On 17 Jul 2002 at 3:46, kharin wrote:
> I'm inclined to agree; mass market
> penetration would be the only way to attain sufficient economies of
> scale that pricing could undercut the dealers (who would always remain
> to some extent otherwise). There are other problems with the cafe
> system of course; how many local councils can you see giving
> permission for the establishments of said cafes?
I expect London might have the first legal cafe. Then other locals
might follow suit perhaps because of the revenue they'll be seen to
create? Or due to large enough demand?
> "As usual, belief must be examined more closely and not dismissed just
> because someone is taking something you aren't."
>
> I thought my post made clear that dismissal wasn't something being
> advocated.
Apologies - I should have written "one". I was no referring to *you*
personally.
> And the correct phrasing for the noetic should be 'can't'
> not 'aren't;'
Thanks.
> any experience of that kind is essentially solipsistic.
Why so?
> In answer to the point where we can step in and say 'no/wrong,' it's
> precisely the problem that by definition no such point can exist
Indeed. It is really the central question to all interactions between
individual and society.
Walpurgis
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.walpurg.iwarp.com
Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, the government police
and other authorities can, with out a court order, demand that phone
companies, internet service providers and postal operators hand over
detailed information on individuals such as their name and address, phone
calls made and received, source and destination of emails, the identity of
websites visited and mobile phone location data, which is capable of
revealing the user's whereabouts at any given time and is accurate to
within a few hundred metres.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/humanrights/story/0,7369,731074,00.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 22 2002 - 05:06:15 MDT