o > rg>, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> wrote: >> > "Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message > >> >> Look at the Amanda Knox case and the cockamamie Italian legal system - >> >> she's acquitted and some judge says "wait a minute, I want another go >> >> at >> >> her!" >> > >> > That is nothing like what actually happened. >> >> Yes it is. She was convicted and the conviction was overturned. She was >> retried and acquitted. Then some judge decided that he didn't like that >> verdict and ordered a retrial. No matter how bad our system is, >> something >> like that couldn't happen here. > > Because of the double jeopardy rule, No, nothing to do with the double jeopardy rule. The same appeal process is possible in the US. something that has to some extent > been dismantled here. > > Don't forget that Italy probably follows the continental Europe notion > of justice - guilty til proved innocent. That mangles the real story too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-30 12:19 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <1896005172423142569.197054peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #3367 |
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > On 29-May-14 16:36, Tim Streater wrote: >> The cases I'm thinking of don't even get to the jury. Here's the >> sequence as seen from here: > > It's not much different from over here. > >> 1) One of our citizens gets extradited to the US. The original >> inditement comes from a US Grand Jury (a notion we scrapped over 60 >> years ago). You're unaware this is taking place and would in any >> event not be allowed representation at this obsolete performance. > > Same grand jury process, unless the prosecutor _wants_ to drop the case > but has to _appear_ to prosecute it for political reasons; then they'll > do a preliminary hearing so they can blame the judge for dismissing it. > >> 2) because you resisted extradition (and why not, that's a >> democratic right) you get considered by the US court as a "flight >> risk", meaning refusal of bail. > > They rarely refuse bail for citizens, but they'll set it so high you > can't possibly pay it. But having set bail, they are allowed to ignore > that pesky right to a speedy trial; expect to spend several months or > even _years_ in jail awaiting one. I believe you pay a "bail bondsman" a fraction of the bail amount to post the bond, like insurance. If you jump bail he will send "Dog the Bounty Hunter" (or his wife) to come after you. > > For violent felonies, you may actually get a trial before that point, > but that's about it; maybe 1% of cases actually go to trial, and the > state loses the _vast_ majority of them--most often because one of the > cops moved, retired, died, etc. in the years since the arrest and is not > available to perjure himself^W^Wtestify against you. Of course that doesn't mean you actually *were* innocent. You can turn up thousands of cases, both of innocent people wrongly convicted and of guilty people getting out on a technicality. What I don't see is a good way to make a bad system better. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-30 08:00 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3397 |
On 30-May-14 07:19, Peter Flass wrote: > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >> On 29-May-14 16:36, Tim Streater wrote: >>> 2) because you resisted extradition (and why not, that's a >>> democratic right) you get considered by the US court as a >>> "flight risk", meaning refusal of bail. >> >> They rarely refuse bail for citizens, but they'll set it so high >> you can't possibly pay it. But having set bail, they are allowed >> to ignore that pesky right to a speedy trial; expect to spend >> several months or even _years_ in jail awaiting one. > > I believe you pay a "bail bondsman" a fraction of the bail amount to > post the bond, like insurance. You still have to pay the bail bondsman at least 10% of the bail amount, plus some sort of security for the other 90%. > If you jump bail he will send "Dog > the Bounty Hunter" (or his wife) to come after you. That's quite rare. In most cases, the bail bondsman simply collects the security and moves on. The court issues a bench warrant, and when you're eventually detained on some other matter, you're arrested and hauled back to that court and sit in jail until trial (or you accept a plea bargain). >> For violent felonies, you may actually get a trial before that >> point, but that's about it; maybe 1% of cases actually go to >> trial, and the state loses the _vast_ majority of them--most often >> because one of the cops moved, retired, died, etc. in the years >> since the arrest and is not available to perjure himself^W^Wtestify >> against you. > > Of course that doesn't mean you actually *were* innocent. > > You can turn up thousands of cases, both of innocent people wrongly > convicted and of guilty people getting out on a technicality. What > I don't see is a good way to make a bad system better. I see two easy ways to make our system vastly better: Get rid of plea bargains, and actually give defendants a speedy trial. The other major problem is that ~70% of our prison population is there for non-violent drug offenses, which any sane country treats as a medical issue rather than a criminal one. Get rid of that idiocy and the courts could focus on the 30% that are legitimate criminal offenses. With the trillions of dollars saved, we could properly fund efforts that _prevent_ crime, such as getting rid of the welfare trap and cleaning up lead contamination in inner cities. Combine those two things and our astronomical incarceration rate would be as low as the rest of the world--and all those people now working rather than sitting in prison would be paying taxes, which would help balance our budgets. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-30 14:44 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <-cudnQ70hMrGFhXOnZ2dnUVZ8qadnZ2d@bt.com> |
| In reply to | #3403 |
