"Bob G" wrote in message
...

China, whether you friggin know it or not, DOES block certain internet
traffic. Not only blocks items, but if one is in China and tries to
put up one's own web site which says things the government does not
approve of, one can end up in prison.


LOL.......

I can see it now........

Hamei put in prison for telling "Joe-Six-Pak" in America his government and
media has been pushing the wrong story about China for all these
years.........


--


SVL

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 08:14:25 GMT, strabo wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 09:20:03 -0600, Bob G
wrote:

Also curious as to how you seem to communicate so freely back and
forth and seem to roam the Net at will. Since China's government is
pretty well known for blocking a lot of sites and whole ISPs, etc?

An example to read about that subject:
http://www.wayan.net/exp/china/censor.htm

That's just one. Do a Google search using china+censorship+internet
and it'll turn up a whole bunch more examples.

Bob

So Bob, think you might have turned up one of them Commie
instigators? :-) Just say COSCO.

Chuckle, no, I don't think I've turned up any Commie instigators. For
the most part if I run across such I ignore em. Chalk it up to good
intentions ... but more fantasy than any possible, workable for very
long, reality.

China itself is proof of my assertion. The idealism of Communism
doesn't last very long with most folks. Does with some, the die
hards. Who usually, most unsurprisingly, are members of the upper
tier. After all, they're usually a little bit more equal and freer
than the rest, tho they almost always deny this.

In any event, China did see an improvement for the lower classes for
the first years after their revolution. And many were motivated by
the new idealism and expectations. But if one checks history, it can
be seen that things started to slow down, mire down, and boggle down.
Always happens. Every time communism on a large scale has been tried.

So the communist government of China had little choice, and made some
internal changes. To allow a somewhat of a compromise between the
ideals of communism and capitalism. And things got started again
towards improving and getting better. Business units were allowed
some freedom to compete, innovate, etc ... and employees of said
business units allowed to keep a little something extra for themselves
if the business unit did well. On a smaller scale private, single
family business units were allowed to do the same. And started to do
better than they had been. Working harder, more efficiently,
innovating, improving.

China started moving forward again, instead of stagnating.

Shrug Will China ever totally adapt a capitalistic system similar to
the US? Who the heck knows? I don't. I'd expect the reality will be
she'll end up with a compromise system. With elements of both systems.
But she's well aware now that the idealism of pure communism does not
work. Not for very long. After all, why would I, Bob, work twice as
hard as another, exercise my brain more, innovate, and so forth if I
never, ever benefited from my extra production? At least some. If
not personally, then my family as a whole. I'll put forward extra
effort for my wife ... my kids ... my cousins ... the neighbors I
personally know, etc. But for some nameless, faceless stranger 500
miles away? I put out 150%, only get 100% ... people I don't know,
will likely never meet, only put out 50% and get my extra 50% given to
them. Uhhhh, I don't think so. I might put up with it for a while.
But then it'd start getting old and I'd say "The hell with it."

However, if a system is in place that allows me to put out that 150%,
and then maybe keep 110-120%. Then I might well be more motivated.
Then being able to SEE a benefit of my extra efforts. A little better
shoes on my kids' feet, warmer coat for my wife. Maybe the luxury of
a window air conditioner. I personally wouldn't care about that last,
I'm not big on personally pampering myself ... but I know my wife
would enjoy it. She smiles ... I smile. And so forth.

There's a big firewall between China and the rest of the world.
Except for a privileged few, there is no direct route in or
out of China. I used to be able to get on some native sites but
not in recent years. The big figure (79.5 million) is likely for
the authorized internal network. Japan has something similar.


Uh Huh. It was ... Geez, I forget exactly, but it was something like
a couple or 3 years back when the Chinese government instigated a new
wave of crackdowns on internet access. Not cutting it off, really.
Tho portions were temporarily shut down. For instance, licenses for
"Internet Cafes" were revoked, and their access cut off. And owners
not allowed to get new licenses until they agreed to let government
officials load up their computers with monitoring and filtering
software. Some ISPs were shut down completely. For failing to
conform to the rules.

(I don't know about Japan, don't keep track of them much, not
interested. But have been to mainland China. Have been to Hong Kong,
Taiwan, and Singapore on numerous occassions. And currently have a
couple sets of friends from that are from that part of the world. One
group of friends originally from Hong Kong, but having still ties with
family on the mainland. Other group were born on the mainland, in
communist China, but managed to get out. They still have ties and
family back on the mainland. So we talk about these things from time
to time.)

And that 79.5 million figure you quote can be a trifle misleading.
Sounds like a lot. But in truth represents only around 6 - 7% of
China's population.

Just as a note. I am well aware there are folks who've been to China
on visits as tourists, as businessmen, and so forth since China has
opened up more than it used to be. And that their impressions of
China and what it's like may make some of the things I say a it hard
to believe.

But, for the most part, what visitors see is not the whole story. For
one, most times they're fairly limited, in an unobtrusive way mostly,
in where they can go and what they can see. For another, they tend to
hang around the better areas. Places a businessman or tourist would
want to go. And where the Chinese want them to go, because after all,
the Chinese would like em to spend some of their money.

And these places are, shall we say, somewhat better off than much of
China. And the Chinese people in these places better off than many
others.

