Subject: Ackanomic Digest V2 #39
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest         Monday, April 7 1997         Volume 02 : Number 039

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 14:47:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

>Well, the judge, once shown the rule, or paradox, or whatever, *is* the
>arbitrator and can tell us we've been crashed for a long time.  This 
>happened in the case of old rule 457, where, do due a bug, the rule had no
>effect, thus no one was ever on vacation, and although it *didn't* happen,
>a lot of proposals could have failed due to quorum, but we were playing
>as if none of them actually failed due to quorum.

  I was thinking of a rule that would let the Pres erect a "Statue of
Limitations" in some public place, making the game state at the time
whatever we think it is...

- -Red Barn

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 13:55:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Duel (Narf)

I, /dev/joe, as second to fnord, am announcing that fnord challenges
Narf to a Duel.  (See rule 1215.)

The reason for the duel is as follows:
> In CFJ 370, Narf clearly claims that those who have Judged before
> have done so based on the Reasoning of a CFJ, even though the Rules
> clearly state that a Judge should base the result of a CFJ on
> the Statement alone.  Such a claim that players blatantly ignore
> the Rules cannot be tolerated, and the honor of all those who have
> Judged before must be defended.

/dev/joe

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 14:08:26 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Impeachment Paper

This is an Impeachment Paper for the purpose of impeaching that nasty
do-nothing, /dev/joe, from the office of Senator (seat /dev/senate3). 
He is so busy with his other offices and treasure hunting that he forgets
to do simple things like post a list of silver moon candidates.

I'm also announcing that Runestone of Jukkasjarvi fragment 5 reads,
in full:

  5. I was the first to complete task number 1.

/dev/joe

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 15:07:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

>And then we have the case of humans (as TM systems) creating AIs (also TM
>systems) thereby becoming more than TM themselves. Actually, don't humans
>already transcend TMs because they've described them? Certainly, I can't be
>expected to be tested on material that would require me knowing myself as a
>system completely.    ; )

  If we had determinism, this would be easy: everything's a TM.

- -Red Barn

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 14:14:39 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Miscellaneous information

The Brass Monkey's chain is 5 meters long.

A word which contains 5 consecutive vowels is queueing.
A word which contains 5 consecutive consonants is strengths.
A word which contains 6 different vowels in alphabetical order is facetiously.

/dev/joe

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 15:10:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

>Who said the universe created humans? Besides, I don't think it's impossible
>for a TM to clone itself, as long as it was part of it's programming. Maybe
>not, though. Humans can reproduce -- does that cause a contradiction? I
>don't think so. At any rate, your speculation boils down to "Does every
>system necessarily have a creator?" which is a metaphysical question that
>cannot be definitively answered.

  Picture a turing machine with some set of rules that never terminates
(or a least not for a long, long time).  Picture it left to itself for
millennia.  Picture the information it stores representing a universe.
Picture intelligence evolving in this universe...

- -Red Barn
Not following the arguments but still stirring up trouble

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 20:21:35 +0000
From: "Bascule" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

Red Barn spaketh:

>   The rules, however, are the definition of Acka (though I don't recall
> anything giving them formal power :), and if we are actually playing with
> a modified ruleset, we're not playing Acka.  Of course, the notion of
> "game custom" fudges this, too - how much deviance from the rules is still
> part of the rules?
> 
> -Red Barn

Aha! But who decides whether or not we are playing with a modified 
ruleset? 

Bascule

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 14:23:17 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Runestone of Jukkasjarvi Translation

After months of work, and weeks of preparation after I thought I'd read
a sufficient number of fragments, only to find that I was unable to
determine a type of fish which fit on fragment #11, requiring me to
go find more fragments, then finding Niccolo Flychuck abducted by the
W-team and unable to help me in making fragments 4 and 16 true, forcing
me to depend on ThinMan, and then finding the registrar, gaoler, and
president in Gaol, and having to get Niccolo Flychuck (after being
returned to Acka by the W-team) to break snowgod out of Gaol so he
could ack ThinMan's name change, finally I write this, the mother of
all run-on sentences, introducing my translation of the Runestone of
Jukkasjarvi:

1. I have submitted a proposal that contains at least 30 words, but
contains no verbs.

2. I have made a guess at the Machine that goes *ping* truth, and that
guess contains the word 'chartreuse' as part of the truth.

4. I have a number of processing chips which is prime and greater than
10.

5. I was the first to complete task number 1.

7. I have correctly stated the length of the Brass Monkey's chain,
it is 5 meter(s).

8. I have verbatim posted a piece of this puzzle in a public message, other
than this one.

11. I have stated 3 words, one of which contains 5 consecutive vowels,
one which contains 5 consecutive consonants, and one of which contains
6 different vowels in alphabetical order.  The words are queueing,
strengths, and facetiously.  Moreover, I have used one of these words in
a proposal, proposal 1742.

