Top Diaries

oh dear - what an idealist ;-)

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 07:56:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The diary was talking about utopia. As we say in spain:

"Yo do not want soup? then two pots" (of soup instead of one)... so utopia.. so here you have it.. a mega-idealist mega-list... he hehehe

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:25:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Let's dream that Eurotrib is at the head of a global government

Our gift to the world: the truth about the EU budget!

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 06:05:25 PM EST

Snark aside, telling the truth, and being willing to listen to the truth would be wondrous gifts.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 06:06:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That would need to be a gift of Gods, at the very least.

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 06:10:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: ... the whole truth, and nothing but the truth (none / 1)

is that WE all love you, Jerome, to keep and hold... on Eurotribe.

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 06:44:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I said Dream. But I was not that demanding <snark>
Is that correct, Kcurie ?

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 06:08:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Excellent snark...
Well-positioned... just in case you find someone who missunderstands you.

Saying Xmas is awful close to Christmas eve and then writing about europia.. well someone may think that you are, I do not know... a warrior in the war against christmas scrrened in Fox news?

Snark is the best camoflauge in time of war.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 06:24:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"Irony is the best weapon agaist despair". I am too tired now to google for the author of that quote. Think it is Milan Kundera.
Sweet dreams everybody. At least on this side of the Atlantic.

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 06:28:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

About Irony (4.00 / 4)

This quote from Lawrence Durrell's "Justine": "...for those of us who feel deeply and who are at all conscious of the inextricable tangle of human thought there is only one response to be made - ironic tenderness and silence."

"Dieu se rit des hommes qui se plaignent des conséquences alors qu'ils en chérissent les causes" Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet

by Melanchthon on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 06:53:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: About Irony (none / 0)

Anyone who quotes Lawrence Durrell gets a 4.

It's the Law. Obey it!

;-)

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 10:18:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

See you all in the European Parliament in 2014.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 06:54:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I dream of a sustainable economic order, a tolerant social order and an organic, free-association political order.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 06:59:23 PM EST

sounds good to me

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 07:57:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You must be a dangerous subversive.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 08:12:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

you already know that I am.

Everything has to be rethought...

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Dec 19th, 2005 at 08:44:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes this is exactly by dream... my utopia is much more further as my post can attest.

In my dream I always add "organic,fre-association city-state political order"... I never forget how many new ideas , frames and symbiology I like came for the state-cities in the past.

Details.. only details.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:30:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I think that is a wonderful list. If we achieve those, it will be so very much easier to tackle the rest.

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within." Cicero

by Grandma M on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:34:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hm.... in no particular order:

end of slavery (especially of of children, women)
socialist democracy in place of totalitarian dictatures
same in place of 'mild' dictatures
end of US imperialism and nationalism
end of Chinese nationalism
end of every other nationalism
end of capital
destroy all WMD
universal gun control
universal health care
universal organic farming
universal and distributed regenerative power generation
plow up all highways
transeurasian high-speed rail
100m space telescope
travel ot Mars and Venus
compulsory teaching of Dawkins's: The Selfish Gene (especially in Rehovot and Barcelona! :-) )

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 09:37:12 AM EST

compulsory teaching of Dawkins's: The Selfish Gene (especially in Rehovot and Barcelona! :-) )

Oh, come on!

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 09:40:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, I'm sure someone dreams of making the reading of Lewontin's Biology as Ideology: The Doctrine of DNA compulsory especially in Budapest :-)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 09:56:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I mean, if you're going to make the teaching of evolution mandatory you could choose a text that arouses less controversy among evolutionary biologists.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 10:05:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I mean, if you're going to make the teaching of evolution mandatory

Isn't it already? At least in Rehovot and Barcelona?

you could choose a text that arouses less controversy among evolutionary biologists.

Well, arousing controversy was the goal...

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 10:35:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

That controversy (none / 0)

Some funny quotes (funny at least to me) - first a typical criticism from the opposed side, in from Val Dusek:

Dawkins, on the other hand, does not make explicit social policy pronouncements. ...he has never made the sort of open political and policy statements as had E. O. Wilson. Dawkins appears to be solely concerned with the defense and propagation of Science... Dawkins' ideology is contained in his biological cosmology. He produces the ideas scientific model for the social Darwinist without drawing any explicit social Darwinist conclusions. Dawkins work is ideology in an even stronger sense that E. O. Wilson's precisely because none of it is explicit. Dawkins can present himself as the pure scientist in contrast to Gould and Lewontin precisely by feigning political unconsciousness and indifference.

Aha, he is biased because he doesn't show it! Now some from Dawkins:

Rose et al cannot substantiate their allegation about sociobiologists believing in inevitable genetic determination, because the allegation is a simple lie...
As I am described in the book as "the most reductionist of sociobiologists", I can speak with authority here. I believe that Bach was a musical man. Therefore of course, being a good reductionist, I must obviously believe that Bach's brain was made of musical atoms!...
We are promised "an alternative world view"... "Dialectical" biology! And what exactly is dialectical biology? Well--think, for example:

"of the baking of a cake: the taste of the product is the result of a complex interaction of components--such as butter, sugar, and flour--exposed for various periods to elevated temperatures; it is not dissociable into such-or-such a percent of flour, such-or-such of butter, etc., although each and every component. . . has its contribution to make to the final product."
When put like that, this dialectical biology seems to make a lot of sense. Perhaps even I can be a dialectical biologist. Come to think of it, isn't there something familiar about that cake? Yes, here it is, in a 1981 publication by the most reductionist of sociobiologists:

"... If we follow a particular recipe, word for word, in a cookery book, what finally emerges from the oven is a cake. we cannot now break the cake into its component crumbs and say: this crumb corresponds to the first word in the recipe; this crumb corresponds to the second word in the recipe, etc. With minor exceptions such as the cherry on top, there is no one-to-one mapping from words of recipe to `bits' of cake. The whole recipe maps onto the whole cake."

(Presented one-sided, as said, to arouse controversy - in truth I like Gould as much as Dawkins, and laugh at a big battle of strawmen on both sides.)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 11:10:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

But you meant worldwide. Dawkins provides a straw man for creationists to attack evolution by attacking his most outrageous and speculative ideas as representative of mainstream evolutionary theory, and contested by reputable biologists.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 11:11:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Similarly, with punctuated equilibrum and later talking of it in a way allowing a saltationist interpretation, Eldredge and Gould provided a straw man for creationists to attack evolution by attacking their most outrageous and speculative ideas as representative of mainstream evolutionary theory, and contested by reputable biologists.