It's kind of like when friends of mine took a trip to Cancun Mexico
and came back and told me Mexico was a really wonderful place,
everybody was so happy and polite. And my friends speculated that
they wouldn't mind moving there.

LOLOL ... I told em the vast majority of Mexico was not at all like
Cancun. And that appearances were not always what they seemed.
Chuckle, they thought I was exaggerating. Until a following year when
they made a return trip. And just to check things out, left the
tourist area, hopped on an ordinary Mexican bus and got off at a
randomly selected area. And promptly got lost. Well, they got to see
some of "the other side" of Mexico. When they got home, had to tell
me that I was right. They'd been unable to believe how poorly some of
those Mexicans they never saw in the tourist areas of Cancun lived.

I'm not bashing China. Not my intent or purpose. I hope for the best
for those people.

When I was there for that 6 month assignment, yes, lots of folks
smiled, were friendly, and life for them seemed pretty decent. Yep.
And life probably wasn't horrible or anything like that.

Life there for me? Great. Chuckle, on ordinary US Navy sailor's pay,
plus per diem, etc I was friggin well to do. "Rich" is the way several
of the ordinary, lower class Chinese described it to me.

Yep, I could afford the better beer. the imported stuff. Dirt cheap
to me.

But it wasn't to an ordinary worker "on the line" in a factory. Or to
a farmer.

Yep, I ate very well, and the food was cheap. To me. But I did not
miss the fact that the lowly wrench turner "over there" was brown
bagging it and his meal was more modest and meager than mine. He
couldn't afford to go eat at places I gave no second thought to going
to.

I tend to wander around. And went to the places suggested to me and
to which I was steered by those Chinese I was working with and
teaching. Who were a bit above the average class of folks. And some
of em, a few, were in fact tasked with keeping an eye on me. But
occassionally, as is my habit if I can get away with it, I'd insist on
wandering down side streets and go eat, or have a beer, at the places
where the "common" folks went. I didn't miss the fact that their life
style was more modest than I might've been lead to believe if I'd only
gone to places people tried to steer me.

Nor did I miss the fact, because I pay attention to such things, that
while the "common" folks smiled, were polite, and seemed happy enough,
that they were in fact deferential to to my ... ummm ... escorts; the
folks I worked directly with. And that there were subjects said
common folks avoided discussing like the plague itself. Or, if they
spoke about such things, repeated lines virtually word for word out of
the book of Party Politically Correct Views. As one fellow, just a
lowly wrench turner, who worked with us on that project because he
spoke some English whispered to me once "There are ears everywhere."

Nor was I unaware that many of the folk didn't even know that things
could be different, or that their's wasn't the 'best' system. For
many, it was all they'd ever known. And what they knew about America
was mostly the bad stuff. And there is bad things about America.
However, what they'd learned was little more than that side of things.
And had not learned the reality of the other side. So their views
were slanted. As was to be expected.

Not that I engaged in political debate much. I'm no dummy. When in
Rome, do like the Romans do is my basic philosophy. I had no desire
to rabble rouse and cause hate and discontent. Was there to teach
some things to some folks. Mainly restrainned myself to that.

G Not to say that I didn't have some fun and do a bit of partying
from time to time.

I was not out to reform the world into the image of what I thought it
should be. China belonged to those folks, not to me. Their country,
not mine. So I was not about to bad mouth it or say things against
it. Not my way. Their business ... not mine.

Chuckle, I noted in one of the random posts of Hamei's I checked a
quip about a gal expecting a little something in the morning. Geez,
prices must've gone up. :-)

Bob

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 20:26:01 -0800, "PrecisionMachinisT"
wrote:


"Bob G" wrote in message
.. .

China, whether you friggin know it or not, DOES block certain internet
traffic. Not only blocks items, but if one is in China and tries to
put up one's own web site which says things the government does not
approve of, one can end up in prison.


LOL.......

I can see it now........

Hamei put in prison for telling "Joe-Six-Pak" in America his government and
media has been pushing the wrong story about China for all these
years.........

Chuckle, I hardly think so.

I certainly have not read all of his posts. But the few I browsed
certainly wouldn't have been considered "subversive".

And I doubt that China is a horrible place to live. I can think of,
and have been to, much worse places. They are, however, restrictive.

I was actuallly hoping to find signs they're getting less restrictive.

Bob

Bob G wrote in message . ..


sherlock, you'd better call Mycroft in on this one ...


Actually, his usenet posts are coming through cn.net in Beijing, China
if you know how to check.

Not my point, Spehro.



I thought that WAS your point, Bob .... that I'm not posting from
China. Btw, if you weren't so sure I live in California I'd let
you download the recording I made of the fireworks out the office
window the other night. Or you could talk to my assistant if you
want to dial long distance. Send a request for a phone number thru
the pacbell email address :-)


I know more than a little about how the net works, trust me. I'd not
be asking about a simple thing like email addys without a reason.


I'm REALLY impressed by your vast knowledge of the Internet, Bob.
Lessee, Did you bother to TRY the pacbell address ? Three guesses
what happens when you send mail there. ONCE UPON A TIME I had pacbell
for an ISP. Nowadays all them Usenet-generated 147k Microsoft viruses
go who-knows-where and who-cares-where. Let pacbell deal with that
crap. They deserve it. It looks like your Internet knowledge could
use a second-quarter advanced course.