On 30/05/2014 14:00, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > On 30-May-14 07:19, Peter Flass wrote: >> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>> On 29-May-14 16:36, Tim Streater wrote: >>>> 2) because you resisted extradition (and why not, that's a >>>> democratic right) you get considered by the US court as a >>>> "flight risk", meaning refusal of bail. >>> >>> They rarely refuse bail for citizens, but they'll set it so high >>> you can't possibly pay it. But having set bail, they are allowed >>> to ignore that pesky right to a speedy trial; expect to spend >>> several months or even _years_ in jail awaiting one. >> >> I believe you pay a "bail bondsman" a fraction of the bail amount to >> post the bond, like insurance. > > You still have to pay the bail bondsman at least 10% of the bail amount, > plus some sort of security for the other 90%. > >> If you jump bail he will send "Dog >> the Bounty Hunter" (or his wife) to come after you. > > That's quite rare. In most cases, the bail bondsman simply collects the > security and moves on. The court issues a bench warrant, and when > you're eventually detained on some other matter, you're arrested and > hauled back to that court and sit in jail until trial (or you accept a > plea bargain). > >>> For violent felonies, you may actually get a trial before that >>> point, but that's about it; maybe 1% of cases actually go to >>> trial, and the state loses the _vast_ majority of them--most often >>> because one of the cops moved, retired, died, etc. in the years >>> since the arrest and is not available to perjure himself^W^Wtestify >>> against you. >> >> Of course that doesn't mean you actually *were* innocent. >> >> You can turn up thousands of cases, both of innocent people wrongly >> convicted and of guilty people getting out on a technicality. What >> I don't see is a good way to make a bad system better. > > I see two easy ways to make our system vastly better: Get rid of plea > bargains, and actually give defendants a speedy trial. > > The other major problem is that ~70% of our prison population is there > for non-violent drug offenses, which any sane country treats as a > medical issue rather than a criminal one. Get rid of that idiocy and > the courts could focus on the 30% that are legitimate criminal offenses. > > With the trillions of dollars saved, we could properly fund efforts that > _prevent_ crime, such as getting rid of the welfare trap and cleaning up > lead contamination in inner cities. > > Combine those two things and our astronomical incarceration rate would > be as low as the rest of the world--and all those people now working > rather than sitting in prison would be paying taxes, which would help > balance our budgets. > > S > Prison is not the only punishment. Bring back the birch.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-31 15:42 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <but8deFn115U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3403 |
"Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message news:lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me... > On 30-May-14 07:19, Peter Flass wrote: >> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>> On 29-May-14 16:36, Tim Streater wrote: >>>> 2) because you resisted extradition (and why not, that's a >>>> democratic right) you get considered by the US court as a >>>> "flight risk", meaning refusal of bail. >>> >>> They rarely refuse bail for citizens, but they'll set it so high >>> you can't possibly pay it. But having set bail, they are allowed >>> to ignore that pesky right to a speedy trial; expect to spend >>> several months or even _years_ in jail awaiting one. >> >> I believe you pay a "bail bondsman" a fraction of the bail amount to >> post the bond, like insurance. > > You still have to pay the bail bondsman at least 10% of the bail amount, > plus some sort of security for the other 90%. > >> If you jump bail he will send "Dog >> the Bounty Hunter" (or his wife) to come after you. > > That's quite rare. In most cases, the bail bondsman simply collects the > security and moves on. The court issues a bench warrant, and when > you're eventually detained on some other matter, you're arrested and > hauled back to that court and sit in jail until trial (or you accept a > plea bargain). > >>> For violent felonies, you may actually get a trial before that >>> point, but that's about it; maybe 1% of cases actually go to >>> trial, and the state loses the _vast_ majority of them--most often >>> because one of the cops moved, retired, died, etc. in the years >>> since the arrest and is not available to perjure himself^W^Wtestify >>> against you. >> >> Of course that doesn't mean you actually *were* innocent. >> >> You can turn up thousands of cases, both of innocent people wrongly >> convicted and of guilty people getting out on a technicality. What >> I don't see is a good way to make a bad system better. > > I see two easy ways to make our system vastly better: Get rid of plea > bargains, That won't necessarily make the system vastly better because it would discourage many are guilty from fessing up to what they did so they get a lesser penalty. > and actually give defendants a speedy trial. Easier said than done when they claim they didn’t do the crime. > The other major problem is that ~70% of our prison population is there > for non-violent drug offenses, which any sane country treats as a > medical issue rather than a criminal one. Get rid of that idiocy and > the courts could focus on the 30% that are legitimate criminal offenses. > With the trillions of dollars saved, we could properly fund efforts that > _prevent_ crime, such as getting rid of the welfare trap and cleaning up > lead contamination in inner cities. There is no evidence that lead contamination is a major driver of crime. > Combine those two things and our astronomical incarceration rate would > be as low as the rest of the world--and all those people now working > rather than sitting in prison would be paying taxes, Many of them would not be, because they do the crime because their job prospects are non existent and they decide that drug dealing is the best work available. which would help > balance our budgets. I doubt it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.misc
csiph-web