Please...

But you meant worldwide.

I meant humorously, directed at another ET reader who already expressed his wish of eradicating the other side in the debate.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 11:18:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I am not proposing to teach punctuated equilibrium as standard evolutionary biology.

And I gave you the controversy you wanted, on purpose.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 11:22:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I am not proposing to teach punctuated equilibrium as standard evolutionary biology.

To be honest, I would teach both.

(BTW, in astronomy, there was/is a similar controversy that was about even more basic ideas, there were even deeper ideological blinders in the background, but the sides managed to fight without getting personal. The issue is whether redshift [the shift of all extra-galatical objets' spectral lines towards longer wavelengths] is a function of distance, hence due to the expansion of the universe; or not. The latter side looked for examples of interacting objects with wildly different redshits, and their statistical probability, and did have a point. The general audience is not aware of this, we were taught both. Another such thing was the steady-state universe proponents.)

And I gave you the controversy you wanted, on purpose.

Yipee, tough I wished to have it with that someone else who started it.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 11:36:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

One addition:

a justice system that gets half of all US leaders behind bars as war criminals, and three quarters of European leaders for corruption
death to leaking walkmans, ghettoblasters, car radios, 120dB party hi-fi sets and other unwanted-unavoidable noisemakers (didn't slept much tonight...)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 09:42:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree with every one of it. Specially the last one.. it is important to remember how a religious book looks like... (snark....if Migeru gives you controversy.. I can give it to you hundred times!! je jeje jeje)

Controversy, controversy.....always go to the sources

The scientists against the perfid scientific impostors Me myself chose to adapt the title of the letter.. je je jejeje..

A huge hug dodo.. merry christmas

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 01:52:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

...always go to the sources

...of your religion? :-)

A huge hug dodo.. merry christmas

(hugs back after getting some air) you too, and solinvictus!

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:07:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

sources of controversy.. of controversy...the original controversy..you have the link to the first letter and the answer of wilson down..so you can also read with no problem your profet if you wish :)... so we go to the origins of this sociobiology and cultural gene evolution mania...It was like a present. Nobody reads the classical any more.. even less if it is a classical fight.

Dodo dodo...as you may well know I do not have any religion.. not even science

By the way I had to look for sol invinctus.. which comes to show that I do not know everything.. surprising, isn'it...je jejeje

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:01:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nobody reads the classical any more.. even less if it is a classical fight.

Dawkins was my clever diversion! Or, was it a diversion? (And was it clever?)

(writes up EO Wilson: Sociobiology: The New Synthesis and AWF Edwards: Human genetic diversity: Lewontin's fallacy on Solinvictus presents-to-friends shopping list)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:17:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I love when Edwards tries to defend cluster analysis.. ej jejejej. Being in Rehovot, origin of a lot of the statistics used for clustering analysis just beside my door, it is rather funny to see it so strongly defended...when it is not necessary.

I love when scientists ,to defend a certain approach, defend an obvious statement to the end which has no relation whatsoever with the ideological point they want to make....and yes, defending clustering and principal component analysis (in a sense) is a very interesting and easy stuff to defend.

Pity that the results are basically useless in the analysis of genes and races (genetic-proteic network anybody? if you are so ready to use clustring... include the whole net available, isn't it? I bet that you will get an extremelly reduced correlation and an awful signal to noise ratio...oh wait.. this is not basically what the present human-genome-project-without-the-proteins-damned says?)...All you need is a little change in the Lewotin's falacy/statement to make it completely true. Do I really need to make the correct statement? I think it is not necessary. I am wondering if he thought that the change was obvious or he really did not take into account that sometimes you get excellent correlation if you already predetermine the subset you are looking for and add a small dosis of noise....no he knew..he thought it was pointless regarding the idea he was trying to transmit.. which by all accounts it is absolutely true still to this day regarding any scientist I know.

I enjoyed very much...really.. some people are desperate :) or maybe they just wanted to defend what he is doing...after all there are a lot of people working an eating thanks to it. Great to read it.. good gift.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:31:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I knew Edwards would be an excellent second choice :-)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:38:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This caught my interest! (none / 0)

More sober today, I read some of the stuff we threw at each others' head for fun yesterday. I found 'the classics' less impressive - previously, I was under the impression that criticism of Wilson is much more founded on actual positions than that of Dawkins, but, sorry, now the 1975 exchange seems another strawman-fest... But what I'd be interested in is what you wrote above against Edwards (strictly as the wanting-to-learn amateur asking the profesional!)

When I read his four-page article (I originally thought it's a book!), what I thought soundly disproves him was something I read just from his one-time co-author he mentions in the article: the predominance of clines, and their utter lack of correlation, in actual human genetic diversity. So first question: do you agree on that, or should I know about some red flags regarding Cavalli-Sforza's (et al) work too?

genetic-proteic network anybody?

For practical purposes, can't they be separated into gene and protein networks? (This was just my hunch, but I found an article (pdf!!!) that seems to claim just this - is it accepted or even relevant here?)

I bet that you will get an extremelly reduced correlation and an awful signal to noise ratio

What trait of proteins introduces such an increased noise in inheritance? Different timescales?

Do I really need to make the correct statement?

Yes, explain your Prophet :-) What I can't fit together is, doesn't Edwards address just that point on predetermined samples on page 3 of his article? (Not that his treatment has practical consequences - he doesn't give any actual correlation numbers from any real studies, and real studies I suppose contradict him, see second from top paragraph.)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 09:13:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

je je jejeje..

???

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 10:21:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That's Spanish for " he he hehehe."

Hey -- does this mean I'm bi-lingual?

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 10:36:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Much Grass! <n/t> (none / 0)

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 10:54:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

de nada (none / 0)

I'm on a roll!

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 11:13:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Erg . . . Dawkins (none / 0)

Now, I'm no biologist, so I'm really not in a position to argue the merits of Dawkins' position from the standpoint of general evolutionary theory. I am not inclined to support it, but acknowledge this to be an irrational opinion based on far too little reading for it to be an informed irrational opinion.

However, I was an anthropologist for quite some time, and have found the influence of him and Wilson to be thoroughly toxic in that field. Sociobiology/ Evolutionary Psychology is oftentimes nothing more than ridiculous, yet because of its connections with evolutionary theory it "seems" scientific, and thus gains a following far out of proportion to its quality.

Admittedly, the fact that mainstream Anglo/American anthropology (standing up for complex cultural and historical context as opposed to biological, economic, or rational determinism) tends to shoot itself in the foot with incomprehensible prose and a faddish trendiness has not helped its cause in the realm of general perception, nor has the more or less wholesale abandonment by many, if not most, of its practicioners of the very notion of science, and its commitment to dialog with the general public and other academics in general.