Also curious as to how you seem to communicate so freely back and
forth and seem to roam the Net at will.


You don't know that I do ... in fact, I can't get to any geocities
sites and DNS resolution here absolutely sucks. Other than that ..

Since China's government is
pretty well known for blocking a lot of sites and whole ISPs, etc?


here we go again. I'm not even going to respond to this crap other
than to remark that it IS a bunch of crap.


Spehro, I was trying to determine if Hamei was, in fact, in China.

It's pretty goddamned easy. Do like Spehro did and notice that it
all goes thru Beijing. In case you didn't know, Beijing ia a city
in China. I suppose that New Jersey packets could go thru Beijing
also but it doesn't seem real likely. Btw, "was" ? I'm sitting here
in Huzhou in wan long da sha listening to firecrackers go off this
very second ... ain't no "was" about it.


And, if he was, how he was managing to route his mail thru Pacbell,
and pay them for it as I'd expect they'd like to be paid for it.


Must be some more of that Sherlock stuff here ... WHY you think
my mail goes thru pacbell, I have no idea. You CERTAINLY didn't
check on it.

(Beyond that, it was actually funny : pacbell closed the SMTP
service when I turned them off but they left the POP account
running. So people could send me mail and I could get it but
I couldn't send thru the Pacbell SMTP server. Well whoopee !
All you have to do is configure sendmail to go direct and away
ya go, a free mail account Took them a good six months to notice.)


China, whether you friggin know it or not, DOES block certain internet
traffic. Not only blocks items, but if one is in China and tries to
put one's own web site which says things the government does not
approve of, one can end up in prison.


oh yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah. And you can end up in jail for life
for crimes you didn't commit in Texas, too. Whoop-deee-doo.


Myself, I needed no examples.


I believe *that*, Sherlock. Your powers of evidentiary collection
have proven to be extraordinary so far. If you swing any harder
at that crystal ball you're going to throw your back out.


For one, had the word from the horse's
mouth so to speak.

Musta been dark and you made a mistake... the mouth is farther
off the ground, in case you're ever in that position again.

The friends I mentioned, who were born in Hong
Kong. Have relatives over on the mainland they still keep track of.
Much easier now than it used to be. To keep in touch. And every once
in a while when they can afford it, nowadays they can take a trip to
China and actually see the relatives. Not often. They say it's been 3
times in the past 10 years.

Sigh. The train to Shenzhen costs all of 16 HK dollars, or about two
bucks. The ferry is 160, or $20 US. Train from Shenzhen to Shanghai
might be about 100 rmb, or twelve bucks American. The STREETSWEEPERS
in Hong Kong make about what a middle management person does in China -
4,000 HK $$ ... soooo, Sherlock ....


Well, let's put it this way. The relatives have stuff they absolutely
refuse to say or talk about. In public.

snipped


Bob, are your eyes brown by any chance ? Do you have problems with
black helicopters ? Is that tin foil beanie really comfortable when
you take a shower ? 'Cuz you know ? the rest of your post shows just
about as much grasp of reality as we see in your Internet sleuthing.

Jesus ! it's been *days* now and they're still not out of fireworks ...
That one sounded like the building next door fell down. Maybe it did ...

anyway ... Bob, you're more pleasant but just about as misguided as
Gunner. If it makes you happy to invent conspiracies and DAMN ! either
the Americans are invading or everyone is finishing off their fireworks
before they have to go back to work tomorrow ...this is getting outta
hand .... anyway, Bob, you're wacko. DNS here sucks and I think they
may filter packets watching for tewwowists - either that or this is the
slowest DSL on the planet, which is also possible - but hey now ! So
does the US. In fact SGI recently got a huge contract to supply some
bigass boxes to the American KGB, so every cloud has a silver lining,
dui bu dui ?

So, anyway. I was curious. If Hamei is who he says he is,

I don't believe I've ever said doodly about "who I am" ... other
than talk about what's going on around me, anyway. And who I am
is definitely who I is, nothing I can do about that.

and is
where he says he is.

c'mon over, Jack. Others have ... I don't think I'll ask you to
stay in my house - no landing pad for the black helicopters - but
Huzhou bin guan is only a few blocks away, a nice room costs 328
rmb/night, so there ya go,

.... And he's managing to link to the outside world
freely, without the censors blocking him, and even use a US based ISP.


More of that Sherlock vast Internet knowledge, I see ... guess
what, Bob ? We pay China Telecom for the DSL connection. And not
to be too picky but your remarks about the only three service
providers in China ? That's also nonsense. In China we have
China Telecom, a part of the government with offices in the post
office and China Unicom which might or might not be government-
connected, I dunno. Nobody else that I was able to find during
an *extensive* search for a possible static IP provider. Not
that there couldn't be some small ones hidden somewhere but
for biggies, that's it. Another bit of your vast China knowledge
seems to be incorrect ...

Holy **** ... one more thing. If this isn't China, someone sure
as hell changed the laws in California 'cuz we now have **** going
off that makes a Lucasfilm extravaganza sound like an Al Jolson
record. That last series shook the building and lit up the entire
block .. lucky no windows got shattered. Freedom, yeah ... you guys
got a lot. Probably stashed away in a back closet for a rainy day.