13. I have legally chewed the Gumball and then have visited a Tower and then
have vexed, annoyed, and harrassed the Brass Monkey, and then have tried
to impeach a member of the Senate.

16. FiBOnacCi Is tHe eVIl tWin.

/dev/joe

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 15:51:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

On Mon, 7 Apr 1997, IdiotBoy wrote:

>On Mon, 7 Apr 1997, Bascule wrote:
>
><SNIP lots of interesting stuff>
>> It is worth noting that a theory cannot be proved true; it can only
>> be contradicted (Popper and falsification and all that). Those
>> theories considered true are those that make lots of useful
>> predictions and haven't yet been contradicted by new evidence. 
>
>This is exactly why I shunned physics in favor of mathematics.
>

It would be kind of cool to say this is exactly why I shunned mathematics
in favor of physics.  (Except that it wouldn't be true.)

- -mr cwm :)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 21:15:37 +0100 (BDT)
From: Matt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

On Mon, 7 Apr 1997, Bascule wrote:

> Red Barn spaketh:
> 
> >   The rules, however, are the definition of Acka (though I don't recall
> > anything giving them formal power :), and if we are actually playing with
> > a modified ruleset, we're not playing Acka.  Of course, the notion of
> > "game custom" fudges this, too - how much deviance from the rules is still
> > part of the rules?
> > 
> > -Red Barn
> 
> Aha! But who decides whether or not we are playing with a modified 
> ruleset? 
> 
> Bascule

Whoops! I missed your Bob comment Red Barn.

Being facetious (with 5 vowels in alphabetical order) I could say that a 3
year old schoolkid was a disinterested party; would you accept their
judgement?

More seriously, if we disagree about things here, it is highly likely that
others would too. I'm trying to say that there is no objective viewpoint,
only opinions.

Bascule

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 23:25:32 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord) 

On Mon, 7 Apr 1997, Thierry Joffrain wrote:

> > [ Godel's theorem, a given, mentioned ]
> 
> Actually, there is an intuitive rationale for BTMs existing. Say that humans
> are just TMs. Then the universe (itself a TM if there is nothingmore) would
> need to be able to completly describe/know itself to create humans. [insert
> space for various religious outcries here] Should that be a special case by
> defining the Universe as a special system? But then that's just another way
> of saying there is something BTM.
> 
> Or we could perhaps argue that Godel's theorem doesn't apply to the Universe
> as a whole, only to proper subsets. But that seems a tad extreme.
> 
> And then we have the case of humans (as TM systems) creating AIs (also TM
> systems) thereby becoming more than TM themselves. Actually, don't humans
> already transcend TMs because they've described them? Certainly, I can't be
> expected to be tested on material that would require me knowing myself as a
> system completely.    ; )

This doesn't follow.
Consider the Universal Turing Machine. It starts off by 'reading' a
description of another Turing Machine, and then emulates it. It is a
TM which can describe, for once it has their description it can be said to
know that description, other TMs predict the their output, by said
emulation.

 > 
> Didn't we talk of things which TMs cannot do, or at least being told they
> are beyond simple explanation? If a machine could do even one of these
> computation (or rather as a computation) then it would become BTMs. The fact
> that humans can invent, describe and comprehend these would in some respect
> support the notion of humans as BTMs.

Can they?   Some claim, and Hofstadter comes to mind, that all invetion is
just variations on a theme.

Niccolo Flychuck

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 22:42:21 +0000
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

> Reply-to:      [email-masked]
> Date:          Mon, 7 Apr 1997 14:36:30 -0400 (EDT)
> From:          "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
> To:            [email-masked]
> Subject:       Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

> >Statement:
> >
> >Further game play is impossible.
> >
> >Narf's Reasoning: 
> >
> >I am not required to submit my reasoning, and according to R211,
> 
>   ARGH.
> 
Just a simple question: Is the judge required to read the reasoning 
and base its judgement also on the Reasoning. 

It looks to me that answer/judgement bases on the statement is easy, 
but based on the Reasoning impossible and almost against the rules. 
Rules are very clear about stopping the game in case of a paradox. 
Also long the paradox is not detected the game can continue. 
And its game custom to continue the game even after the game is 
ended.

The most beautifull statement I have read about its is. As long the 
players wants to play the game the game continues.

BTW is Acka a game or is it a simulation of something that looks like 
virtual world?

