Tue, 18 Mar 2003 15:03:31 +0100 (CET)
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> Grrrrr.... Even if the "optimistic" scenario plays out, there will be a
> segment of the world populartion that will be unable to admit that they
> were wrong. These people are irrational fools who get their life
It is irrational to believe that you're rational. No one is that.
"Wrong" implies a single frame of reference. Unlike physics, human world
models differ in an irreconsilable way. I'd suggest sticking to a more
utilitarian approach: the hedonistic imperative. You can still argue about
each individual model of current decisions resulting in a funneling out of
bifurcating future realities until we're all blue in the face, but a
really short time window and a rough tally (bodycount, own QoL assessment
integrated over population) do help to objectivize the metric.
> meaning by hating other people. For these folks, hate is the end, not
> the means. In this regard, they're not much different from your run of
> the mill uneducated ignorant racist. Disgusting.
I remind you that our firmware has not been reflashed since the neolithic.
Primates are not nice people in general (that's why monkeys and apes make
for lousy pets), and humans are no exception. Our current society model
(which has been having problems) is built around centralism.
Centralism is vulnerable to assymetric warfare, and agressive posturing
generates hate fostering it in an autofeedback process. Israel is not a
happy place, and US culture has not been acclimatized to living with
terror, especially WoMD terror.
9/11 did not come out of clean blue skies. The next one is going to be a
lot bigger, and part of the fallout will come from the current campaign.
It is important to become aware of your actions and their assessments by
other players as technology gives an intrinsic and growing edge to
attackers rather then defenders.