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 4 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 12 Next page →
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-01 09:44 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <lmfe8g$cq7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3441 |
On 31-May-14 06:29, Walter Bushell wrote: > In article <but8deFn115U1@mid.individual.net>, "ratty" > <ratty@gmail.com> wrote: >> That won't necessarily make the system vastly better because it >> would discourage many are guilty from fessing up to what they did >> so they get a lesser penalty. > > It would cost a LOT of money, but it would reduce the pressure on the > innocent to plead guilty, which is worst feature of the present > system. And voters are not willing to pay for adequate defense of the > accused. Take non-violent drug cases out of the court system and we could spend two or even three times as much on the rest of the defendants and _still_ save money. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-31 23:54 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <1801883505423272252.401811peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #3433 |
"ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> wrote: > "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message news:lm9vcv$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. This would also have the effect of jamming the courts to make your second suggestion much more difficult. > > 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. The circumstantial evidence is fairly convincing. Actually, abortions have also been shown to reduce crime, eighteen years down the road. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-01 11:21 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <buvdh7F6ddgU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3451 |
"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1801883505423272252.401811peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... > "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> wrote: >> "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. > > This would also have the effect of jamming the courts to make your second > suggestion much more difficult. > >> >> 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. > > The circumstantial evidence is fairly convincing. No, not now that we have seen the gentrification of so many inner cities without any surge in crime in those areas. Actually, abortions have > also been shown to reduce crime, eighteen years down the road. And so did contraception.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-01 09:59 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <lmff44$ia4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3451 |
On 31-May-14 18:54, Peter Flass wrote: >> "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message >> news:lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me... >>> I see two easy ways to make our system vastly better: Get rid of >>> plea bargains. > > This would also have the effect of jamming the courts to make your > second suggestion much more difficult. > ... >>> and actually give defendants a speedy trial. I see four obvious options: 1. Only prosecute the most serious cases 2. Build (and staff) more courts 3. Address the root causes of crime 4. Decriminalize lots of stuff 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 | Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-02 07:03 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <538c59fe$36$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net> |
| In reply to | #3466 |
In <lmff44$ia4$1@dont-email.me>, on 06/01/2014 at 09:59 AM, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> said: >I see four obvious options: 5. Change the system so that prosecutors are penalized for, e.g., bringing bogus cases. If you can't find the perpetrator, then keep looking for the perpetrator, not some innocent fall guy that you can pin it on. For those who want harsh punishment for criminals, plea bargains not only jail the innocent, the also let major offenders get off easy. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-04 09:33 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <1119.303T1540T5734733@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
| In reply to | #3490 |
In article <538c59fe$36$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>, spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid (Seymour J.) writes: > In <lmff44$ia4$1@dont-email.me>, on 06/01/2014 > at 09:59 AM, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> said: > >> I see four obvious options: > > 5. Change the system so that prosecutors are penalized for, e.g., > bringing bogus cases. > > If you can't find the perpetrator, then keep looking for the > perpetrator, not some innocent fall guy that you can pin it on. > > For those who want harsh punishment for criminals, plea bargains not > only jail the innocent, the also let major offenders get off easy. However, it lets you bask in that warm fuzzy feeling of knowing that Something is Being Done. "We must do something. This is something. Therefore we must do this." -- Yes, Prime Minister http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician's syllogism -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-01 09:35 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <lmfdn3$9cc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3433 |
On 31-May-14 00:42, ratty wrote: > "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message > news:lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me... >> 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. One doesn't have to "fess up" to anything to take a plea bargain; one has to plead guilty, but that's usually to a lesser charge. And many, many people take plea bargains because they'll get out of jail faster than if they demand a trial, even if they're innocent. >> and actually give defendants a speedy trial. > > Easier said than done when they claim they didn’t do the crime. Why would that be an obstacle to giving them the trial they deserve? >> 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. As usual, reality disagrees with you: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline Even over 2,000 years ago, the Romans knew lead poisoning made people stupid and violent, and some blame their use of lead pipes, lead cookware, lead tableware, etc. with the fall of the Roman Empire. >> 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. Dealing drugs pays less than minimum wage. However, you're right about job prospects: a convicted felon can't get a legit job _for the rest of their lives_, so it's not surprising that they turn to crime to support themselves; it's the only option available to them. 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 | "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-02 09:31 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <bv1rf7Fm3b2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3464 |
"Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message news:lmfdn3$9cc$1@dont-email.me... > On 31-May-14 00:42, ratty wrote: >> "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message >> news:lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me... >>> 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. > > One doesn't have to "fess up" to anything to take a plea bargain; one > has to plead guilty, That is two different terms for the same thing. > but that's usually to a lesser charge. And many, > many people take plea bargains because they'll get out of jail faster > than if they demand a trial, even if they're innocent. Its very far from clear how many are innocent in the sense that they did no crime at all. >>> and actually give defendants a speedy trial. >> >> Easier said than done when they claim they didn’t do the crime. > > Why would that be an obstacle to giving them the trial they deserve? That was just a comment on the speedy bit. While ever hardly anyone fesses up, and there is no point in doing that if you are guaranteed a speedy trial, it will be much hard to provide everyone with a speedy trial, particularly when you have to put a lot of effort into proving what it is alleged they did. Look at the Pistorius trial. He doesn’t even dispute that he shot her dead, and yet its taken an immense amount of resources to bring him to trial. Its never going to be possible to give everyone a speedy trial. >>> 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. > > As usual, reality disagrees with you: > http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline No it doesn’t. That doesn’t explain the crime in mexico for example. > Even over 2,000 years ago, the Romans knew lead poisoning made people > stupid and violent, and some blame their use of lead pipes, lead > cookware, lead tableware, etc. with the fall of the Roman Empire. > >>> 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. > Dealing drugs pays less than minimum wage. That is very arguable with many of them. However, you're right about > job prospects: a convicted felon can't get a legit job _for the rest of > their lives_, so it's not surprising that they turn to crime to support > themselves; it's the only option available to them. Pity that they turned to crime before they were ever convicted of anything.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-01 21:59 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <lmgpb0$jt8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3479 |
On 6/1/2014 6:31 PM, ratty wrote: > > > "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message > news:lmfdn3$9cc$1@dont-email.me... >> On 31-May-14 00:42, ratty wrote: >>> "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message >>> news:lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me... >>>> 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. >> >> One doesn't have to "fess up" to anything to take a plea bargain; one >> has to plead guilty, > > That is two different terms for the same thing. "fess up" implies speaking truthfully. Pleading guilty doesn't, any more than pleading innocent does.. >> but that's usually to a lesser charge. And many, >> many people take plea bargains because they'll get out of jail faster >> than if they demand a trial, even if they're innocent. > > Its very far from clear how many are innocent > in the sense that they did no crime at all. It's very far from clear that _anyone_ is innocent in the sense that they've done no crime at all. > >>>> and actually give defendants a speedy trial. >>> >>> Easier said than done when they claim they didn’t do the crime. >> >> Why would that be an obstacle to giving them the trial they deserve? > > That was just a comment on the speedy bit. > > While ever hardly anyone fesses up, and there is no point in doing > that if you are guaranteed a speedy trial, it will be much hard to > provide everyone with a speedy trial, particularly when you have > to put a lot of effort into proving what it is alleged they did. > > Look at the Pistorius trial. He doesn’t even dispute that he shot her > dead, and yet its taken an immense amount of resources to bring > him to trial. > > Its never going to be possible to give everyone a speedy trial. > >>>> 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. >> >> As usual, reality disagrees with you: >> http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline > > No it doesn’t. That doesn’t explain the crime in mexico for example. > >> Even over 2,000 years ago, the Romans knew lead poisoning made people >> stupid and violent, and some blame their use of lead pipes, lead >> cookware, lead tableware, etc. with the fall of the Roman Empire. >> >>>> 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. > >> Dealing drugs pays less than minimum wage. > > That is very arguable with many of them. > > However, you're right about >> job prospects: a convicted felon can't get a legit job _for the rest of >> their lives_, so it's not surprising that they turn to crime to support >> themselves; it's the only option available to them. > > Pity that they turned to crime before they were ever convicted of > anything.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-02 16:46 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <bv2kubFqogqU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3480 |
"Dave Garland" <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote in message news:lmgpb0$jt8$1@dont-email.me... > On 6/1/2014 6:31 PM, ratty wrote: >> >> >> "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message >> news:lmfdn3$9cc$1@dont-email.me... >>> On 31-May-14 00:42, ratty wrote: >>>> "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message >>>> news:lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me... >>>>> 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. >>> >>> One doesn't have to "fess up" to anything to take a plea bargain; one >>> has to plead guilty, >> >> That is two different terms for the same thing. > > "fess up" implies speaking truthfully. No, its just an informal way of saying plead guilty. > Pleading guilty doesn't, any more > than pleading innocent does.. >>> but that's usually to a lesser charge. And many, >>> many people take plea bargains because they'll get out of jail faster >>> than if they demand a trial, even if they're innocent. >> >> Its very far from clear how many are innocent >> in the sense that they did no crime at all. > It's very far from clear that _anyone_ is innocent > in the sense that they've done no crime at all. We're talking about serious felonies, not trivia like exceeding