On 25 Jan 2004 07:43:20 -0800, (Excitable Boy)
wrote:

Bob G wrote in message . ..

More of that Sherlock vast Internet knowledge, I see ... guess
what, Bob ? We pay China Telecom for the DSL connection. And not
to be too picky but your remarks about the only three service
providers in China ? That's also nonsense. In China we have
China Telecom, a part of the government with offices in the post
office and China Unicom which might or might not be government-
connected, I dunno. Nobody else that I was able to find during
an *extensive* search for a possible static IP provider. Not
that there couldn't be some small ones hidden somewhere but
for biggies, that's it. Another bit of your vast China knowledge
seems to be incorrect ...

The information I got about the ISP providers in China ... came from
the Chinese government itself, Hamei.

If you'd actually read my post, without making presumptions as to my
purpose, you'd have noted that.

The rest of the stuff about the blocking and censorship 1) The Chinese
government themselves admit to, and say it is their right. And I did
not even debate the point that they had the right. 2) Is well
documented by everyone and their brother, sources coming from MANY
different countries, not just the US.

So I was simply stating fact. And not once did I say the Chinese
should be bashed about this. Their government, their right. I don't
agree, but it's not my country. So said no more about it other than
the fact that I was trying to establish if there was some evidence
that perhaps they were loosening up on their restrictions.

Tell me something, Hamei ... why are you so angrily defensive?

As to the PacBell thing, I didn't attempt to send you email because
that is not my way. I don't just ping people and bother them
uninvited. Period. Particularly people I do not know, who have not
established a willingness to talk to me.

I've been on the net since before it was called the Internet, Hamei.
You can ask, or do a search in archives if you wish. I don't believe
you'll find anyone who'll say that I ever emailed em without our
having first chatted together via Usenet post, or some other means.
Nor will you find any instance in which I posted something to someone
else, who ignored said post and did not respond to me, where I did not
let the matter drop. And did not hound the person to talk to me or
respond to me. If you wish, email me and I'll give you past IDs I've
used and you can check it out for yourself.

None of those things are the way I conduct myself, Hamei.

That you were posting out of a Beijing run ISP was beside the point.
As I said to Spehro. That whole thing avoided my specific question.
Which was about the Pacbell thing. I was already aware China had it's
own ISP's. NOT MY QUESTION !!!

Now, if you'll pardon me. I have better things to do than to argue
with overly rude, overly sensitive, argumentative people. If you did
not wish to speak to me, it was simple. Don't respond. Or say go
away.

Good bye, Hamei.

And, regardless of your thoughts, my best to you and yours.

Bob

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:25:21 -0500, Tom Quackenbush
wrote:

Sue wrote:
snip
I quit running, um, er....... actually, probably right after the last
PE class I took. Hmmm. Perhaps during the Johnson administration
(not Andrew).

FYI, my emailed reply was blocked by Earthlink's spamblocker.

I did get one but not in answer to this one. The one I got (about
running dog lackeys) wasn't entirely blocked. I'm having a bitch of a
time with my e-mail and some people's doesn't download to my pc so I
have to go to the earthlink webmail site to get it. At that place
anyone who isn't in my on-line address book is put into the "Suspect
Email" folder from where I can have it moved to the on-line inbox and
the address added (yours is now). I have not been able to figure out
how it is that some friends' e-mails get downloaded and some get stuck
at the webmail site. It's really annoying because I can't save ones
that I want to save directly to a folder. I have to cut and past and
all that crap. Also, when I reply from there there are none of those
things that make them easier to read. Sigh. I still get those
Swen worm things, too. Down from the 50 p/hr at first to about 1 or 2
p/hr. Those are the ones about Microsoft patches and bug reports and
all that nonsense.
Sue

R,
Tom Q.

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 16:42:08 +1300, Tom wrote:


Alright Ed, next time someone offers you a raise, shoot for 3%,
cos that's better than 9...:-)


OK...I'll take 3% of my pay against 9% of yours and be reasonably sure
that I'll get at least as cash improvement in my per hour compensation
as you will...maybe more...even if you are getting three times the
percentage raise...

here's a Clew, Tom...Just like you can not compare absolute numbers of
deaths per year between the US and NZ...you have to compare numbers of
deaths per unit population...say per 100 000 folks...otherwise, I
could say of a year where two people in Auckland died of gunshots as
opposed to the previous year when only one died of a gunshot, that it
was horrible because NZ had a *50%* increase in gunshot deaths...

By the same token, unless you accept some sort of normalization (like
the per capita income under discussion here), you can not compare
percentage improvements in gross product/gross production. While China
has made major strides in getting money down to the workers...they are
still *far* behind what even NZ would consider as a living wage...much
less here in the States....

ck


--
country doc in louisiana
(no fancy sayings right now)

Bob G wrote in message . ..


Tell me something, Hamei ... why are you so angrily defensive?

oh, let's see why a person could become slightly riled ...other
than the fact that you called me a liar, no real reason ... with
all your great knowledge of the Internet you are so stewpid as to
claim someone is a liar based on an email address in google WHICH
YOU DIDN'T EVEN CHECK. Oh yeah, then you decided that becasue of
the times I post at, I MUST be living in California and LYING about
China ... sure, no one's liable to get upset by claims like that,
what the heck, we all like to be called liars.

