tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post7157602151687359084..comments2024-03-28T14:07:18.682-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: So many milestones in space!David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger131125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-86035857860363687162019-02-09T14:01:05.213-08:002019-02-09T14:01:05.213-08:00onward
onwardonward<br /><br />onwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-81800879598464388272019-02-09T10:09:39.454-08:002019-02-09T10:09:39.454-08:00Yana, I think a lot of the gung-ho people would ra...Yana, I think a lot of the gung-ho people would rather fight the social engineers who think they can manipulate humanity arbitrarily toward their pet projects than be pawns in their phony wars. Fight space? Are you mad? Where does this mentality come from? Anyway, men need flesh and blood enemies to fight against; fighting an unbeatable abstraction is absurd. In the absence of Klingons, your kind will do fine.Treebeardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-12080403193375902892019-02-09T10:02:43.036-08:002019-02-09T10:02:43.036-08:00Yeah, Mike. I can only say it yet more time. I do ...Yeah, Mike. I can only say it yet more time. I do sipmatise with your position.<br />But still... she ended not that good. Buddha's middle path see as more prefered.;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-36971829635347681942019-02-09T08:55:17.644-08:002019-02-09T08:55:17.644-08:00“Imperfection is beauty, madness is genius and it&...“Imperfection is beauty, madness is genius and it's better to be absolutely ridiculous than absolutely boring.”<br />― Marilyn Monroe Mike Willhttp://www.scidata.canoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-9433225975718717312019-02-09T08:54:34.170-08:002019-02-09T08:54:34.170-08:00"But the sterile, useless Moon is a stupid pl..."But the sterile, useless Moon is a stupid place for the U.S. to aim its efforts. Humanity is going there anyway, propelled by desperate symbolism. America should do things that only they can do… with partners like Japan and Elon and Planetary Resources... like go where the riches are."<br /><br />I really have to disagree with you on this. The Moon is not useless, and there are practical reasons to establish a permanent presence there. With gravity 1/6th that of our Earth, and no atmosphere to invoke dynamic pressures, using the Moon as a launch point to other destinations in our solar system would be one of the more important advances for ensuring the human race becomes a multi-planet species.Daisyworldhttps://www.wunderground.com/blog/Daisyworld/archive.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-31719519809245565842019-02-09T08:52:27.608-08:002019-02-09T08:52:27.608-08:00And rationalism degenerates into madness. %((((
By...And rationalism degenerates into madness. %((((<br />By far most dangerous.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-58269544234114033212019-02-09T07:54:24.393-08:002019-02-09T07:54:24.393-08:00Both Democracy and Liberty are laudable, yet usele...Both Democracy and Liberty are laudable, yet useless without honourable intent and literacy. And both seem to have innate, self-serving hostility towards these, in practice at least. The former degenerates into mob-rule/oligarchy, and the latter degenerates into chaos/feudalism. I choose Rationalism.<br /><br />“There never was a good knife made of bad steel.”<br />- Benjamin Franklin Mike Willhttp://www.scidata.canoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-67045385167511346012019-02-09T07:08:27.200-08:002019-02-09T07:08:27.200-08:00Alfred would choose Liberty over Democracy if &...<br />Alfred would choose Liberty over Democracy if & when push came to shove -- as I would -- but then there are the Blue Urban Dum-Dum socialists who choose Democracy over Liberty & receive (and deserve) neither.<br /><br />In effect, they destroy the democratic fruit of liberty in order to save it.<br /><br /><br />Bestlocumranchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06812045410916208141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-11866368328239806562019-02-09T02:54:23.006-08:002019-02-09T02:54:23.006-08:00Alfred Differ thought:
"It wasn't slaver...<br />Alfred Differ thought:<br /><br />"<i>It wasn't slavery, though. Close, but not really. Where it got closest was where Marx recognized the use of mental opiates.</i>"<br /><br />It is possible that people are more familiar with European feudalism than other examples. In that geographic timeline, there was a demographic anomaly. About 1350, people started dropping like flies. When it passed, after a third of Europe was dead, labor became more valuable than capital.<br /><br />That's where the common myth of free migration and property rights under feudalism comes from, particularly in England where people started to think the Magna Carta said things which it does not. <br /><br />It was true for a hundred years or less, in one place, but the combined weight of the history of feudalism is bleak slavery. If we were debating this 100 years ago we wouldn't be using the word 'slavery' but today we can see clearer. Shoulders of giants.<br /><br />"<i>You won't get one without the other because we don't go anywhere without spreading our markets to put those places in reach.</i>"<br /><br />Thumbs up on the market ideogram, but i feel there's a lost opportunity, one of those 2-bird shots. Yes, we need to convince industrialists to invest, but while this is going on we need to divert the natural portion of people who deeply need to strive against something immediate. Currently, that portion is absorbed by military, or mafia, or 1st-responders, or politics.<br /><br />Going to space for a regular paycheck, or for a share of profits, or just to get away from the wife's family for a few months? None of these will absorb the striver portion. Shouldn't have to mention it, but expanding to space without drawing off the gung-ho via a compelling mission directive would only sharpen the risk of war planetside.<br /><br />The only smart answer is to make space our mortal enemy and paint the planting of self-sustaining colonies as mankind's stiffest middle finger to a universe which has always said "fnck you" to the Earth. Yeah i know, shh, it's not true, goldilocks and all that, but if we want the stars we need to have peace on Earth, and the way to do that is give the strivers something to fight.<br /><br />Ummph, if only Tunguska had happened 100 years later when we had helicopters and a billion cameras, i would not have to be laying on this skit now.yananoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-53802502165296123152019-02-09T01:19:03.717-08:002019-02-09T01:19:03.717-08:00\\My thought is that we have to survive before we ...\\My thought is that we have to survive before we can profit. The blogger here weighs the odds and correctly sees that the chances are very good, that we'll attain species redundancy before the Earth gets smacked by a rock we spotted 2 weeks earlier. <br /><br />Isn't it more wise to dewise ways of diverting that rock... or even making it ari-natural sputnik of the Earth?<br /><br />Isn't it why we are going to comets now? ;)<br /><br /><br />\\If we have three places to live...<br /><br />We can dig into Earth too. Dive into the Ocean.<br /><br />And that is much cheaper, safer, robust and up to date possible (damn, it was possible even with 19th century techs). %P<br /><br /><br />So... you posing Good Point here. By ever means.<br /><br />But not so bright still.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-30095451858967446592019-02-09T01:06:47.133-08:002019-02-09T01:06:47.133-08:00Jon S thought:
"I am curious, yana. Why do y...<br />Jon S thought:<br /><br />"<i>I am curious, yana. Why do you advise against this data point? ... I was under the impression ... sudden collapse of inhabitant communities ... due to plagues introduced from Europe</i>"<br /><br />Certainly, your impression is spot-on. What is iffy at best, is the conjecture that subsequent reforestation triggered what climatologists call the Little Ice Age. So many reasons why that idea is improbable, so very many.<br /><br />lowsemenherder thought:<br /><br />"<i>First, y'all need to reread Yana's sage post about how the "real riches" of extraterrestrial mineral deposits accrue only to those who use those raw materials to REMAIN IN SPACE, as colonists, as the relative value of those mineral deposits literally 'plummets to Earth' when they enter the terrestrial gravity well.</i>"<br /><br />Cripes, don't agree with me. Are you trying to bring my cred back down? Don't hitch me to the rest of your post about the world of men and your chittering glee over toasty handbaskets.<br /><br />I disagree with our host's view of the utility of a self-sustaining colony on the Moon, that's all. I feel that it fits life's primary urge to survive, while he feels that it's a wasted effort of lost time/resources, a perilous excuse for humanity to pause expansion, and even retards the inception of our expansion because there's no gold on the Moon (so to speak) and thus discourages corp investment in space activities immediately right now.<br /><br />All valid points. I think i know what DB is doing, dangle the shiny carrot of wealth over the asteroid belt, and the people who seek it can't help themselves. They will automatically induce development of all points inbetween, in particular the current vast wealth of the hospitality and entertainment industries can be subtly turned to the general welfare, to literally "fill the void" and pay for it themselves.