But still.

by Zwackus on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 09:23:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Government or god? (none / 1)

The changes I could make as head of government would still be constrained by political reality; those made by God would not be.

If God I would simply abolish evil. Just like that.

If government head, the first priority is to establish genuine democracy, worldwide, in a massive global parliament. Freedom of speech, religion, etc, for all. This of course would lead to national elections in all currently-dictatorial countries.

Following is a international armed force to restore order in areas torn by civil war. Once civil wars are over, demobilization of child soldiers rapidly follows. As legitimacy of international armed force grows, national armies can be disbanded and force rarely used to settle disputes.

Then comes economic development. Rich countries must cancel debt owed by, eliminate tariffs against, and remove subsidies competing with poor countries. Poor countries must cease to use ethnic/religious demagoguery, dismantle red tape and corrupt regulations, and respect the rule of law.

Now we concentrate on the micro level. Universal vaccination, universal primary/secondary education, clean water for all. Funding to come from rich countries if poor countries' growth is insufficient. Female genital mutilation, dowry murders, caste discrimination, and slavery outlawed, and this time the laws actually enforced.

Some decades will be needed for poor countries to catch up to rich. Rich countries provide funding for construction of schools, roads, etc. as needed if poor countries get stuck. Gradually phase out child labour as countries grow richer. Construct social safety nets; should reach Scandinavian standards by the time countries reach Scandinavian GDP levels.

by tyronen on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 01:15:47 PM EST

Re: Government or god? (none / 0)

Ok just for the sake of arguing ... because my program's debugging is causing me grief, I come here to bicker ;))

Like it was well illustrated by Umberto Eco's the name of the rose, there can be no good without evil.

In essence all men are born non-evil (and non-good). A child coming out of a woman's womb is born with absolutely no pre-conception whatever of foul play. He may be born with genetic memory about things like "doing anything for survival", but even those things bear no connotation to evil, as that is a notion that requires constructive cognition and a place to exercise it in (society, nature ...).

So in essence, all men learn evil through education and experience. And, as I cannot believe that there is any aspect of education or experience that can't be undone by more education and experience, no man is doomed to be evil (bar a few with mental diseases, but in their case it's not even their fault, it's their brain organ that's failing them, just like your liver or kidney could fail you).

This taken into account, there is no evil on Earth, only imperfect people who are or aren't aware of the evil they are capable of.

We are all therefore capable of pure evil, because we have learned through education and experience what evil is, and we all exercise evil one way or another, as one man's good is another man's evil ... but I believe that most of us decide/agree/learn to abide by certain society rules that prevent us from being only totally evil.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 01:36:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If I were president of France, I would declare poverty illegal. Policemen would patrol the streets to enforce the law, and when an offender would be found sleeping under a bridge, in a cardboard box, during winter, the cops would have orders to rough him off: "how dare you be poor? here (gently slaps the guy or pulls his ear), take this (hands a one thousand euro banknote) and I better not catch you at it again, you punk".

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 01:47:30 PM EST

2nd measure: I would declare polygamy compulsory. Every man would be able to wed any woman, and inversely. With a legal minimum of 2. This way everyone would be part of the same family, and all the needless machado sexual shit that drives the world (it's not money, it's sex that drives the world) would be considerably reduced.

Though instead of being limited, jealously could just as well skyrocket with such a measure, some studies need to be made. We eurotribbers could constitute an initial population sample.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 01:51:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Been Done (none / 0)

The Oneida Colony in upstate New York had a group marriage thing going (hetero only). As usual with intentional communities it lasted until the founder died.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 10:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Been Done (none / 0)

The Mormons are still around. And Oneida still makes some nice silverware.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 11:09:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Erk (none / 0)

Hate to burst your bubble but Oneida no longer makes silverware -- they buy it from China and distribute it under their own name.

Mormon men had multiple wives (bigamy) but the women were stuck with one hubby. The LDS now frown upon the practice although Mormon Wing-nuts still have the practice 'tho the leaders (men) are being sued for doing so. As well they should be; forcing 14 year old girls into 'marriage' is ... distasteful.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 11:47:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Erk (none / 0)

Yes, the Mormon's version was different, but they were an intentional community that's still around although their founder has died.

But, damn! That silverware thing is harsh. I'm really disillusioned... please -- don't tell me anything about Paul Revere...

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 11:59:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

i really find your comments amusing alex (none / 1)

this one reminded me of cocteau's (i think) famous quote:

'i am a tramp (clochard) under a bridge of gold'

and here's another one i love from winston churchill - no not the one here lol):

'we are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars'

or ' we are all worms, but some of us are glow-worms'

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Tue Dec 27th, 2005 at 05:41:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I realized that as a heterosexual I forgot to consider my homosexual friends. Ok so change the comment above to "every man/woman would be forced to wed at least 2 men/women".

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 01:52:55 PM EST

If president of the world, I would call for the terraforming of Mars so that we can ship all our fauna/flora over there, and declare Mars a solar system reserve. On Earth, I'd enforce moving all of humanity below the surface, so that the surface could be left to all the plants, animals and crop. The surface would be easily accessible for strollers, loiterers, tourists, lovers, travellers. Dropping a cigarette butt or even a tiny bit of garbage on the surface would be punishable with surface ecology community work.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:00:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What would you do with the isolationist triangles?

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:01:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hehehe very very good one Jérôme.

Damn, these would be problematic (but nevertheless illegal!), as they would break the chain that would make everyone part of the same family. Though come to think of it, 2 couples could form a isolationist quator too. And the problem will repeat itself with hexa-groups etc etc. I think we're going to need that eurotribber sample population to experiment and find a solution, as pure math won't work on social behaviour.

Then again perhaps we could add a non-isolationist clause, by which no group of spouses can be isolated (no person of a group of N people can be married to exactly the same number/identity of people that everyone else in the N group is married to).

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:15:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually, something genealogists have long suspected and DNA is now showing, is that we already are basically in the same family. People in isolated communities above the arctic circle have strands of DNA from people in Polynesia and strands of DNA from Africans is found in shopkeepers in England and pretty much everyone has a little of something in their DNA.

In studying genes passed pretty much intact through the mothers, they've found that over 90% of the population in the west comes from only 7 women. I might be a little off on the specifics, but I'm sure one of our scientists here can further enlighten us?