How about if we turn the tables, Bob ? how about if I said everything
YOU have talked about here is a pack of lies ? *I* can come up with
proof that I live in Huzhou. What do we have from YOU except a bunch
of worthless bytes ?

Are you running away now because it's going to become painfully
obvious very quickly that you are full of bear squat ?

Bob G wrote in message . ..


China itself is proof of my assertion. The idealism of Communism
doesn't last very long with most folks. Does with some, the die
hards. Who usually, most unsurprisingly, are members of the upper
tier. After all, they're usually a little bit more equal and freer
than the rest, tho they almost always deny this.




Snipped 47 pages of ignorant, simplistic, ill-infornmed crap.

Bob ? you're full of it. Go back to watching Ozzie and Harriet.
That's more your speed.

On 25 Jan 2004 19:58:35 -0800, (Excitable Boy)
wrote:

Bob G wrote in message . ..


Tell me something, Hamei ... why are you so angrily defensive?

oh, let's see why a person could become slightly riled ...other
than the fact that you called me a liar, no real reason ... with
all your great knowledge of the Internet you are so stewpid as to
claim someone is a liar based on an email address in google WHICH
YOU DIDN'T EVEN CHECK. Oh yeah, then you decided that becasue of
the times I post at, I MUST be living in California and LYING about
China ... sure, no one's liable to get upset by claims like that,
what the heck, we all like to be called liars.

How about if we turn the tables, Bob ? how about if I said everything
YOU have talked about here is a pack of lies ? *I* can come up with
proof that I live in Huzhou. What do we have from YOU except a bunch
of worthless bytes ?

Are you running away now because it's going to become painfully
obvious very quickly that you are full of bear squat ?


LOL.. this is funny... ok everybody.. Hamei really is in China ..
really!!

Later,
Mike

"Santa Cruz Mike" wrote in message
...
On 25 Jan 2004 19:58:35 -0800, (Excitable Boy)
wrote:

Bob G wrote in message
. ..


Tell me something, Hamei ... why are you so angrily defensive?

oh, let's see why a person could become slightly riled ...other
than the fact that you called me a liar, no real reason ... with
all your great knowledge of the Internet you are so stewpid as to
claim someone is a liar based on an email address in google WHICH
YOU DIDN'T EVEN CHECK. Oh yeah, then you decided that becasue of
the times I post at, I MUST be living in California and LYING about
China ... sure, no one's liable to get upset by claims like that,
what the heck, we all like to be called liars.

How about if we turn the tables, Bob ? how about if I said everything
YOU have talked about here is a pack of lies ? *I* can come up with
proof that I live in Huzhou. What do we have from YOU except a bunch
of worthless bytes ?

Are you running away now because it's going to become painfully
obvious very quickly that you are full of bear squat ?


Hamei really is in China ..
really!!


Mike,

Got foorp ???

--

SVL

Excitable Boy wrote:

Bob G wrote in message . ..

sherlock, you'd better call Mycroft in on this one ...


Actually, his usenet posts are coming through cn.net in Beijing, China
if you know how to check.

Not my point, Spehro.


I thought that WAS your point, Bob .... that I'm not posting from
China. Btw, if you weren't so sure I live in California I'd let
you download the recording I made of the fireworks out the office
window the other night. Or you could talk to my assistant if you
want to dial long distance. Send a request for a phone number thru
the pacbell email address :-)


I tried to email you a private note to exactly that email address
) and it got returned by the mailer daemon. This is the
message I received:

The following addresses had delivery problems:


Permanent Failu
,_relay=[204.127.202.64]
Delivery last attempted at Fri, 23 Jan 2004 17:02:05 -0000


Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

"Abrasha" wrote in message
...

I tried to email you a private note to exactly that email address
) and it got returned by the mailer daemon. This is the
message I received:

The following addresses had delivery problems:


Permanent Failu
,_relay=[204.127.202.64]
Delivery last attempted at Fri, 23 Jan 2004 17:02:05 -0000


Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

I have trouble with that one all the time, Abrasha. I use another one to
reach Hamei. Maybe he'll tell you what it is if you want to check him out.

Meantime, I have names (including his) and places, and I've interviewed him
in real life for an article. He's in China.

Ed Huntress

"john" wrote in message
...

LOL.. this is funny... ok everybody.. Hamei really is in China ..
really!!

Later,
Mike


But we don't know where Bob G. is.. probably in outter space.


John

Here's a secret: Gunner actually is in Newport, RI, living on a yacht.

Ed Huntress

Santa Cruz Mike wrote:

On 25 Jan 2004 19:58:35 -0800, (Excitable Boy)
wrote:

Bob G wrote in message . ..


Tell me something, Hamei ... why are you so angrily defensive?

oh, let's see why a person could become slightly riled ...other
than the fact that you called me a liar, no real reason ... with
all your great knowledge of the Internet you are so stewpid as to
claim someone is a liar based on an email address in google WHICH
YOU DIDN'T EVEN CHECK. Oh yeah, then you decided that becasue of
the times I post at, I MUST be living in California and LYING about
China ... sure, no one's liable to get upset by claims like that,
what the heck, we all like to be called liars.