the speed limit. >>>>> and actually give defendants a speedy trial. >>>> >>>> Easier said than done when they claim they didn’t do the crime. >>> >>> Why would that be an obstacle to giving them the trial they deserve? >> >> That was just a comment on the speedy bit. >> >> While ever hardly anyone fesses up, and there is no point in doing >> that if you are guaranteed a speedy trial, it will be much hard to >> provide everyone with a speedy trial, particularly when you have >> to put a lot of effort into proving what it is alleged they did. >> >> Look at the Pistorius trial. He doesn’t even dispute that he shot her >> dead, and yet its taken an immense amount of resources to bring >> him to trial. >> >> Its never going to be possible to give everyone a speedy trial. >> >>>>> 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. >>> >>> As usual, reality disagrees with you: >>> http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline >> >> No it doesn’t. That doesn’t explain the crime in mexico for example. >> >>> Even over 2,000 years ago, the Romans knew lead poisoning made people >>> stupid and violent, and some blame their use of lead pipes, lead >>> cookware, lead tableware, etc. with the fall of the Roman Empire. >>> >>>>> 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. >> >>> Dealing drugs pays less than minimum wage. >> >> That is very arguable with many of them. >> >> However, you're right about >>> job prospects: a convicted felon can't get a legit job _for the rest of >>> their lives_, so it's not surprising that they turn to crime to support >>> themselves; it's the only option available to them. >> >> Pity that they turned to crime before they were ever convicted of >> anything. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-31 07:26 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <proto-1CBBFF.07260931052014@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #3403 |
In article <lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me>, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > 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. Or the prisoners and the jail staff would be unemployed. -- Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. Me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-31 12:48 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <lmd4kv$2ha$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3440 |
On 31-May-14 06:26, Walter Bushell wrote: > In article <lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me>, > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >> 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. > > Or the prisoners and the jail staff would be unemployed. If those millions of prisoners didn't have felony drug convictions on their record, they could get jobs. But even if they were unemployed, welfare is a _lot_ cheaper than prisons. Get rid of the welfare trap and they'd not stay on welfare forever. 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 | "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-01 07:44 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <buv0qaF4052U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3444 |
"Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message news:lmd4kv$2ha$1@dont-email.me... > On 31-May-14 06:26, Walter Bushell wrote: >> In article <lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me>, >> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>> Combine those two things and our astronomical incarceration rate would >>> be as low as the rest of the world--and all those people now working >>> rather than sitting in prison would be paying taxes, which would help >>> balance our budgets. >> >> Or the prisoners and the jail staff would be unemployed. > > If those millions of prisoners didn't have felony drug convictions on > their record, they could get jobs. That's very arguable with those that do get jailed for drug trafficking. > But even if they were unemployed, welfare is a _lot_ cheaper than prisons. Yes. > Get rid of the welfare trap and they'd not stay on welfare forever. That is very arguable indeed with the worst of them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-01 07:32 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <buv02jF3rc0U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3440 |
"Walter Bushell" <proto@panix.com> wrote in message news:proto-1CBBFF.07260931052014@news.panix.com... > In article <lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me>, > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > >> Combine those two things and our astronomical incarceration rate would >> be as low as the rest of the world--and all those people now working >> rather than sitting in prison would be paying taxes, which would help >> balance our budgets. > > Or the prisoners and the jail staff would be unemployed. But there are vastly less guards than prisoners.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-01 12:18 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <869.300T1440T7384657@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
| In reply to | #3440 |
In article <proto-1CBBFF.07260931052014@news.panix.com>, proto@panix.com (Walter Bushell) writes: > In article <lm9vcv$vt5$1@dont-email.me>, > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > >> Combine those two things and our astronomical incarceration rate >> would be as low as the rest of the world--and all those people now >> working rather than sitting in prison would be paying taxes, which >> would help balance our budgets. > > Or the prisoners and the jail staff would be unemployed. Saturday's Mister Boffo comic strip shows a prisoner being released from jail; the guard is saying, "Thank you for your time." -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-29 18:59 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <lm8hls$gjp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3360 |