<br /><br />My thought is that we have to survive before we can profit. The blogger here weighs the odds and correctly sees that the chances are very good, that we'll attain species redundancy before the Earth gets smacked by a rock we spotted 2 weeks earlier. <br /><br />I agree on those odds, but at this moment the possible outcomes are a binary pair: survival or extinction. If we have three places to live, the future of the species is not two possibilities, it is eight possibilities. And still, only one is species extinction, so either 0.875 or 0.50 is what it comes down to. <br /><br />A growing colony on the Moon gets us from 0.50 to 0.75, and two antipodal colonies up there gets us closer to 0.80. Aha, those crafty Chinese, once every 29 days a spaceport on the far side of the Moon becomes the most valuable piece of real estate on our block.<br /><br />Chelyabynsk should have scared the everlovin' skit out of all eight billion of us. Only a few years later a big rock landed in Lake Michigan. If it landed a bit more SSW we would now be, as sure as skit, be building spaceships in Seattle and habitation modules in Detroit, as fast as our skinny trembling hands could work.yananoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-27943975025194234772019-02-08T23:41:09.946-08:002019-02-08T23:41:09.946-08:00Well. I'll try argumentum ad vericundiam too. ...Well. I'll try <b>argumentum ad vericundiam</b> too. %)<br /><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestication#History" rel="nofollow">The <b>domestication of plants began at least 12,000 years ago</b> with cereals in the Middle East, and the bottle gourd in Asia. Agriculture developed in at least 11 different centres around the world, domesticating different crops and animals.<br /><br />On society[edit]<br />Jared Diamond in his book Guns, Germs, and Steel describes <b>the universal tendency for populations that have acquired agriculture and domestic animals to develop a large population and to expand into new territories. He recounts migrations of people armed with domestic crops overtaking, displacing or killing indigenous hunter-gatherers, whose lifestyle is coming to an end.</b></a>progressbotnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-36666631956540584392019-02-08T23:17:00.638-08:002019-02-08T23:17:00.638-08:00>> yana said...
\\We are never "overdu...>> yana said...<br /><br />\\We are never "overdue" for an extinction impact, but there's one item to keep in mind. If it happens after we've expanded to harvest riches, then we get to keep exploring and harvesting while we wait for Earth to become re-habitable. But if it happens before we expand, there will be no riches, no waiting, only species death.<br /><br />Well, you have all my approval and support on this. (well, if you need it %))<br /><br /><br />\\Survival must tru- err, survival must overmatch another played card, before we think about getting comfortable, let alone wealthy.<br /><br />That's the same as risk of cancer from smoking. One need some vivid example(s???). Among closer relatives. To understand.<br /><br />Well... go... beardy from the clouds do send us message after message, recently. %)<br /><br />But it seems it need to be something definite. Like Twin Fall. Or Chernobyl %((((((((((((((<br /><br />Sapiency in "homo sapiens" ARE greatly exaggerated. (sad) Even in "futurist, scientist... etc, etc, noble honorifics".<br /><br /><br /><b>>> Alfred Differ said...<br />\\When it comes to survival by spreading out into space it's the same thing as becoming wealthy. Treat them as synonyms. <br /><br />As fer me... its synonym of "becoming smart".<br /><br />Because... othervise -- feudals and feudal thinking ALREADY are winners in collecting welth rat-race. ;)</b>progressbotnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-54756009779549183742019-02-08T22:59:17.620-08:002019-02-08T22:59:17.620-08:00yana,
When it comes to survival by spreading out ...yana,<br /><br />When it comes to survival by spreading out into space it's the same thing as becoming wealthy. Treat them as synonyms. Colonization is Species Wealth. You won't get one without the other because we don't go anywhere without spreading our markets to put those places in reach.<br /><br />Humans are traders. <br />The more of us there are, the more we specialize, innovate, and 'complexify' our markets. <br />We don't 'bud' a disconnected group unless a barrier imposes itself after we spread out. <br />Going to space will happen according to market rules meaning those who go must be able to trade with those who do not.<br /><br />The 'space ark' concept ain't gonna happen.<br />The 'terran diaspora' might.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-42359458636313665882019-02-08T22:50:26.396-08:002019-02-08T22:50:26.396-08:00>> David Brin said...