How about if we turn the tables, Bob ? how about if I said everything
YOU have talked about here is a pack of lies ? *I* can come up with
proof that I live in Huzhou. What do we have from YOU except a bunch
of worthless bytes ?

Are you running away now because it's going to become painfully
obvious very quickly that you are full of bear squat ?

LOL.. this is funny... ok everybody.. Hamei really is in China ..
really!!

Later,
Mike



gut Bob G is in outter space.


John

Santa Cruz Mike wrote:

On 25 Jan 2004 19:58:35 -0800, (Excitable Boy)
wrote:

Bob G wrote in message . ..


Tell me something, Hamei ... why are you so angrily defensive?

oh, let's see why a person could become slightly riled ...other
than the fact that you called me a liar, no real reason ... with
all your great knowledge of the Internet you are so stewpid as to
claim someone is a liar based on an email address in google WHICH
YOU DIDN'T EVEN CHECK. Oh yeah, then you decided that becasue of
the times I post at, I MUST be living in California and LYING about
China ... sure, no one's liable to get upset by claims like that,
what the heck, we all like to be called liars.

How about if we turn the tables, Bob ? how about if I said everything
YOU have talked about here is a pack of lies ? *I* can come up with
proof that I live in Huzhou. What do we have from YOU except a bunch
of worthless bytes ?

Are you running away now because it's going to become painfully
obvious very quickly that you are full of bear squat ?

LOL.. this is funny... ok everybody.. Hamei really is in China ..
really!!

Later,
Mike


But we don't know where Bob G. is.. probably in outter space.


John

Santa Cruz Mike wrote:

On 25 Jan 2004 19:58:35 -0800, (Excitable Boy)
wrote:

Bob G wrote in message . ..


Tell me something, Hamei ... why are you so angrily defensive?

oh, let's see why a person could become slightly riled ...other
than the fact that you called me a liar, no real reason ... with
all your great knowledge of the Internet you are so stewpid as to
claim someone is a liar based on an email address in google WHICH
YOU DIDN'T EVEN CHECK. Oh yeah, then you decided that becasue of
the times I post at, I MUST be living in California and LYING about
China ... sure, no one's liable to get upset by claims like that,
what the heck, we all like to be called liars.

How about if we turn the tables, Bob ? how about if I said everything
YOU have talked about here is a pack of lies ? *I* can come up with
proof that I live in Huzhou. What do we have from YOU except a bunch
of worthless bytes ?

Are you running away now because it's going to become painfully
obvious very quickly that you are full of bear squat ?

LOL.. this is funny... ok everybody.. Hamei really is in China ..
really!!

Later,
Mike


But we don't know where Bob G. is.. probably in outter space.


John

On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 08:09:20 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"john" wrote in message
...

LOL.. this is funny... ok everybody.. Hamei really is in China ..
really!!

Later,
Mike


But we don't know where Bob G. is.. probably in outter space.


John

Here's a secret: Gunner actually is in Newport, RI, living on a yacht.

Ed Huntress

Nope..I moved it to Martha's Vineyard so I could mingle with the rest
of the hoi poi.

Gunner

"As physicists now know, there is some nonzero probability that any object will,
through quantum effects, tunnel from the workbench in your shop to Floyds Knobs,
Indiana (unless your shop is already in Indiana, in which case the object will
tunnel to Trotters, North Dakota).
The smaller mass of the object, the higher the probability.
Therefore, disassembled parts, particularly small ones,
of machines disappear much faster than assembled machines."
Greg Dermer: rec.crafts.metalworking

On 25 Jan 2004 19:58:35 -0800, (Excitable Boy)
wrote:

Bob G wrote in message . ..


Tell me something, Hamei ... why are you so angrily defensive?

oh, let's see why a person could become slightly riled ...other
than the fact that you called me a liar, no real reason ...

Hmmm.

Hamei, obviously what we have here is a failure at understanding.

And also quite obviously the failure is almost certainly my fault. As
I initiated the communication, and obviously did a poor job at
conveying my thoughts.

Unfortunately I have a habit of "thinking out loud", even on a
keyboard. Am a touch typist, do not edit things I type, and simply
type the thoughts that come to me as they come to me.

As a net result, unfortunately, my posts tend to be too long, as they
often contain my thoughts and musings which often bore people, confuse
them as to my meanings, and contain the trivia of a wandering mind
still forming it's own thoughts and conclusions which are sometimes
not even arrived at as yet.

So, I'll try to be clear.

First, Hamei, if I intended to call you a liar ... you'd be under no
doubts of it. I'd have said you were a liar, straight out if that was
the conclusion I'd come to. It is my way.

Even if in person, if I think a man is a liar, he'll know, because I
won't say it behind his back, it'll be to his face. Whether he likes
it or not. I do not ever bad mouth a person behind his or her back.

I did not call you a liar.

I was thinking aloud about the questions in my mind concerning whether
or not you were actually in China.

If you do not know, Hamei, a great deal of what people claim and say
on the internet tends to be rubbish, fantasy, and wannabe type stuff.

