Returned mail: unknown mailer error 138 (fwd)

Kragen Sitaker (kragen@pobox.com)
Fri, 8 Jan 1999 15:25:11 -0500 (EST)


Looks like (a) hypermail needs to be fixed (perhaps replaced with
pipermail or something else guaranteed to handle errors a little less
violently?) and (b) error mail needs to be directed to Rohit.

-- 
<kragen@pobox.com>       Kragen Sitaker     <http://www.pobox.com/~kragen/>
A good conversation and even lengthy and heated conversations are probably
some of the most important pointful things I can think of.  They are the
antithesis of pointlessness!  -- Matt O'Connor <matthew@anti-earth.org>

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 8 Jan 99 12:08:41 -0800 From: NeXT Mail Agent <Mailer-Agent@XeNT.ics.UCI.edu> To: kragen@dnaco.net Subject: Returned mail: unknown mailer error 138

----- Transcript of session follows ----- sh: 5336 Bus error 554 "|/usr/www/hypermail/bin/hypermail -i -u -d /usr/www/public/FoRK-archive/current -l \"FoRK Archive\" -a /FoRK-archive/"... 554 unknown mailer error 138

----- Unsent message follows ----- Return-Path: <kragen@dnaco.net> Received: from april.dnaco.net by XeNT.ics.UCI.edu (NX5.67f2/NX3.0M) id AA05332; Fri, 8 Jan 99 12:08:41 -0800 Received: from kirk.dnaco.net (kragen@kirk.dnaco.net [207.238.206.3]) by april.dnaco.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA07208; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 14:52:55 -0500 (EST) Received: (from kragen@localhost) by kirk.dnaco.net (8.8.4/8.8.5) id OAA08171; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 14:59:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 14:59:55 -0500 (EST) To: "Robert S. Thau" <rst@ai.mit.edu> Cc: Mike Masnick <mike@techdirt.com>, fork@xent.ICS.uci.edu Subject: Re: people, places, things, and ideas In-Reply-To: <199901081949.OAA05245@beet-chex.ai.mit.edu> Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.96.990108145701.17332l-100000@kirk.dnaco.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: kragen@pobox.com (Kragen Sitaker)

On Fri, 8 Jan 1999, Robert S. Thau wrote: > Economists claim that what they're doing is a science. However, what > you're saying here is that whatever they do fails to meet the basic > criterion of falsifiability.

Well, not any particular specific theory, necessarily, but general theories like people wanting to get maximum benefit, yes. The same thing could be said of essentially all pre-quantitative theories, including most psychological theories.

Psychology is, IMHO, at about the same stage of development that medical science was in in 1800 or 1850. And medical science is still in its infancy.

-- 
<kragen@pobox.com>       Kragen Sitaker     <http://www.pobox.com/~kragen/>
A good conversation and even lengthy and heated conversations are probably
some of the most important pointful things I can think of.  They are the
antithesis of pointlessness!  -- Matt O'Connor <matthew@anti-earth.org>