<CarsesraC> 

Some this can be nosense and for sure there will be some people that 
disagrees with my statements.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 16:51:31 -0500
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord) 

>> Something just hit me. Anyone willing to give a shot at proving that Acka is
>> more than a Turing machine? Certainly, Acka can mimic a universal TM. Can it
>> go beyond that?
>	What is a Turing machine?  I see this everywhere... science
>fiction is full of it.  Ack.

It's a mathematical model for a class of computers. All current computers a
Turing machines. There is a theorem (unproven) that states that there is no
computer more powerful than Turing machine, and there is yet another
unproven theorem that states that any problem that can be computed at all
can be computed by a Turing machine.

Robert Sevin

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 16:53:03 -0500
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord) 

>>And then we have the case of humans (as TM systems) creating AIs (also TM
>>systems) thereby becoming more than TM themselves. Actually, don't humans
>>already transcend TMs because they've described them? Certainly, I can't be
>>expected to be tested on material that would require me knowing myself as a
>>system completely.    ; )
>
>  If we had determinism, this would be easy: everything's a TM.

Not necessarily. I am not sure we've proven that any system of rules can be
emulated by a TM, although I would intuitively say that it could.

Robert Sevin

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 17:19:43 -0500 (CDT)
From: Thierry Joffrain <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord) (TM thread) 

After some modicum of rest, I'll try and sort out the silly things I've said.

- - I'll take Godel as correct for logical systems. [yeah yeah yeah]
- - A system at a particular computational level can describe systems of lower
computational power. [part of the definition of a larger set in mathematics]
- - All generic systems on a particular computational level can be made
equivalent. [for example, the universal TM is equivalent to other TMs]
- - No system can completely describe itself. [handwaving: this is a corollary
of Godel]

Example. We wire a very complex program (as complex as one wants) into the a
human instead of his "normal" brain, so long as that program is a PDA
program. That is, the computation power is limited to using one stack. Could
that person (i) describe itself completely (ii) have the conception of a
Turing Machine (the next computational level)?

I have no clear solution to give to (i). If it was more tired I might.   ; )
As for (ii) I'd intuitively say that it couldn't. It would require making a
computational and conceptual jump that is incompatible with its capacities,
whatever its program.

Repeat this experiment using only a TM program, again as complex as desired.
Same questions.

Part (i) is still ambigous. Perhaps someone else has a solution? Part (ii)
is controversial. If we say no for the reason that there isn't a higher
level above TM, then that is no proof of the lack of a higher level. The
fact that we cannot see a higher level would actually say more about where
we are on the computational power scale than what's above TMs. Or rather, it
says nothing at all for certain.

The cloning/children question was brought up. As I think I've said, we could
start into pretty religious questions there. Let me just say that because
humans can create/have children, or can/could clone humans, does not say
anything. While I would probably argue that this means systems on equivalent
levels can create more of that level, it says nothing about the next levels
or provide any understandings of the current one. Also, just for kicks,
let's bring in that religious argument about the "life spark" (or whatever)
that is required to create a human (child or clone) which is beyond
human-ness, and thus that the actual creation may have little to do with
humans anyway.

As Robert Sevin said, this goes way beyond what we talked about and deals
with the question of an observer and creator. And in his own immortal words:
"[it] is a metaphysical question that
cannot be definitively answered."

Back to some real work after this thought-candy
Calvin N Hobbes

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 18:35:51 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 365 Verdict

CFJ 365 has been judged FALSE

Clerk of the Courts
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 365
  Subject: Ad Hoc
Initiator: Malenkai
    Judge: Red Barn (failed to deliver verdict)
2nd Judge: ThinMan (assigned Apr 3, 1997, 19:31h EST)
Judgement: FALSE

Statement:

Rule 1843 calls and Ad Hoc Committee.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

First one must consider whether rule 1843 (or proposal 1843)
successfully satisfies section 1a of rule 1803 (as rule 1843 does
not have precedence over rule 1803).

More importantly, does rule 1843 "empower" the Ad Hoc committee, per
rule 1803, section 2?  I do not think so, and believe FALSE is
indicated.

FiBOnacCi's Reasoning:

I am invoking R340 and interpreting the "and" in the CFJ statement as
"an."

After consideration of the provisions of R1080 (R1803 at the time of
this CFJ being called), I think it relatively clear that rules are not
empowered by that rule to call Ad Hoc committees.  In particular, a rule
is _not_ an accepted proposal; rather, it is _created by_ an accepted
proposal (in general).  However, the rules nowhere forbid rules from
calling Ad Hoc committees, and in such cases rules generally have
whatever authority they claim for themselves.

I also remark that although the passage of P1843 causes its text to be
put into a new rule, one could interpret R1080 to have both the proposal
and the rule call Ad Hoc committees.  I will not issue an opinion on
that matter here, however.