Thus it is my habit of never presuming that anything I read on the net
is the truth. Almost an automatic reflex for me to question, compare
one thing said against another, ask myself "Do these things match?",
does what is said match up with some other verifiable source, etc?

No offense intended to you, Hamei. I do this almost always.

If I offended you, it was unintentionally, for which I apologize.

I don't apologize, nor retract anything else of what I said.

I asked about your apparent Pacbell connection. No, I did not ping it
nor did I send you email. And I explained why. I tend to avoid
sending any uninvited/unsolicited email to anyone, except businesses.
As to whether or not you had an Chinese ISP in addition to the Pacbell
thing, was of no particular interest to me. What I was interested in
was the original question, which I've tried to clarify too many times
now and both you and Sperho at first seemed to be sidestepping.

I was wondering 1) If you were really in China, and 2) if so how were
you managing to use a Pacbell ISP? That was my question.

Simply having a Chinese server show up in the routing would tell me
nothing about whether or not you were actually in China, Hamei.

I am much too old, and have been around too much to make any
assumptions based simply on that. I have myself played that trick
more than a few times.

And if you actually read and followed a link in one of my previous
posts discussing the fact that China does in fact filter, block, and
monitor internet traffic. You'd have read how Ben Edelman and
Jonathan Zittrain, researchers at Harvard Law School's Berkman Center
for Internet & Society, did exactly that. Going in thru backdoors in
China to make it appear that their access to the net was originating
in China, so they could test out exactly what sort of things were
being blocked.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in531567.shtml

I posted the link to that report in a previous post. I do note you
have seemingly refused to address the matter. Or perhaps were in a
hurry, and eager to ridicule me and simply over looked it.

FWIW, even having read that article, Hamei, I did not presume it to be
truth as I almost never presume any single source to be automatically
correct or truthful. Not that I make a presumption that someone is
necessarily lying. But people make errors, rash presumptions and
assumptions, form conclusions on partial sets of facts, and so forth.
So I checked further.

As I mentioned in a previous post, all one has to do is a Google
search on China+censorship and one finds a LOT of other, independent
sources verifying the same thing. Nor are they all American, so it's
not some US conspiracy to mislead people.

Am I still seeing black helicopters and wearing a tin foil hat, Hamei?

Shrug Perhaps I am. But that would surprise me as I am not much
given to seeing things which are not there. And when seeing black
helicopters ... or ghosts ... it'd be my tendency not to run and hide
but rather to attempt to chase either down and investigate it,

with
all your great knowledge of the Internet you are so stewpid as to
claim someone is a liar based on an email address in google WHICH
YOU DIDN'T EVEN CHECK.

As noted above, Hamei. If my intention had been to call you a liar,
I'd have said that flat out. In a post, or face to face.

It was not my intention.

That's why I explained what caused to me have some doubts, to
"suspend" belief without thinking you were either truthful or lying
since I did not have enough evidence to decide one way or the other,
and then to ask you.

If I'd been convinced you were a liar, Hamei, I'd have simply
dismissed your posts altogether unless I'd had reason to call you on a
lie. And I did not. Don't know you, ain't never gonna meet you, if
you'd been lying would have made no difference to me as you'd not been
using a lie to harm anyone, etc.

I read people's posts, in which they are undoubtedly lying all the
time. 99% or better of the time it's simply not worth the time to
bother calling them on it. To what purpose? I have to have a reason
to even bother.

In your case, I couldn't make up my mind, so I asked. Because I was
interested in the Pacbell link thing. Not in Hamei, not in his
discussions with friends, or his arguments with others, not in his
brags, stories, and so forth. Nothing against you Hamei, I simply
don't know you and don't follow the group where you hang around.
Someone crossposted a post.

I was interested in the Pacbell thing.

You answered that, with a reasonable answer. And I have no reason to
disbelieve it. It fits, it's reasonable.

Add, that in your previous seemingly angry response to me you gave me
a further clue.

I was not impressed about the naming of places and prices. Anyone
could look up such things, it's not as if they're secrets, and some of
the names were familiar to me.

But you did say one, minor thing which convinced me you are most
likely truthful about being in China. Or if not, you've likely spent
significant time around the Chinese.

Just as anyone could easily look up city names and places, typical
prices of transportation and so forth. So can they easily look up a
few Chinese words and phrases. However, there would be things about
any language a person would not easily know or pick up on unless
they'd actually been around the people speaking the language. In your
post you used "dui bu dui" in the same context as one who is Chinese,
or at least has spent significant time around them.

So my "suspension of belief", my unwillingness to either believe or
disbelieve, has changed. I have no particular reason to doubt you any
longer.

And I apologize for bothering you and upsetting you.

How about if we turn the tables, Bob ? how about if I said everything
YOU have talked about here is a pack of lies ? *I* can come up with
proof that I live in Huzhou. What do we have from YOU except a bunch
of worthless bytes ?

Are you running away now because it's going to become painfully
obvious very quickly that you are full of bear squat ?

Believe as you wish, Hamei. It is your right.

My best to you and yours.

Bob

"Ed Huntress" writes:

http://www.machiningmagazine.com/China.pdf

Great article, Ed! I've downloaded the others as well, and am looking
forward to reading them. Highly recommended reading, folks!