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:46:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yeah, I've heard about some such study, and I can't wait for the day when the human genome will be totally decoded so that we can buy Made in China trinkets that go beep beep beep when we shake hands with someone in the street (beep crrrrr processing crrrrr match found, this person and you share a common ancestor 7 generations back beeep would you like trivia addition click yes. clic. triva addition processed beep crrr this common ancestor is also the father of the common ancestor of Saddam Hussein and George Bush beep crrrr)

These days I'm watching after a friend's pet mouse (friend left on holiday). And even when I stare at this tiny white mouse with red eyes, I get the feeling that we're cousins with a very similar DNA.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:54:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Eve and her sisters (4.00 / 2)

Hi there Izzy,

When I started my study at the end of the nineties the fight between the Out of Africa and the Multiregional origin of Homo Sapiens was at fever pitch. The signs are more and more convincingly swinging to the Out of Africa theory, but well... In science, you're only right as long as you're not disproven.

What you talk about is the myth of Eve and mitochondrial DNA, which pass intact only through women. In the early nineties, people ran a statistical test on mitochondrial DNA and found that it all boiled to one common ancestor, some 100.000 years ago. One woman, at the cradle of mankind. Eve. This is of course a nice story, so it got lots of attention in the press and gained traction. Now, if there is one thing more unreliable than politicians, it is statistics and this perfect number of one doesn't mean much at all. But the method itself proved convincingly enough, so more tests have been done and now people end up with 7 women, 100 women or 1000 women. There's nothing definite there.

The one thing that does tell us something is that, apparently, at least 90% of all human DNA must have passed through one and the same genetical bottleneck of a very small population. One group of intermixing humans as the sole basis of 90% of every human on this earth. And that is one of the most convincing arguments Africa is indeed the birthplace of modern man. (I prefer modern man above Homo Sapiens (wise man), since we haven't been proven that wise just yet.) The second thing to note is that the human race in this case could have balanced on the razor's edge of extinction.

Note that the remaining 10% also represent tribes in Africa such as the remarkable, but almost thoroughly destroyed, San people which never left Africa and had very little interbreeding with other tribes. The San are in that respect truly ancient. If you want to meet proto-humans, look at the San.

But then again, 51 percent of our genes we share with cabbage....

by Nomad (Bjinse) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 06:07:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Eve and her sisters (4.00 / 2)

I prefer modern man above Homo Sapiens (wise man), since we haven't been proven that wise just yet.)

Have a 4!

San people which never left Africa and had very little interbreeding with other tribes. he San are in that respect truly ancient.

(I know you hate it, but I can't stop it) nitty-pi-nit-picking: lack of interbreeding doesn't mean lack of change, hence doesn't mean being 'ancient'. This picture originates in a mixing of Linné's taxonomy with the theory of common descent.

Non-nitpicking: according to research by Cavalli-Sforza and others, the San actually carry the genes of a large back-migration from Asia 20,000 years ago - not ancient and African-only at all!

51 percent of our genes we share with cabbage....

If it is produced proteins rather than base pairs that counts, we probably share 0% of genes with cabbage. (I.e., even a change in one base pair on a 1000-base-pair gene makes a protein with different properties, so small differences in the genes are enough for a completely different chemistry.)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 06:32:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks, Nomad. The above part was what I was referring to. I've only read in passing about the Eve and "out of Africa" controversies. However, knowing academic-types, I have no doubt the conflict was huge and polarizing -- I actually love that about academic types! In fact, I think I might be that type myself, only without the formal academics to back it up in most cases. ;-)

But thanks for giving the proper history and names to this stuff. I've loved reading about the mitochondrial dna studies and it's good to hear about the San (and from you, too, DoDo).

I also read that there's a controversy from these same studies involving the "missing link." Do you know anything about it? Last I read, it was quite heated because the dna seemed to be showing there wouldn't be a missing link. Have you heard of this, or was I reading an unreliable source?

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 07:29:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't have the slightest clue as to what this could be about. (Missing link between which two evolutionary stages?) Could you find your source for checking?

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 07:55:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Dang! I was being the lazy one asking you guys! Okay, I'll go check and be back...

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 08:07:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh, DoDo... the horror, the horror...

Okay, I looked around and had to shovel through mountains of links by the !@#* religious fanatics. Remind me to abolish the phrase "missing link" from my vocabulary. It's evidently some hot-button, rubbish term that people throw around in the evolution argument.

Full disclosure: I was raised in part and schooled almost entirely by religious fanatics, so at times this is revealed by my concepts of "normal" and "common knowledge." Most of the corridors of my brain where this stuff is stored have been revisited and updated, but occasionally I'll stumble across one of them. Tragically, eighth grade science was overseen by the baptists.

Even fuller disclosure: I recently went through a very long period of ill-health followed by an even worse period of medical treatment. The up-side is that I got to do a lot of reading. The down-side is that some of it is like trying to remember things through a fever. This dna thing is one of those things (sadly, a subject I probably never would have read about in normal circumstances).

So you see, my off-hand comment was the result of an almost "perfect storm" of ignorance. BUT! It turns out that however improperly I conveyed and remembered it, there was some connection in there.

It was indeed another controversy from the mitochondrial DNA study that spawned the "Eve" and "Africa" controversies. It was saying that neanderthal man and modern man are two distinct species.

Here's a link on BBC.

It also may or may not have something to do with Mungo Man from Australia. At this point, I'm so lost I may need to hire a guide -- I have television to watch and I don't think I can get there from here. Besides, I can't take stumbling across any more creationist links... you're on your own, DoDo. If asked, I'll deny I ever heard of any of this...

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 09:36:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Eve and her sisters (none / 1)

You may try to further deny it, but I know that you know that I know that you definitely know all your movie classics.

PS: by reading your comment, something came to mind. I was wondering about the name "Eve". So here I am, wondering if the name is somehow, etymologically or customarily, connected to the expression "the eve of mankind". If this were to be the case, then why wasn't "Adam of mankind" chosen? (this is not a complaint at all, just a question) While we're at it, why isn't it "Eve's apple" (you know, that thing beneath the chin)?

About the apple, I think I have an idea. It must have something to do with Eve's taste for them. But for the mankind thing ... no clue. Then again, this is mere speculation, perhaps in "eve of mankind" the "eve" is merely the word from the which the Proper name Eve was derived. We'll never know ... unless you do a bit of google for us, Izzy?

Ok I'm off to bed (4am here, and last night I crashed at 10am -not good-) so g'night all.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 09:59:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Eve and her sisters (none / 1)

I have no idea what you're talking about. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. All I know is that I was born in a cross-fire hurricane and I howled at my ma in the drivin' rain, but it's all right now...