I interpret the entire rule, rather than just the first sentence, to
constitute the call.  Under this reading, R1843 did specify the matter
and the specific case on which the Ad Hoc committee was to be called.
The question is then, as Malenkai astutely claims, whether any rule
empowers the particular Ad Hoc committee that was supposedly called.

The relevant provision of R1080 is this: "If a call to an ad hoc calls
specifies a matter, and there exists no rules that empowers an ad hoc
committee for such a matter, then the call is void and is ignored."

I interpret "rules that empower [...]" to mean rules that provide some
use, interpretation, or response based on the decision of an Ad Hoc
committee on some particular matter.  I can find no rules rules of
that category among those in effect at the time of this Call for
Judgement.

Finally, then, what does it mean that the call "is void and is
ignored"?  Did R1843 actually call an Ad Hoc committee (so that this
CFJ would be TRUE) with that call being nonetheless ignored?  Or did
R1843 in fact, not call an Ad Hoc committee at all?  The CFJ statement
conveniently goes right to the heart of that question, and it is my
judgement that R1843 did _not_ call an Ad Hoc committee.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 18:37:57 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 366 Verdict

CFJ 366 has been judged TRUE.

Clerk of the Courts
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 366
  Subject: Voting on the Web
Initiator: Mohammed
    Judge: snowgod (failed to deliver verdict)
2nd Judge: ThinMan (selected Apr 06, 1997, 19:38h EDT)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:

If the Tabulator were to set up a WWW page that would allow voting players
to send votes to him via CGI, and the page had some sort of authorization
feature that would help ensure that players could only cast votes on their
own behalf, then votes cast through the web page would be as valid as
those cast via private e-mail.

Mohammed's Reasoning:

Rule 106 (Voting on Proposals):
> Voting Players may vote either YES, NO, or PRESENT on each proposal, by
> sending their vote to the Tabulator.

It doesn't specify a medium, therefore CGI looks legal to me.  The reason
I bring this up is that this is very feasible.  I just want to make sure
it's 100% legal before I put it out there.

(Actually, since it is the sending and not the receiving of the vote that
matters, it looks like a player could vote through snail mail, and as long
as it reached me before the unretractable-error deadline, we'd have to
unwind the game state fifteen times a week.)

FiBOnacCi's Reasoning:

Rule 106, by intent, does not specifiy the medium by which votes may be
sent to the Tabulator.  I concur with Mohammed that CGI would be
perfectly legal.  I also remark that the authorization feature is not
required by the rules, although not including such would expose the
Tabulator to a much greater risk of breaking the rules by not correctly
attributing votes.  Furthermore, I note that the Tabulator is required
to accept votes sent to him by any medium.  Smoke signals and telepathy
are not excluded, for instance.  However, I urge players to be nice to
our hardworking and dedicated Tabulator, and to restrict themselves to
those media that he specifies.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 18:40:42 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Impeachment Paper

> This is an Impeachment Paper for the purpose of impeaching that nasty
> do-nothing, /dev/joe, from the office of Senator (seat /dev/senate3).
> He is so busy with his other offices and treasure hunting that he forgets
> to do simple things like post a list of silver moon candidates.

An IP has been filed against /dev/joe.  Voting lasts for 3 days.  Send
votes to [email-masked]

Count Tabula

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 19:06:01 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

Bascule wrote:

> My position arises from philosophy of science, as I alluded to
> before. The idea is basically as follows; I put it into the context
> of Acka afterwards:
> 
> Suppose that the universe runs according to fundamental laws, and
> that scientists are trying to discover what these laws are.

Stop right there!  :)  My position is that those laws exist whether
us clueless mortals have figured them out or not.  If incorrect
approximations of those laws are useful, or if laws that happen to
fit the data du jour work, that's fine, but it doesn't necessarily
make our description of the physical world (game state) correct.
If we can *never* prove those laws exist or prove their correctness,
tough tomatoes, that doesn't bother me at all (of course, natural 
curiousity will make sure we keep trying).  

> there is no omnipotent game-show host in the sky to give us a
> cuddly toy if we get it right. 

That seems a bit dogmatic :).  There of course doesn't need to be
for there to exist a set of Platonic laws that make everything tick.
This is getting harder and harder to relate to Acka...

> If you made it here, congratulations. Please savage my reasoning.

I hang on every word.  It still leaves the fundamental "crux", as you
put it:

> No, we don't *decide* it is something else, but *realise* it is something
> else.