\\Ack ignorance! The l...>> David Brin said...<br />\\Ack ignorance! The local natives taught the Pilgrims how to plant corn and beans! Most native peoples had… farms. If you disagree, prove it.<br /><br />I am living in agriculture country side now. That have all stigmats of (post-soviet) stagnation all over its face. But also. Vibrant traits of new. Like never ending fields of crop.<br /><br />I already provided my arguments.<br /><br />\\(because... farming and "some agriculture" could be THE SAME only to Locum...<br />because ability to create farms means much more advanced level of development,<br />because with such level of development that natives would have own NATIONS)<br /><br />You are trying hard to ignore it. And to pose some childish "contre-arguments."<br /><br /><b>People. Homo sapiens. Domesticated some plants really LONG AGO.<br />But decent level of agriculture, known as "farming" they developed NOT so long ago.<br />And only that level allowed modern time level of population,<br />and made them "rulers of the Nature"... not the mere scavengers.</b><br /><br />Your communication with Locum... get you no good.<br /><br /><br />>> Alfred Differ said...<br />\\No one here is a Saint. Some are more social than others, but most are quite intelligent, skilled, and have egos to match. Even locumranch is intelligent, skilled, and ego-filled. 8)<br /><br />As you can see... I have NOP with locum.<br /><br />His stupidity is stanning... but it have a system. He just fulfiling here his agenda as mere troll.<br /><br /><br />\\My simple example of this is one I used to use at my front door when missionaries came by to talk about faith.<br /><br />Did you see that stuff? ;) "Kiss Hanks ass" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goQO4lcDt6E<br /><br /><br /><b>\\No one has taken me up on it in over 15 years, unfortunately. I have to come to blogs run by science fiction authors to find people with the strength of character to try it. The topic rarely stays on faith, but I'm interested in learning about the broader world so I'm fine with that. It's good for the soul to spread one's wings.<br /><br />Good attitude!<br />Feel free to bite me. %)</b><br /><br /><br />\\...adapt to life among people with egos at least as strong as yours.<br /><br />No. %) My ego is very flimsy. But I have powerful henchman's -- Logic and Science. For backup. ;)<br /><br /><br />\\that's why I'm so opposed to policy that prevents chain immigration. The term might not mean much to you where you are, but it makes some of my fellow Americans spitting angry as if a thief was stealing from them and I was helping. <br /><br />We at least informed about it. And... it is what await us as country. If only we sprung from our current state.<br />Well, Ukraine's territiory always was a road for such travelers.<br /><br /><br />\\ It would seem only fools would choose feudalism, but the truth is worse. Feudalism makes sense for people with no hope. It is the social attractor that ensures despair in anyone who does not gouge out their own eyes to avoid seeing and lobotomizing themselves to avoid thinking about events around them. Their only choice for hope is belief in a better afterlife.<br /><br />I do already stated here... that I am on objective history side.<br />That there always some OBJECTIVE predispositions... why people choose this or that.<br /><br />You word looks for me as "old medievel medicine" doctrines -- that illness is because of "bad air" or "abundance of blood".<br /><br />Why I am on Lui Paster side -- with statement -- illness because of microbes.<br /><br />(well, it could be good point for discussion between us ;))porohobotnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-36344235640882529062019-02-08T22:48:44.923-08:002019-02-08T22:48:44.923-08:00Destroy it in order to save it
Meh. Says the guy...<i> Destroy it in order to save it </i><br /><br />Meh. Says the guy who can't get into another person's head well enough to paraphrase consistently.<br /><br />As for me, I recognize there are times when Liberty and Democracy are in conflict. Often they are not, but occasionally they are. <br /><br />I choose Liberty.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-18782636138230627382019-02-08T22:48:13.364-08:002019-02-08T22:48:13.364-08:00David Brin thought:
"Justifying the Moon col...<br />David Brin thought:<br /><br />"<i>Justifying the Moon colony as a “lifeboat” is silly in the short term. We need riches that can keep us in space… THEN a self-sustaining civilization will create colonies.</i>"<br /><br />Every now and then, one hears an alarmist chirp up and say something to the effect that we're "overdue" for a catastrophe of some sort, megavolcano or ice age or San Andreas tumbler. But the ones which get an Olympic-level eyeroll from me are the Planetkiller Impact folks. Two reasons:<br /><br />1. Our odds get better every time Jupiter eats up a Shoemaker-Levy 9. Once read an estimate of how many tons of cruft the gas giants eat every day, forget the number but it is enormous.<br /><br />2. There is zero amount of periodicity in large impacts. There is a probability, but it is the same no matter if it's been 65 million years since the last one, or just since last Thursday.<br /><br />We are never "overdue" for an extinction impact, but there's one item to keep in mind. If it happens after we've expanded to harvest riches, then we get to keep exploring and harvesting while we wait for Earth to become re-habitable. But if it happens before we expand, there will be no riches, no waiting, only species death.<br /><br />Since we don't know when a small but momentum-rich rock will approach from the direction of the Sun, towards which we're fairly blind, there is only one wise plan.<br /><br />Survival must tru- err, survival must overmatch another played card, before we think about getting comfortable, let alone wealthy.yananoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-8264539472993034602019-02-08T22:10:29.384-08:002019-02-08T22:10:29.384-08:00DR. Brin,