P.S. I also don't know where the name Eve comes from. I have no definitive knowledge that the word "eve" is short for evening and commonly refers to the the period before the end. But I did learn from the fanatics that Adam's apples are from where Adam choked on the fruit of the poisoned tree that Eve tempted him with. Poor Adam -- his throat fought manfully...

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 11:00:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Eve and her sisters (none / 1)

Remind me to abolish the phrase "missing link" from my vocabulary. It's evidently some hot-button, rubbish term that people throw around in the evolution argument.

Well - you don't have to abolish it, but to get where those fanatics get it wrong, think about it: simply put, if you discover a missing link, you'll have two new links missing! E.g., successive discoveries in graphic fashion:

We---------|--------------|---|-------Lucy
We---------|------|-------|---|-------Lucy
We---------|------|-----|-|---|-------Lucy
We---------|------|-----|-|---|----|--Lucy

It was saying that neanderthal man and modern man are two distinct species... It also may or may not have something to do with Mungo Man from Australia.

Ah, that: yes, both of those are part of the multiregionalist vs. Out Of Africa controversy (which creationists like to twist around). Simply put, for the last one million years, archeologists distinguish multiple lineages of humanoids in the fossil record, and the debate indeed rages about whether they were only 'races' and evolved in tandem into today's humans with some interbreeding (multiregionalism), or whether the African lineage took over from all the others beginning 100,000 years ago (Out Of Africa / African Eve), or whether the Africans dominate but they assimilated the other lineages (don't know if this was named). (BTW, this shows that my above missing links 'graph' is gross over-simplification: in human ancestors we are looking at relatives so close that direct ancestry vs. regional intra-species differences vs. diverging lineage can't easily be distinguished...)

Last I read of this, neither the DNA evidence nor the fossils with apparently mixed features settled the debate (i.e. the interpretation of both evidences was criticised by the other side) - but last I read was more than a year ago, I would have to read up... (and ask around, maybe kcurie has something newer on the DNA evidence part).

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 08:08:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks, DoDo. You're last paragraph answers the original question I asked that set me on this treacherous path.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:15:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, they would not be illegal, that's the problem.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:04:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Indeed indeed, I initially thought you were talking about a threesome of some kind, but then DoDo's bisexual remark made me understand your initial comment.

But we do agree that they wouldn't work out among heterosexuals, as there is bound to be either 2 men or 2 women in such a triangle (and thus only one candidate of the other sex).

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:07:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry I'm having so much trouble to catch up but is that about polygamy or ecology ?

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:20:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Polygamy I think (3 people forming a closed group, refusing to abide by the compulsory "minimum 2 spouse" law).

But Jérôme, sharp as always, raises a good point. For this to work (everyone to be part of the same family), we'd have to ensure that no isolationist group can exist.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:22:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

(3 people forming a closed group, refusing to abide by the compulsory "minimum 2 spouse" law)

Refusing to abide by? You forget bisexuals!

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:42:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I sense a trap in your comment but I can't put my finger on it ;)

Ahhh yes, you're right about bisexuals. And in fact that may also work for some number of homosexual among the three (apart from the obvious all three being same sex and homosexuals example, but I'm too lazy to figure out combinations).

You're right, they would be legal (would break the non-isolationist clause I weakly suggested above => ie. in bisexual case any spouse is with the other two, so none is with the same two spouses as any other).

Ok we definitely are going to need that eurotrib sample. People, it's your duty as utopian human beings to submit to this experiment.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:50:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: ET sample : who's volunteering ? (none / 0)

a bisexual experiment ? I am afraid I will not be up to it. I'm fine with polygamy but fiercely heterosexual (speaking for myself).

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:57:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: ET sample : who's volunteering ? (none / 0)

Well I'm sure we'll find a way to fit everyone in one category or another. Then we can rename Eurotrib.com to polygamysect.com and we'll be all set and ready.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:03:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh, Alex, so smart yet so young...

Are you really proposing marriage to promote familial feeling and harmony? ahahahahahahah (wipes tear from eye)... that's a good one! I'll have to tell that one to my first husband. I won't tell the second 'cause I'd rather see him in hell than give him a laugh.

Seriously, though -- polygamy just doesn't work. Actually, in the US, especially in the 30s, there were a lot of interesting utopian communities. An astounding number of them wanted a bunch of sex... I mean, wanted to explore the, um, legal boundaries of the marriage compact and redefine familial... whatever. They did things like saying everyone was married to everyone else. These arrangements always crumbled in large groups. Even when it was expressly forbidden, people formed pair-bonds and snuck around being monogamous.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:28:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Awwwwww but hey, like kcurie said this is the Utopia thread! Yet you seem to have uncovered my master plan of attempting to promote polygamy on ET.

But really, I'm more interested in the notion that everyone could be part of the same family. Even if people choose to hang in pair-bonds when married to several other people, at least their marriage to others ensures a family link. Imagine that ... walking in the street, bumping into someone, and knowing that somehow that person is the child of a person married to someone married to someone married ... to at least one of your parents!

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:41:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: polygamy on ET or within ET ? snark (none / 0)

You would have had my full support on that one, Migeru. Plus this would have been no problem ; entirely virtual...

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:48:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

my master plan of attempting to promote polygamy on ET

Polygamy, headscarves, nuns' habits, masks... The whole deal!

(This is Utopia, or what?)

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:01:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Disclaimer/Warning: I am not a pervert ;)
But the world needs a lot of love, you know?

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:06:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Perversion is of this imperfect world, my son.

There are no perverts in Utopia. Only love.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:58:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ahh afew, would you like some candy?

(this above was my attempt at personal worst joke of the year 2005, I have to hurry seeing as how the year is almost over)

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:00:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You mean it took you all year to make up such a bad joke?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:06:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well I've been busy pulling off bad jokes which weren't nominees for worst joke of the year. Now I need to focus.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:09:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually there is a culture lost in the polynesia.. or was it in Africa that actually...nooo ok no.. this kind of family no.. if you make it you are the first...

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:04:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Total agreement. Polygamy is a marxist concept ; an utopy impossible to implement. This damned property instinct in us humane beings. That's like you wanted to ban jealousy. Both my first and second husband agree (not joking).

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:46:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

hehehe, I think I've scored high on the Utopia-o-meter!

