On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 04:31:48PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Anthony Towns <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > > The claim is that: > > Dissident test + Practical objections == Can't close the ASP loophole > > and, furthermore that that equality goes both ways. That is that > > the Dissident test is just another way of saying that the only ways > > you're allowed to close the ASP loophole are ones which are practically > > unreasonable. > Sorry, when I say I agree with this claim, I mean the => direction. > The <= direction is surely false; for example, I formulated the > dissident test long before the ASP loophole (of any sort) had ever > been pointed out to me. Huh? "I never thought about a number bigger than 10^128, therefore a^b * a^c = a^(b+c) is surely false for numbers that large" You're not making any sense. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <email@example.com> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations -- you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''
Description: PGP signature