Regarding your opinion (and mine) that t...DR. Brin,<br />Regarding your opinion (and mine) that there should be either a remedy or some statute of limitations on youthful, stupid, even reprehensible, but non-criminal behavior, here's a NY Times columnist that agrees with you<br />https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/opinion/northam-virginia-governor-racism.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=HomepageDougnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-44121168549703152042019-02-08T22:06:16.663-08:002019-02-08T22:06:16.663-08:00One only as good as his rival. (tm)
You have choo...<b>One only as good as his rival. (tm)</b><br /><br />You have choosen Locum. Which cannot pose neither logic nor fact as argument.<br /><br />And look what happen...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-33254867208204974992019-02-08T20:42:29.959-08:002019-02-08T20:42:29.959-08:00It's been almost 25 years since Francis Fukuya...<br />It's been almost 25 years since Francis Fukuyama declared an 'End to History' due to the triumph of Liberal Democracy over the failure of Soviet Collectivism, only to have history rebel & mockingly declare an 'End to Liberal Democracy' shortly thereafter.<br /><br />Yet, like Asimov's Foundation, we are left with a stalwart few, composed of both the clueless (who fail to understand the new reality) & the true (who, like David, refuse to accept the new reality), who betray practical democracy (aka 'populism') in favour an abstract & sterile democratic ideal.<br /><br />These Samsonesque stalwarts engage in overt voter nullification, zealously defy the popular will, and topple the very temple of democracy in upon itself, all in the fallacious belief that they protect what they destroy.<br /><br />In both the EU & the US, these stalwart zealots destroy democracy in order to save it from the corrupting influence of actual democracy.<br /><br />They destroy democracy in order to save it, they say.<br /><br />Where have we heard madness like this before?<br /><br /><br />Bestlocumranchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06812045410916208141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1531623201251657232019-02-08T16:59:47.517-08:002019-02-08T16:59:47.517-08:00yana,
Recorded history is awash with such events…...yana,<br /><br /><i>Recorded history is awash with such events…</i><br /><br />Yah. My dark suspicion is history has many more of these events than we imagine. It would be a matter of what counts as well as who gets to record it. Maybe 10 to 1? Maybe more if one counts smaller events. We get into Pinker's territory, though, and I'm content to let others do the research. 8)<br /><br />America's revolution wasn't a peasant revolt. Too many came from the merchant class for it to count as such. Our rebellion was one of the liberalism revolutions and that's very different. Mexico and points further south? Not so sure. Spain fell apart as an empire and smaller, would-be despots rose to fill the vacuum. The peasants were certainly involved, but they do that in feudal wars too. Russia? Well… they certainly call it a peasant action, but it didn't stay that way for long. That still leaves open all the other stuff as you point out, though. <br /><br />As for the peasant owning themselves and property, I wasn't implying they all could. What I was pointing out was that some could, thus there is a difference between their state and that of the serfs. Post-Magna Carta Englishmen had a number of rights they jealously guarded. WE would still think of their state as 'owned', but they did not. Some in western Europe COULD leave, but it didn't make much sense to try until things got really miserable. Even in central Europe, property ownership was respected up to a point. After all, the Church had to convict you as a witch to take your property by force in many places or the Courts as they stood would respect laws/traditions.<br /><br />We in the liberal democracies overstate the case that life as a peasant was essentially slavery. It wasn't at least in much of western Europe in the last 1000 years or so. Much closer in eastern Europe and let's not even get into what the Ottoman's did. We in the liberal democracies have it soooooo much better, though, that it's hard to use a peasant's perspective. It wasn't slavery, though. Close, but not really. Where it got closest was where Marx recognized the use of mental opiates.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-36352521087268020032019-02-08T16:20:33.590-08:002019-02-08T16:20:33.590-08:00progressbot, [separate message out of respect for ...progressbot, [separate message out of respect for the identity shift]<br /><br />paraphrasing….<br />{Some people do not want to be freed of their heavy loads because they cannot imagine other, better ways of living.}<br /><br />Yes. That's the core issue at the heart of Liberalism. Those of us who have converted already know, but we sound like missionaries when talking to those who don't know. Our better way sounds like magical thinking when we know darn well it isn't.