On 29-May-14 15:31, Peter Flass wrote: > Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote: >> In article <lm7jr2$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. Elected judges are a small problem, but juries are indeed far worse, especially in civil cases. My sister was on a jury for a malpractice case. The doctor had warned a mother woman that there was a ~70% chance of genetic defect; she got pregnant and had a child with that exact defect--and then sued the doctor for causing it. The first poll of the jury was unanimous in favor of the doctor. However, as they were getting up to head back to the courtroom, one woman asked how much money they were going to award to "that poor child". Once told that they couldn't award damages if the doctor did nothing wrong, she changed her vote--and so did several other jurors. Idiots! That trial ended in a hung jury, but that just means the woman gets to sue the doctor again and again until she gives up, costing him (er, his insurer) more in legal fees than the settlement they had already offered. Even if the woman eventually wins, her lawyer will confiscate the entire award to cover his costs, so neither she nor her child will _ever_ see a dime. Of course, the doctor's malpractice insurance was canceled as a result of that case, and he can't realistically practice medicine without it, so he loses his career yet still owe half a million dollars or so in student loans, and thousands of other patients have a harder time finding a doctor when they need medical care. So, everyone loses except the lawyers, but what else would you expect from a system _designed_ by lawyers? > 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. Notably, neither the plaintiff nor his lawyer has to pay the defendant's legal costs if they lose, so it's all reward and no risk for them. This is even worse in criminal trials: poor defendants can't afford to fight, and middle class defendants would be bankrupted by fighting, so both take plea bargains even if they're innocent--and the prosecutor gets to brag in the next election cycle about their stellar "conviction" rate. For years, the motto of a local DA (proudly displayed on the walls of his office) was "Anyone can convict the guilty; only the best can convict the innocent!" Didn't we fight a revolution to get away from that kind of thing? 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 | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-30 07:28 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <20140530072810.16aede19b93a67028f1b638b@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #3366 |
On Thu, 29 May 2014 18:59:55 -0500 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > My sister was on a jury for a malpractice case. The doctor had warned a > mother woman that there was a ~70% chance of genetic defect; she got > pregnant and had a child with that exact defect--and then sued the > doctor for causing it. The first poll of the jury was unanimous in > favor of the doctor. That sounds like something that should have been chucked out of court. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-30 09:26 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <lma4fe$7f2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3378 |
On 30-May-14 01:28, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: > On Thu, 29 May 2014 18:59:55 -0500 Stephen Sprunk > <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >> My sister was on a jury for a malpractice case. The doctor had >> warned a mother woman that there was a ~70% chance of genetic >> defect; she got pregnant and had a child with that exact >> defect--and then sued the doctor for causing it. The first poll of >> the jury was unanimous in favor of the doctor. > > That sounds like something that should have been chucked out of > court. That's not how the US legal system works. Heck, the victim can't even recover their legal costs from such bullshit cases, which would prevent the vast majority of them from ever being filed. Remember, the goal of suing someone is _not_ to win; the goal is to make it so expensive for them to fight your lawsuit that they'll just give you money to go away. 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 | "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-30 15:24 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <598.298T1422T9244579@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
| In reply to | #3407 |
In article <lma4fe$7f2$1@dont-email.me>, stephen@sprunk.org (Stephen Sprunk) writes: > Remember, the goal of suing someone is _not_ to win; the goal is to > make it so expensive for them to fight your lawsuit that they'll just > give you money to go away. And then these same people publicly cry crocodile tears about how bad bullying is. Sheesh. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-30 17:40 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <buqr03F7dndU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3366 |
"Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message news:lm8hls$gjp$1@dont-email.me... > On 29-May-14 15:31, Peter Flass wrote: >> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote: >>> In article <lm7jr2$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. > > Elected judges are a small problem, but juries are indeed far worse, > especially in civil cases. > > My sister was on a jury for a malpractice case. The doctor had warned a > mother woman that there was a ~70% chance of genetic defect; she got > pregnant and had a child with that exact defect--and then sued the > doctor for causing it. The first poll of the jury was unanimous in > favor of the doctor. > > However, as they were getting up to head back to the courtroom, one > woman asked how much money they were going to award to "that poor > child". Once told that they couldn't award damages if the doctor did > nothing wrong, she changed her vote--and so did several other jurors. > Idiots! That trial ended in a hung jury, but that just means the woman > gets to sue the doctor again and again until she gives up, costing him > (er, his insurer) more in legal fees than the settlement they had > already offered. Even if the woman eventually wins, her lawyer will > confiscate the entire award to cover his costs, so neither she nor her > child will _ever_ see a dime. > > Of course, the doctor's malpractice insurance was canceled as a result > of that case, and he can't realistically practice medicine without it, > so he loses his career yet still owe half a million dollars or so in > student loans, and thousands of other patients have a harder time > finding a doctor when they need medical care. > > So, everyone loses except the lawyers, but what else would you expect > from a system _designed_ by lawyers? The other legal systems are designed by lawyers too and none of them get anything like that utterly obscene result. >> 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. > Notably, neither the plaintiff nor his lawyer has to pay the defendant's > legal costs if they lose, so it's all reward and no risk for them. > > This is even worse in criminal trials: poor defendants can't afford to > fight, and middle class defendants would be bankrupted by fighting, so > both take plea bargains even if they're innocent--and the prosecutor > gets to brag in the next election cycle about their stellar "conviction" > rate. > > For years, the motto of a local DA (proudly displayed on the walls of > his office) was "Anyone can convict the guilty; only the best can > convict the innocent!" > Didn't we fight a revolution to get away from that kind of thing? Nope, it was about something else entirely.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.misc
csiph-web