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:57:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think the French Prime Minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, is going to send a police squad over here soon. According to some members of his political group, polygamy was the cause for the recent riots in France. And here I am, promoting bilateral polygamy.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:00:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're kidding! My knowledge of politics hardly compares to that of gossips, but the latter could be more useful here : I cannot figure out how Nicolas could not support us : he's been supporting polygamy by his own acts. His future ex-wife, Ceacilia, was handed over to him by Jacques Martin (so old I guess he is dead by now) and he talked her into an affair with number 2 of Publicis just to annoy Dominique de Villepin (or is it the other way round?)

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:07:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Very astute remark!!!

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:09:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I am sensing sarcasm there. Am I paranoid ?

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:51:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No no, no sarcasm at all! I don't actually practice sarcasm unless I explicitly say so, like ("ok sarcasm aside" or "i'll stop being sarcastic now"). I don't really like sarcasm in fact, it's kind of agressive.

Your remark is good.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:55:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I am so bad at everything that is even remotely computer related that it took me some time to go and check the rating. So apologies and thank you for the 4.

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:11:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Catch you!!!

there are recorded cultures where such a thing as jealousy does not exist..And property..uff proeprty is in no way embedded in nothing.. there are so many examples of no-property cultures..or with a very different way of understanding it that it has nothing to do with our notion of property.

Funny enough I had te exact conversation with Izzy regarding property just yesterday.. Really, no preperty cultures are easy to understand, no property concept.. easy.. but there is this wonderful Austrilian aborigens (so-called) with an idea of property so different... if you can take a look in google.. wonderful people.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:37:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If you don't allow yourself to think you own someone you can't be jealous. Which ties in nicely with the concept of property. La maté porque era mía, verdad Kcurie?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:39:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

why you always have to say the things much more better and clear (this comment just the last of a long list of cases)...jesus!!! I am jelous.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:52:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You can't own ideas, how can you be jealous? Wait, that's what the whole battle over intellectual property is about! Now I get it! It's all just a transfer of repressed sexual impulses!

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 06:02:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Would you do a diary on these people sometime?

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:41:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Great. Although I do not think anybody will read it.

Actually the interesting topic will not be jealousy on property...which I think it will not engage people... it will be long list of differnt notions (I already talked with Izzy.. int he diary about female quotas.. a part is ther). The proper focus will be jealous in love relations...this is something!!!

I think this may like people around here...

OK I will try to make a nice diary!!!!

Thanks for the idea..!!!

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:57:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Great. Although I do not think anybody will read it.

Hey, as Alex put it, it's not money, it's sex that drives the world, so no such worries!

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 06:06:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm not supposed to admit this, but I was once totally biased in my job. I had to recruit 2 candidates for a team, and I interviewed over a dozen people. No matter how much I tried not to judge, I couldn't help but notice that the male candidates enjoyed bragging, and were all posturing along the lines of "of course I know how to do that". The female candidates on the other hand, were soft-spoken, more humble, and would posture along the lines of "well I may not be very good at that yet, but I'm sure I can learn". I ended up picking two women, and not because they were cute (though they actually were). I was proven to be right in the end, as they were solid and fun to work with.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 06:40:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I would read your diary ! (none / 0)

Looking forward to it. In the meantime, have a wonderful Christmas time.

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 08:53:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I would read your diary ! (none / 0)

Thanks !!1
YOu toooooo!!!!!!

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 11:49:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Just make everyone marry one man and one woman.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:18:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Suported!!!

By the way , did you now that if you count the number of cultures which are bisexual, homosexual or heterosexual...bisexual wins by far!!! of course. you have to use the notion of "different culture" which is not always easy... and of course do not take into account the total number of people in each culture....

But ei....bisexual is the winner...and now that it is oK for science to look into it, wait for more species with clear bisexual patterns (more than the presently known)... who said that science is not, at least slightly, socially constructed. Except thermodynamics.. thermodynamics is sacred...well almost..the closest thing to a religion I have.. but still away from it.. for the moment.

Now I quit you.. I have to repeat my daily proverbs to Carnot

Oh Carnot, so up in the skies
we here still recall you
in the cold and in the warm
with and without your motor
Give all us the heat of today
forgive our inefficiencies
just in the same way we forgive
other inefficiencies.
And do not let us think
we can break the secon law
For the century and centuries
Amen

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:46:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

lol! (none / 0)

See? This is why everyone thinks you're so funny! :-)

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 07:32:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

(1) Economic and political freedom in Asia, the Middle East and Africa, along with rapid development.
(2) Renewed rapid growth in EU countries, a la the post-WWII "Great Keynesian Boom," especially in France and Germany's immigrant communities.
(3) More innovation in the energy sector, worldwide.
(4) The Iraqis making a great success out of American failure and stupidity.
(5) A constitutional amendment protecting the Right to Privacy, everywhere.
(6) Howard Dean resigning from the DNC chair and winning the presidency in '08 with Wes Clark as his VP, and then annihilating the budget deficit and saving Social Security from the looting of the last five years.
(7) Avoiding a recession in Britain, and higher salaries for academics there. (Okay, that will be the only wish that is in my own self-interest.)

(8) A federalist EU.
(9) The bankruptcy of Microsoft, preferably via some scandal (so that the world will know that Bill Gates makes garbage and has all the economic knowledge of a rock), and the renewal of Apple dominance in PCs.
(10) The end of the American Republican Party, or at least the Christian Right.
(11) The elimination of militant nationalism, because, while I have no problem with loving one's country and history, I believe nationalism will be a threat in years to come.

Many other things, but those are the first few that come to mind.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:22:53 PM EST

Oh, one more in my own self-interest:
(12) To find a company that makes flat-caps that will fit my large, Celtic head properly.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:28:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

and the renewal of Apple dominance in PCs

Aaaaaaa!!! No way!! Apples are great, agreed, but they are on the opposite side of the scale to Windows that Linux is on. Linux, though extremely annoying during the first few months of use, is really terrific because it's utterly customizable. Apples are hardly customizable. Windows is moderately customizable.

To resume: Mac OS is solid, efficient, but barely customizable. It is like wearing a life-lasting soviet garment that comes in only one size. Windows is moderately efficient, somewhat weak, but somewhat customizable. It is like wearing a pair of imitation Levi's (for being so mainstream). Linux is very efficient, ultra solid, and utterly customizable. It is like being naked inside an armoured and custom-built car that's hard to drive at first.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 02:34:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes, but I know nothing about customizing computers. I can turn the thing on, open the internet and the word processor, and...that's about it. My experience with Windows has been a nightmare. Slow, ugly, expensive (and without any real innovations that I can see for the average user), and so on.