<br /><br />Unfortunately, there isn't much WE can do about it from the outside. Many of us are still ignorant enough to think we can fix things for the rest of you, but the honest truth is that the best we can do is show the way. I can point out the path, but the burdened peasant has to choose to walk it and dump the load they care. It's a scary choice they rarely make unless things are so miserably bad that they feel they have little choice. <br /><br />The main reason the peasantry has largely vanished in the West started with things being THAT MISERABLY BAD that a few of them took the risk. When they found it to be slightly better, they could pull their relatives up by pointing out what they had learned. It's one thing for a stranger to point out a better path. It is something else again when kin does it. In fact, that's why I'm so opposed to policy that prevents chain immigration. The term might not mean much to you where you are, but it makes some of my fellow Americans spitting angry as if a thief was stealing from them and I was helping. <br /><br />The argument many of us make FOR liberalism is that feudalism pretty much ensures things get THAT MISERABLY BAD for a large percentage of humanity. Predictably miserable to make things worse. It would seem only fools would choose feudalism, but the truth is worse. Feudalism makes sense for people with no hope. It is the social attractor that ensures despair in anyone who does not gouge out their own eyes to avoid seeing and lobotomizing themselves to avoid thinking about events around them. Their only choice for hope is belief in a better afterlife.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-22218237829951873012019-02-08T15:59:59.525-08:002019-02-08T15:59:59.525-08:00porohobot,
No one here is a Saint. Some are more ...porohobot,<br /><br />No one here is a Saint. Some are more social than others, but most are quite intelligent, skilled, and have egos to match. Even locumranch is intelligent, skilled, and ego-filled. 8)<br /><br />What each of us gets to decide individually is whether or not it is worth the price we pay in attention and effort to interact, persuade, and be the target of others trying to persuade us. My simple example of this is one I used to use at my front door when missionaries came by to talk about faith. Many were polite enough to start the conversation with a question about whether I was willing to talk to them and hear from them bout it. My trained/easy response was I was willing if they were equally willing to listen to my effort to persuade them to see things my way. If they hesitated, I pointed out that my arguments were quite good and if taken seriously might undermine their faith. That was usually enough to end the encounter with the weakest of them. The strong ones stuck around, though, and we had some fun for a while. They helped me learn about them and I helped them learn about people like me and no one lost their faith. <br /><br />No one has taken me up on it in over 15 years, unfortunately. I have to come to blogs run by science fiction authors to find people with the strength of character to try it. The topic rarely stays on faith, but I'm interested in learning about the broader world so I'm fine with that. It's good for the soul to spread one's wings.<br /><br />Locumranch serves a useful purpose here. Stick around long enough and our host will explain exactly what that purpose is. He reminds us roughly once or twice a year when a few too many get upset at him. You are in danger of serving a similar purpose, but I think you might be more self-aware than locumranch is, so you might avoid the trap once you adapt to life among people with egos at least as strong as yours.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-55666597864996468782019-02-08T15:25:40.999-08:002019-02-08T15:25:40.999-08:00“Our host has a thick skin, but he has his limits ...“Our host has a thick skin, but he has his limits on how much he accepts people telling him how to think. Want to change his mind? Persuasion is necessary, but not sufficient. You also have to find a way to make it worth his time to pay attention. That usually requires being of some value to him as part of the community. The effort it takes from you is the price you pay to correct him. Only you can decide if his supposed error is sufficient to justify the price you pay to correct him.”<br /><br />What Alfred said! Fair enough.<br /><br />“For a minute https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/farmland<br />First Known Use of farmland<br />1638, in the meaning defined above”<br /><br />Ack ignorance! The local natives taught the Pilgrims how to plant corn and beans! Most native peoples had… farms. If you disagree, prove it. When they died, those fields went back to trees. Prove otherwise. If you meant something else, then be more clear! <br /><br />We are patient with your English... which is much better than our Ukrainian. But that patience is stretched when you are so quick and eager to express flares of outrage.<br /><br />“And NOW it's MY fault that YOU stated something stupid.”<br /><br />No, you are being stunningly stupid and I will go back to ignoring you, now.<br /><br />locum, if liberal enlightenment is in peril, it is because of traitors like you.<br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-86783019020477752662019-02-08T13:59:17.927-08:002019-02-08T13:59:17.927-08:00Is it time to just ban the two Bots?
At least loco...Is it time to just ban the two Bots?<br />At least loco does not post so muchduncan cairncrosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14153725128216947145noreply@blogger.com