Having had this debate many times under the influence of many sorts of
beverages, I have found that it has always boiled down to an argument of
faith.  However, in one such instance of perhaps more such beverages than
recommended, I discovered much to my delight that the objective-Platonic
premise is self-validating, whereas the subjective-pragmatic premise 
leads to a self-invalidating argument.  Of course, I'll have to lead that
to the reader to discover for themself, given that I don't remember how
that argument goes, and probably will not be able to reconstruct it without
a bit more thought.

Malenkai
more BWG

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 19:21:07 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Runestone of Jukkasjarvi Translation

/dev/joe wrote:

> [...] introducing my translation of the Runestone of Jukkasjarvi:

Nice try, but the Treasure of Jukkasjarvi remains safely hidden.

Good thing, because the Golden Frog is shy and would probably be
reluctant to give prayers of wisdom if found and put in some museum
or church or diced up for A$ or something :(

Malenkai
scholar of Jukkasjarvi
chess on IRC tonite anyone?

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 19:40:38 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Auction

I wrote:
 
> I am building an evil ballot stuffer.  It will be done in 3 days.

This is complete.  I am now conducting an auction for it.  Bid
publically.  The auction lasts for 3 days.

Malenkai
Wizard
Chief Cheese

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 19:50:50 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: fragment trade

I am trading Runestone of Jukkasjarvi fragment 7 and 2 PF/dev/joe to
fnord for Runestone of Jukkasjarvi fragment 17.

/dev/joe

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 19:23:50 -0700
From: [email-masked] (fnord)
Subject: Acka: Sum thing is up

1 + 2 + 10 + 20 + 33 = 960.

fnord

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 19:26:21 -0700
From: [email-masked] (fnord)
Subject: Re: Acka: fragment trade

/dev/joe spake thusly
> I am trading Runestone of Jukkasjarvi fragment 7 and 2 PF/dev/joe to
> fnord for Runestone of Jukkasjarvi fragment 17.

I acknowledge this trade.

fnord

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 21:02:19 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: fragment trade

fnord wrote:
> 
> /dev/joe spake thusly
> > I am trading Runestone of Jukkasjarvi fragment 7 and 2 PF/dev/joe to
> > fnord for Runestone of Jukkasjarvi fragment 17.
> 
> I acknowledge this trade.

FiBOnacCi has fragment 7, and Narf has fragment 17.

Malenkai

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 20:07:30 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: fragment trade

fnord wrote:
> /dev/joe spake thusly
> > I am trading Runestone of Jukkasjarvi fragment 7 and 2 PF/dev/joe to
> > fnord for Runestone of Jukkasjarvi fragment 17.
> 
> I acknowledge this trade.

Whoops, neither one of us actually had the fragment we were trying to trade,
so that failed miserably.  I instead simply give fnord 2 PF/dev/joe, and
we'll trade the text that we have for fragments we don't have any more. :-)

/dev/joe

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 19:37:58 -0700
From: [email-masked] (fnord)
Subject: Re: Acka: fragment trade

Malenkai writes:
> fnord wrote:
> > 
> > /dev/joe spake thusly
> > > I am trading Runestone of Jukkasjarvi fragment 7 and 2 PF/dev/joe to
> > > fnord for Runestone of Jukkasjarvi fragment 17.
> > 
> > I acknowledge this trade.
> 
> FiBOnacCi has fragment 7, and Narf has fragment 17.

Oh.  Well.  Never mind then.

fnord

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 19:38:58 -0700
From: [email-masked] (fnord)
Subject: Re: Acka: fragment trade

/dev/joe spake thusly
> 
> Whoops, neither one of us actually had the fragment we were trying to trade,
> so that failed miserably.  I instead simply give fnord 2 PF/dev/joe, and
> we'll trade the text that we have for fragments we don't have any more. :-)

Ack.

er... I ack this.

fnord

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 20:14:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Herring!

It's a herring!  It's coming to me now, there's a stone with a herring on it.

/dev/joe

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 20:15:41 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Translation attempt #2

1. I have submitted a proposal that contains at least 30 words, but
contains no verbs.

2. I have made a guess at the Machine that goes *ping* truth, and that
guess contains the word 'chartreuse' as part of the truth.

4. I have a number of processing chips which is prime and greater than
10.

5. I was the first to complete task number 1.

7. I have correctly stated the length of the Brass Monkey's chain,
it is 5 meter(s).

8. I have verbatim posted a piece of this puzzle in a public message, other
than this one.

9. I have correctly named a type of fish on another stone, it is herring.

11. I have stated 3 words, one of which contains 5 consecutive vowels,
one which contains 5 consecutive consonants, and one of which contains
6 different vowels in alphabetical order.  The words are queueing,
strengths, and facetiously.  Moreover, I have used one of these words in
a proposal, proposal 1742.

