From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Jan  8 23:53:48 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id XAA19061
          for current-outgoing; Mon, 8 Jan 1996 23:53:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA19052
          for <current@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 8 Jan 1996 23:53:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.7.3/8.6.9) id XAA15054; Mon, 8 Jan 1996 23:53:22 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 23:53:22 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199601090753.XAA15054@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: terry@lambert.org
CC: phk@critter.tfs.com, paul@netcraft.co.uk, jkh@time.cdrom.com,
        jehamby@lightside.com, current@FreeBSD.org
In-reply-to: <199601082027.NAA10320@phaeton.artisoft.com> (message from Terry Lambert on Mon, 8 Jan 1996 13:27:28 -0700 (MST))
Subject: Re: Prognosis of 2.2-960107-SNAP
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * I loved putting this to a test once (I happened to know the majority of
 * the people in the room) when someone didn't understand the difference
 * between ontology and epistimology and stated as a "fact" that there
 * would be two people with the same birthday.  There weren't.  It wasn't
 * an impossibility for this to be the case, merely an improbability.

That person's gotta be one of the dumbest guys around, how can the
"guarantee" threshold not be at 366?  Or am I totally misunderstanding
the question? ;)

Satoshi