Apples are also cheaper than the tech press leads people to believe. My iBook was about $1050, thanks to the education discount. A comparable Dell would've cost a couple hundred bucks more. A Sony would've cost about a thousand more.

Linux is great, if you know computers. Apple is great if, like Linux users, you hate Windows, but, unlike Linux users, you're an idiot when it comes to how the damned things work.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:02:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well you're certainly right.

My few experiences with Apples have always been good. These things work flawlessly. But being a computer nerd, I hate not being able to dive into the thing and tear it apart. Windows has its good sides too actually, to be fair, but it's so damn expensive for what it is! And besides, I find it incredible that when some non-nerd friend of mine buys a computer these days, his/her computer is pre-fitted with Windows! Talk about monopoly!!!

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:14:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

C'mon, get an Apple AND a Linux computer.

After all, you're the one who advocated polygamy :-)

by Bernard (bernard) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:42:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Argh, you just poked me in the ribs with that one!

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 03:56:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And now we know why you had two screens...

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:00:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Isn't Mac OS X just BSD Unix under the hood?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:41:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

hehehe how would I know?
Mac OS is the OS of Apples, no? What's Mac OS X?
I'll look it up, I know as much about Apples as I know about movies showing in cinemas in Tehran. I've used Apples at times, but the last time was something like 3 years ago.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:45:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

OS X is the tenth edition of the Mac OS, and I think Migeru is right that it's basically Unix under the hood.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:48:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's mostly bsd under the hood. Some things are apple-ised weirdly, such as device drivers (unfamiliar incantations for optical device access) and the X11 port is, well, not stellar, but usable. The "ports" package will assist in dowloading and building standard unix utilities. I have GIMP, cdrecord, and many other familiar tools on my command line, run x clients routinely, use cvs, vi, code in Tcl/Tk and all the rest on my small, unobtrusive powerbook running OSX. Recently one of my home linux machines died (disk/print server) and I replaced it with a mac mini because it was the smallest footprint "unix" box for the lowest price -- and this burns me to admit, as a longtime Linuxnik and x86 hacker. Just avoid most of the pointyclicky macos tools and life is pretty good...

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...

by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 07:43:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

OS X is a brilliant way for Apple to capture the geek market: give them an open-source OS and the coolest hardware designs, off the shelf.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 08:22:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Also, the moron market: People like me, who love how "purdy" it is.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 08:58:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Definitely sounds good. But can you have, say 2 different versions of Gtk+ or Tcl/Tk installed and link to one or the other, as desired, like you can (but really shouldn't) with Linux?

What about the OS itself, is it open source?

Anyhow I must admit it sounds really really good!

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 09:12:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Anyhow I'm just curious, as I know next to nothing about this, so I'll read up about it, don't worry about answering me (these were just quick questions that came to mind).

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 09:14:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The kernel is Mach based, the userland system is BSD based and the pointy-clicky stuff runs through a separate windowing system. Pretty much all the userland stuff works as normal, though when you get to talking to the kernel things are different as DeAnander says. However, if you own a Mac you never need to talk to the kernel.

And the pointy-clicky Mac tools are great - though it's still command line and vi for real work. I went mac because I was bored of fighting with the computer to get things done.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 02:59:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Barely customisable is good. It means you don't spend half your life trying to customise things. You have all the tools you want - almost anything that runs under linux will run on the Mac - in an environment where things just work. Good for the old people like me that no longer have time to wrestle with the free desktops or bizarre hardware support issues.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 03:06:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Jérôme, that's great news, and you're right, there's no need for Utopia. Just good wishes.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:02:26 PM EST

Yes, excellent news.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:10:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wow (none / 0)

I'll plug in my felicitations in this sub-thread as well. Wonderful news, and how blessed to receive such news before Christmas. Enjoy it.

by Nomad (Bjinse) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 06:16:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Jérôme, this is really happy news. Thank you for sharing.

by Fran on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 02:16:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Congratulations to Jerome and his wife, and most especially to his son and daughter. The family has been under great stress.

by Rolfyboy6 (rolmsted@hawaii.rr.com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 03:21:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Good news, Jerome. Wishing the best for your family.

Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other. -- Dr Johnson

by melvin (melvingladys at or near yahoo.com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:21:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

That's wonderful news, Jerome. Congrats, keep your head up, and go enjoy the holidays. You've surely earned it. If there were a way to buy you a drink from across the Atlantic, I would. :)

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:04:53 PM EST

Youpee, vive la vie, Jérôme! Enjoy your holidays very much, with your family, and friends.

by Alex in Toulouse on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:11:57 PM EST

The power of love surely was at work there. Congratulations.

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:18:59 PM EST

Congratulations to you and your family, Jérôme! That's the best news and thanks so much for sharing it with us -- lots of good thoughts and warm wishes headed your way!!

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:41:59 PM EST

Congrats, Jérôme! I had a cousin second grade who had a brain tumor and chemotherapy for 6-7 years as a child, but now he is an adult full of life. Wish your child the same!

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 04:48:26 PM EST

Happy holiday J. Me is happy to hear news:)

You will always will be my J.

Take care of your j (your little J)...and play,play play.

hug

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 05:49:14 PM EST

Fantastic news, Jerome, best wishes to you and your family!

My humble blog - featuring Friday Basset Blogging

by Man Eegee (man.eegee :at: gmail.com) on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 08:11:29 PM EST

Wonderful news (none / 0)

Congratulations to you and your family, Jérôme!

by olivia on Tue Dec 20th, 2005 at 08:34:22 PM EST

Well, what better Christmas present could you ask for, Jérôme? Congratulations.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:24:50 AM EST

Agnes and Jerome Congratulations on the great news about your son. May he live a long, happy and fulfilling life. May you and Agnes find the peace and hope of the season in your lives every day.

Merry Christmas!

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within." Cicero

by Grandma M on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:38:08 AM EST

Re: a little clarification ; Jerome and Agnes (none / 0)

Thank you for you sweet message, Grandma M.
For avoidance of doubt, Jerome and I are bound by close friendship, not matrimony. No offense however, at least on my part. I hope Jerome agrees.
Have a wonderful Christmas.

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 08:58:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a little clarification ; Jerome and Agnes (none / 1)

Close friendship and harsh disagreements!

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 09:03:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

This is great news!

by Travis (stnemmoc at gmail dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 02:47:34 PM EST

Utopia? I see 2 choices:

A place whose only constitution, law and regulation would be:

Mort aux cons!
Iain M. Banks' The Culture.