13. I have legally chewed the Gumball and then have visited a Tower and then
have vexed, annoyed, and harrassed the Brass Monkey, and then have tried
to impeach a member of the Senate.

/dev/joe

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 21:31:31 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Translation attempt #2

/dev/joe wrote:

[guess at the RoJ translation.]

Would that the Politeness Moon would allow me to ridicule
the students of Jukkasjarvi, especially after that disasterous
Machine episode when /dev/joe was scholar. Ah, sweet revenge :)

Fortunately, unlike the Machine, you get as many guesses as
you would like (just try to save bandwidth; one guess permitted
for each reply in the CFJ 370 discussion ;-)

Perhaps someone should invest in a JMCL.

Malenkai
Scholar of Jukkasjarvi

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 21:15:58 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

> >	What is a Turing machine?  I see this everywhere... science
> >fiction is full of it.  Ack.
> 
> It's a mathematical model for a class of computers. All current computers a
> Turing machines.
	I have gathered from the thread that a Turing Machine is a
machine whose behavior is determined purely by a set of rules-- in
which case there is no way to know whether current computers are
Turing machines.

- -- Mohammed

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 19:48:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

>>> 	What is a Turing machine?  I see this everywhere... science
>>> fiction is full of it.  Ack.
>> 
>> It's a mathematical model for a class of computers. All current computers a
>> Turing machines.
> 	I have gathered from the thread that a Turing Machine is a
> machine whose behavior is determined purely by a set of rules-- in
> which case there is no way to know whether current computers are
> Turing machines.

Not quite. A Turing Machine is simply an incredibly simple computer
that can just barely do anything. Alan Turing described this
hypothetical computer and then proved that it could do anything any
other computer could do. *Every* computer ever built is equivalent to
a Turing Machine.

The usefulness of a Turing Machine is that its limited capabilities
make it relatively easy to prove things about what it can and cannot
do, which is then automatically true for all known computers.

b

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 21:54:52 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord)

> Not quite. A Turing Machine is simply an incredibly simple computer
	*snip*

	Perhaps all of us are a level below Turing Machines, since none of us
is (apparently) capable of describing one completely... 

> The usefulness of a Turing Machine is that its limited capabilities
> make it relatively easy to prove things about what it can and cannot
> do, which is then automatically true for all known computers.
	Thanks.

- -- Mohammed

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 17:58:54 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: twinning 

>I am hereby asking /dev/joe to be my evil twin.  I hope snowgod will
>not be jealous -- he will always be my first, most evil, twin.
>
>FiBOnacCi

I understand, completely, FiBOnacCi.  Ofr course, the disparity between
myself, your first most evil twin, and /dev/joe who will be in all
likelyhood your second less evil twin, is amazing.

snowgod
Evil Twin of FiBOnacCi and proud of it.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 17:59:58 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 370 (fnord) 

>On Mon, 7 Apr 1997, Bascule wrote:
>
><SNIP lots of interesting stuff>
>> It is worth noting that a theory cannot be proved true; it can only
>> be contradicted (Popper and falsification and all that). Those
>> theories considered true are those that make lots of useful
>> predictions and haven't yet been contradicted by new evidence.
>
>This is exactly why I shunned physics in favor of mathematics.

\And why I shunned Physics AND Mathematics in favor of English.

snowgod

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 18:16:34 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Translation attempt #2 

>Perhaps someone should invest in a JMCL.
>
>Malenkai
>Scholar of Jukkasjarvi

Hey hey!  I have a JMCL!  And having long since removed myself from the
scandavian treasure hunt thingee (I'm no match for /dev/joe even though the
clues were intiguing) I hereby agree to give it to the first player to name
their house after me.

snowgod

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 22:40:43 -0500 (CDT)
From: Thierry Joffrain <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: W-File Case #1 

It had been a strange night, filled with strange dreams. Dreams of a shadowy
figure moving in my backyard, eating away in small fiery puffs at some dirty
gray smog. What a bizarre dream I though, getting ready to see the Tabulator
to get some new proposals out.

It's then that I saw them through my window. Two loose raincoats dancing
around my yard. In the longer one, a lanky man wearing unkempt hair and a
dark suit. In the other, a smart dress on a woman with hair a tad too red
under this morning's sun, her eyes strikingly pretty even at this distance.

They disappeared from the window, making their way to the main door. Three
loud knocks came from it. Wondering where on flat Acka I'd seen these two
before, I hobbled over to entrance, my left foot not yet tucked in properly
into its suction cup shoe. Before opening the door, I looked at my feet,
making sure I wasn't about to float out of those wretched shoes. I had
already gotten a taste of space flight when my house had broken free and I
wasn't about to try it again any time soon.