Thanks, Tom. 'Glad you enjoyed it. Of the four articles on that site, I
wrote three of them, including the one without a byline. The fourth one,
about Representative Phil English's trade proposal, was written by David
Smith.

I think David Smith would do well to read your material carefully, and
try to learn from your approach. I've now read all three articles on
China, and the contrast between your interesting, thoughtful writing,
and Smith's frothing at the mouth, is overwhelming. His lies don't go
down too well, either.

What sort of responses did you get from the politicians? I'd love to
read some of that material, or at least some sort of summary... Your
questions take some answering -- in fact, they're of a nature where
the lack of a response would be telling, in its own right. :-)

-tih
--
Tom Ivar Helbekkmo, Senior System Administrator, EUnet Norway
www.eunet.no T: +47-22092958 M: +47-93013940 F: +47-22092901

In article , Bob G
writes:

As I mentioned in a previous post, all one has to do is a Google
search on China+censorship and one finds a LOT of other, independent
sources verifying the same thing.

And a Google Usenet archive search for "god" finds ~20,000,000 posts
while a search at google.com of the Web finds ~60,300,000.

Provide foorp of red shoes.
--
Cliff

Ed Huntress wrote:

"Abrasha" wrote in message
...

I tried to email you a private note to exactly that email address
) and it got returned by the mailer daemon. This is the
message I received:

The following addresses had delivery problems:


Permanent Failu
,_relay=[204.127.202.64]
Delivery last attempted at Fri, 23 Jan 2004 17:02:05 -0000


Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

I have trouble with that one all the time, Abrasha. I use another one to
reach Hamei. Maybe he'll tell you what it is if you want to check him out.

Meantime, I have names (including his) and places, and I've interviewed him
in real life for an article. He's in China.

Ed Huntress

I wasn't questioning that he is in China. I don't want to check him out, I just
wanted to send him a private note, and it bounced back. I asked him a bunch of
personal questions, that did not seem appropriate for the news group.

He wrote me back with an alternate email address. So I tried to send the note
again. See, if we are luckier this time.

Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote in message ...


What sort of responses did you get from the politicians? I'd love to
read some of that material, or at least some sort of summary... Your
questions take some answering -- in fact, they're of a nature where
the lack of a response would be telling, in its own right. :-)



I should mind my own business here, but this part I found mildly
amusing :

A long long time ago, in a Universe far far away, Ed had some of
the same common misconceptions we see others spouting cf China,
machining, Milton Friedman,and so on.

Then Ed decided to do a series of articles about the situation ....
when Ed gets into his job he does it right : we'll all have to admit
that, I think. Over the progress of three articles, mention of Milton
went down drastically but the big buildup was coming ... the culmination
was to be Ed's discussions with the People in Power, the People Who
Know, the people at Commerce who were gonna Take Action.

Then a period of prolonged silence.

Then Ed's quiet announcement that he no longer worked for a magazine
that depended upon manufacturing ad revenues for its existence.

Possibly my inductive reasoning is as faulty as Bob G's, but .... I
got the impression that Ed did not find Our Leadership to be especially
reassuring in re the future of manufacturing in the US, at least as far
as small to midsized shops go. And I haven't heard Ed quote Uncle Miltie
once over the past six months :-)

"Tom Ivar Helbekkmo" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" writes:

http://www.machiningmagazine.com/China.pdf

Great article, Ed! I've downloaded the others as well, and am looking
forward to reading them. Highly recommended reading, folks!

Thanks, Tom. 'Glad you enjoyed it. Of the four articles on that site, I
wrote three of them, including the one without a byline. The fourth one,
about Representative Phil English's trade proposal, was written by David
Smith.

I think David Smith would do well to read your material carefully, and
try to learn from your approach. I've now read all three articles on
China, and the contrast between your interesting, thoughtful writing,
and Smith's frothing at the mouth, is overwhelming. His lies don't go
down too well, either.

What sort of responses did you get from the politicians? I'd love to
read some of that material, or at least some sort of summary... Your
questions take some answering -- in fact, they're of a nature where
the lack of a response would be telling, in its own right. :-)

-tih
--
Tom Ivar Helbekkmo, Senior System Administrator, EUnet Norway
www.eunet.no T: +47-22092958 M: +47-93013940 F: +47-22092901

Tom, thank you for your gracious comments. For the sake of fairness, I had
an extraordinary amount of time to research and write each of my articles --
several entire months in which I had no other responsibilities but to write
each one -- while David had about 3 days to write his. No kidding.

David is a fine journalist who came from Business Week. He had to rely on
Congressman Phil English for the content of that piece, and there's a
problem right there. There's nothing basically wrong with English, but he's
a man in a vise, a conservative Republican who has to support free trade as
a Party issue, but who has in his district perhaps the biggest collection of
small metalworking shops in the US that are being beaten senseless by
low-wage competition. When you get squeezed that way, it's like a tomato
being squeezed in an arbor press: some funny-smelling stuff comes squirting
out the sides. g

That's just the way it goes sometimes in writing and editing trade
publications on a deadline. We just try to suck it up and move on.

As for the response, I was just starting on that when I got laid off.
Business is still desperate among manufacturing trade magazines in the US. I
hope they'll pick it up at Machining and get those responses.

Ed Huntress