The first possibility is maybe a bit too bloody minded so, notice to any GSV or MSV who would happen to swing by our puny little solar system: if there is room aboard, I'd be glad to hitch a ride. I'm not even asking for a return ticket :>

by Francois in Paris on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 03:37:10 PM EST

If you do, don't forget your towel (this is a wink to a book you may or may not have read?)

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 03:54:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The answer is 42.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 04:24:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Izzy you are the ultimate living encyclopedia of the classics!

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 04:54:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Encyclopedia?!? What are you trying to do to me, Alex? I have a reputation to neglect! I don't care who I step on on my way down!!*

*paraphrased from Tom Waits

D'oh! I mean "oh, nooooo"... I mean... dammit, you're ruining me.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:12:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Bah, who needs the Encyclopedia when you have the Guide! (And Izzy has it!)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:24:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

heheheheeeeee a 4 to both of you for making me laugh at a time when I would rather feel like crying.

I need a pan galactic gargle blaster, I'm watching the DADVSI session at the French parliament (I mentioned this on the French-German economy frontpage entry) and I'm horrified with what I'm seeing. Like a friend recently said to me, it's when the right-wing UMP is in power that you realize that the Socialists really are left-wing. If Sarkozy is elected in 2007 I think I'll go and live in Barcelona.

Freedom on the internet is dying in France tonight and it'll be under thunderous applause, like George Lucas would make Senator Padmé from Naboo say.

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:33:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually, it won't even be under thunderous applause, as there are only 66 members of parliament present (where are the other 561?).

This law, pushed for urgent consultation (meaning it's only presented once on the floor and immediately voted), right before Christmas when everyone is busy having fun, is really a back-stab.

Using the pretext of protecting culture to control us is so shameful.

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:36:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

There should the France's first webmaster/sysadmin/programmer strike!

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:38:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That "the" should be a "be". (How the hell did I manage to mess up that!?...)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:39:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

hehe you're right I should go on strike!
But who would listen to us? The problem with such horrible laws is that they are too technical for people to find an interest in them, while in reality they are only cover stories for repression.

You know Izzy, if you're still here, when I see what I see on the parliament's webcast, I can't imagine how horrible it must be to live in George Bush's America. I would go nuts over there. At least our right-wing pricks are only as right-wing as your democrats, so it's not as spine-chilling. But it still is. The alleged country of human rights, about to vote a law that locks access to culture/knowledge?

Shit when you read the French revolution's declaration of human rights, you know that these guys knew what freedom really was, because they knew what oppression was too! That 200 year old declaration mentions free access to knowledge and culture for all ... hell it even mentions that intrusion on a person's privacy and mail is forever banned (change "mail" with "email" to get what the modern version would be ... though actually the original text is "correspondance", which sort of means "mail" anyhow).

200 years later, some pricks with ties are saying "ok, in order to ensure boob implants and cocaine for our pop stars, we are going to intrude on your mail and limit your access to culture and knowledge".

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:47:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But who would listen to us? The problem with such horrible laws is that they are too technical for people to find an interest in them, while in reality they are only cover stories for repression.

But isn't that a point with many strikes? That people if they see such emotion will stop and think a little about the issue? (At least in France? [Tough I wonder, if instead of black workers white upper-middle-class computer nerds would go on strike, would they get more sympathy?])

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:59:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I assure you I went quite mad some years ago.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:02:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh my god guys something beautiful just happened. Amendments 153 and 154 have been barely voted in favour, by 30 votes to 28, thanks to a pair of dissidents in the government group who were concerned about what their kids were downloading !!

This is unbelievable! These are amendments that declare that downloading things that you already own is legal. This throws the whole law and many of its amendments into jeopardy.

The session has been suspended as the political groups now need to re-assess their positions.

It's nuts, we had absolutely no chance, and here we've just opened a tiny crack which may send this law back to the planning room.

I'M SO HAPPY I COULD HAVE ANOTHER PAN GALACTIC GARGLE BLASTER !!!

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:09:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Need a headscarf to clean your twin displays?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:16:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

BTW, I feel I'm missing something - what's this with Alex and headscarves, where did it all begin?

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:28:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It was no big deal. Some time ago he admitted to a small weakness and we've been exploiting it ever since.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:31:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Argh sorry all, I need to hand out a few 4s for some of your comments here but I'm busily writing tons of emails, talking on specialist forums, warning everyone that we now have a chance! I even just wrote to a Socialist parliament member to thank him for his professionalism (he was a hundred times cooler and wittier than the government's Minister of Culture, who was agitated and agressive).

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:34:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Seriously, you should write a diary about this whole thing.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:37:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sources (none / 1)

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:49:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sources (none / 0)

Um, no headscarfs in your first link!

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 07:00:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sources (none / 1)

Spent most of my time trying to imagine how hot the nuns looked underneath their face-hiding kit.

You will notice in the thread referred to by the second link there is already a headscarf joke.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 07:04:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sources (none / 0)

Duh...

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 07:06:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sources (none / 0)

...googling 'headscarf fetish' gives this - but was that the first mentioning?

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 07:05:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sources (none / 0)

That was just my reaction to yet another "hot under the headgear" story.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 07:06:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sources (none / 0)

With a brain this porous, now I really need some sleep... g'night!

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 07:08:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The geeks should just start working at setting up an underground internet, to be ready for the coming clampdown.

No matter how much the suits try to control cyberspace, the truth remains that the only people who can actually run the infrastructure are geeks with anarchic tendencies.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:10:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think there won't be any need for that, already some news flashes are out saying P2P has been legalized (which isn't totally true, only legal for things you already own), so millions of French people are going to wake up tomorrow and start downloading like mad and the government won't know what to do!

As I understand it, the current president of parliament ( women, temporary), inversed the voting order on some key amendments, and as a result a lot of amendments are screwed up.

I'm telling you, this is a miracle.

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:29:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"women, temporary" => I mean the real president is either on holiday or in bed. It's a woman (I don't know her) who's doing this, and she's not accustomed to the job (besides this law has a lot of amendments), so she screwed up and we now have a chance!

But it's kind of scary, that so many decisions can be made so lightly, and such school-level mistakes can be made.

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:32:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fuck that! I'm with Migeru! I have my copy of Cryptonomicon and I'm totally ready to take this sucker off the grid!!

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Dec 21st, 2005 at 06:34:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ah Jerome - you are such a diplomat! Harsh disagreements seem totally out of character for you. Perhaps only when you have a bit too much bubbly?

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within." Cicero

by Grandma M on Fri Dec 23rd, 2005 at 10:16:40 AM EST