Is it about my old house I wondered? Did it crash somewhere? Do any damage?
Traced back to me by the trinket I'd left in it? I opened the door, half
dreading this new house to break loose as I did so. And half hoping it would.

"Mr Hobbes?" enquired the young woman, flipping out a badge I didn't quite
make out, trying as I was to glance at her partner's at the same time.

"Yes. How may I help you?"

"My name is Scold, this is Mold. Can we come in and ask you a few questions?"

I immediately remembered who they were. He was taller than I expected.
"Certainly, I was just about to get breakfast," the man looked at me in a
blank way , "can I get you something?" I waved them into the house.

"Nothing, thank you" she answered politely. I turned with a similarly
querying look to the man, but he was too busy psychoanalyzing the decor of
the hall to hear my question or see me. I motioned them into my study,
heading to the kitchen myself and quickly grabbing a cup of coffee.

Returning, I realized that every chair was overflowing with documents from a
long night of work. Half written proposals, records of the dismal state of
my finances, a few processing chips used as paper weights; all lay strewn
about the room. Mumbling an apology, I brushed two chairs naked and then
took the one behind my desk. Mold's feet had dug up a familiar looking tome
of considerable age and he dropped it gently onto the desk.

"So that's where it went" I blushed, recognizing the Codex of Kra. "I've had
to move recently" I said, trying to explain the mess away as some sort of
side effect. I stood up with the book, putting it on a dangerously unstable
shelf.

"No need for apologies Mr Hobbes, I'm used to seeing paper caverns. The only
danger would be my partner deciding to establish a secondary residence
here," she grinned, "He always needs more room for his files." Mold grinned
back at her.

"So what can I do for you?" I enquired, wondering if I should mention I had
a storage room I could lend them.

"You know of a certain snowgod?"

"The player, we already know about the abominable yeti" added Mold, who had
warmed a little from his previously blank expression.

"Certainly, pretty well known around these parts. Has anything happened to him?"

"Not to him, but last night Rule 1309 was abducted" answered Mold.

"Not abducted Mold, just missing for a short period of time" Scold countered.

I frantically tried to remember what rule that was. Ah yes, snowgod's
gravity rule. I felt guilty at the slight pang of relief I had in my
stomach. Mold and Scold continued to argue.

"Scold, you did a biopsy yourself on the rule, the results you found were
consistent with those of rules that have spend time in space."

"Acka is known for its tornados. It could have been swept away."

"There were no tornados reported last night. Besides, it wouldn't be dropped
back in the exact same spot."

"What about the people who were seen wondering around? There is no assigned
Financier in charge of supervising the Treasury. Anyone could have walked in
and taken the rule. There is no evidence of supernatural forces at work here."

"How do you explain the fact that there was a black mark under the title?"

"Just a mark Mold. What do you expect was under it? 'Kidnapped by aliens at
Apr 07 1997, 01:21 EDT'? Come on Mold, we need facts not theories!"

Mold shrugged. I took the opportunity to join their conversation.

"This reminds me of an event that took place a few weeks back."

They both turned towards me. Mold spoke, providing more info that I could
have, all with astonishing speed.

"That's right, the construction by members of the Acka government of special
Missile Defense Systems. That was all hushed up." Mold's bland look was
gone, replaced by the wild gaze of a puppy that had been promised a bone.

"There was collection for funds and some players though it would be a good
idea to donate some Ackadollars" I added thoughtlessly.

Scold moved her eyes from Mold to myself and back to him.

"That was to prepare for the construction of a bunker for the next tornado.
There is no evidence of a sophisticated government conspiracy. What makes
you think a government who can't even get papers published on time is
capable of constructing an elaborate missile defense system, let alone
maintain a long standing conspiracy of silence to hide it?"

"No Scold, the evidence is there. All we need to do is track it down. We are
close, I can feel it."

She sighed softly, rolling her deeper than ever eyes, head tilted to one
side ever so casually. As they faced off each other, I could not help but
think they made a great couple. But then the moment was gone and Scold
continued with a question for me.

"Do you know of any reasons, any persons who would want to damage that
rule?" she asked.

"You mean besides me? After all, as Ackaphysicist, that affects me directly.
And it's no secret I've had a hard time explaining some of the effects of
that rule."

"Is that a confession Mr Hobbes?"

"Not at all. It was a great rule! Still is. I'm sure we can fix it, whatever
happened to it."

"Lab says experiments may have been performed on it. It is now a shadow of
itself, relegating all authority it once commanded to other rules" explained
Mold.

I must have looked grim as he described the vegetative state of that once
proud rule. How could anyone do such a thing to a helpless rule I screamed
inside myself.

