🚀 go-pugleaf

(see post above)
Note the following addressing problem. Have A use the phrase **he did
something to him**. This is told to a walkie talkie. he is different
from him, but the message reaches both he and him. In this case, the
contextual knowledge of A of who is he would be reproduced by the
interlocutor, making the message reach he, THEN the contextual thought
of him would follow the same path. Both referred persons would reach
the message...

Same problem, been thinking for three hours without taking notes while
walking here... little bit starved save one coffee, just kicked out
three times today, but managed to sleep several hours more or less
flat. Has to be obvious that it is not happening just because, I am
suffering a continuous crime by a MOB. Looks like Moriarty is
implemented by making people feel stupid because they were defrauded,
or by offering authorships and then letting them cancel out each
other?

Lex Luthor is yet another expression of the fear the Churches have of
intelligence. It is a convenience myth, that intelligence is
uncontrolable (by wom?) and evil. It doesnt take into account market
economies where endowments and other mechanism, mainly protection to
private property and several respected privacies, grant intelligence
in more than one sense the possibility of generating enough income to
stay out of social crimes and most personal crimes. What results
paradoxic is that intelligence can also discover the crimes of other
people! And other people will want to commit crimes against
intelligent to appropriate its market excedents in excess to what
criminals can get from the market...

Note that in case of huge gravity wells, the owner of wealth enjoys
already such level of consumption utility that in the margin inviting
people to share that consuption wont diminish normal consumption. So
if the holder of wealth is used to feast or use a limo, inviting one
more person costs almost nothing, the marginal costs can be considered
zero. Some people will be willing even to incurr in debt to share that
consumption, again under the expectation of future, sudden wealth.
This observation can applied be to countries too to explain some
migration phenomena, namely, how people trade ther present condition
for the promise of future well being in excess to what they can
achieve in their own countries.

I wonder if judge Alito is considered a realtive of Barttlet? It makes
sense under the Sterens algorithm. It can be seen as a distribution
algorithm that works across country borders.

Etc.

Fabrizio J Bonsignore now and ALWAYS Danilo J Bonsignore