"As a doctor, I can assure you that some of Acka's best rule doctors are
looking at the problem. It'll be cured in no time" said Scold, darting a
comforting smile across the distance that separated us.

"Calvin..." she continued.

"Hobbes. Call me Hobbes. I even made my evil twins call me Hobbes."

"Hobbes," she acknowledged, "you are not our prime suspect. My partner
already has his own theories and we checked, you weren't out last night."

"On the other hand, if the lack of RFC for proposal was a paranormal
activity..." chuckled Mold knowingly.

"Yes, I've been told that's one of my bigger problems" I accepted. After a
pause, I tried to answer their last question. "I can't think of anyone that
would see this rule as one vital enough to inflict so much damage on it.
Perhaps if you had said R101, 102 or 211, perhaps something in the early
400s to make a political statement. Now those would cripple Acka." Or R1118
which I authored to create you, I thought silently in painful distress.

"What if this was just a rehearsal? A test before a larger attack? After
all, they failed the first time." Mold was evidently thinking at 200 miles
an hour, something I gathered he did quite well.

"Mold..." Scold groaned.

"Just think Scold. One rule here, one rule there. Then before you know it,
you can't amend proposals, win cycles, appeal rulings. You know as well as I
do that there are forces at work which would love to see chaos here."

"That is true," I agreed, "for a while now, Acka has attracted a lot of
attention from the outside Nomics. Taking down Ackanomic might just be the
greatest publicity stunt they could achieve!"

Scold was obviously annoyed at being in the same room as the two most
paranoid people in the land. She spoke softly, trying to calm us down.

"It isn't in their interest. Why would they take down a government they can
control, as you seem to imply Mold?"

"I'm not sure this isn't the work of different factions. Perhaps that would
explain the fact that no missiles where used last night."

"There was a recent presidential election and snowgod was elect..." I
stopped short and probably turned pale white. "You are not implying that
snowgod would purposely allow his own rule to be sacrificed? That doesn't
make sense!"

"Unless he is trying to gain their confidence Mr Hobbes. If you had to
choose which rule to save, which to sacrifice, which would you pick?"

The dark tone of his voice made me shudder. It all fit into place. The
presidential election. The lack of retaliation for the abduction. The little
publicity at the sinister event that took place. The low profile of the
rule. The back room dealing at then end of the election -- what was
promised? The suddenly warming of relations between the Senate and the
President. The snail's pace in appointing a Financier as supervising
authority of the Treasury where the rules are kept, when candidates had come
forward. I could not believe it.

I would not believe it.

"This is why we came to you Mr Hobbes. You may be acka's favorite when it
comes to being put on hit lists, but you do have some connections inside the
corridors of power. Do you know of anything that might be pertinent to this
investigation?" Mold was more like a bloodhound now, while Scold winced at
the impetuous leaps of his imagination. She needed facts. And frankly so did I.

"Mold. Let's slow down a second here. There is no evidence that there are
any aliens involved." Hers was the voice of reason. "This is all
circumstantial evidence. Coincidences. We could stand here and talk all day,
but we are no closer to the truth. We need evidence. We need to find the truth."

I suddenly saw someone passing by in front of the house. It looked like
something out of a dream. Nightmare I corrected myself. Of last night's
nightmare to be precise. But the shadow passed before I had time to focus on it.

Mold and Scold turned to see what had caught my attention but saw nothing.
Mold's eyes scrutinized my face, trying to read my mind, it felt like. I
didn't think I could hold my composure for much longer. If there was a
conspiracy out there, with the power to cripple rules then their presence
endangered those rules I had created. They all flashed before my eyes. I
could never choose between them if asked. I knew that much. I would rather
go down fighting.

"Mold..." I begun, "Mold, I will make enquires. Where can I reach you?"

He handed me a piece of paper. He had retreated somewhat and even though he
again wore his blank stare, I could guess he had become suspicious. He need
not be, I would do everything in my power to help them. But they could never
know. Because if they did, something inside me knew that their enemies would
kill two birds with one stone, removing all trace of their existence and
harming one of my rules at the same time. And I could bear neither loss.

I walked them back to the door. "Sorry I could not be of more help," I said
in a voice that tried to be normal.

They looked at me then Mold, face cast in stone, and Scold, unconvinced of
everything, walked out. Closing the door, I stood behind it, one breath left
in me. Through the door, I heard their footsteps move away. Then stop. A
crumpling of clothing as someone crouched. A sniff.

"This will be another dead end Scold" said Mold's voice.

I stood still, waiting for their voices and footsteps to leave my front
yard. And my mind. When it was silent at last, I opened the door and looked
around on the ground. And then I saw the dreaded things.

Cigarette stubs.

------------------------------

End of Ackanomic Digest V2 #39
******************************