tqk

Thankyou for expressing exactly what I thought of it. From the time I started reading it, it reminded me of that old criticism of X-Files: "Yeah, it's cool, but basically it's crap."

I was recently involved in a discussion on Islam and Muslims: "What's honourable or good about Islam?" I thought that was a pretty stupid question, and I replied mentioning Islamic architecture, quisine, and a few other things. It's also through the Arab nations that most of what we now know of the Hellenic Greeks was obtained. Xtian monks were ripping up their books and reusing the pages for their own writings. Meanwhile, the Arabs were preserving them. I can't tolerate book burners. I've many friends and acquaintances who are religious; Christian or Muslim. I've no trouble tolerating them. Heck, they're my friends so it's more correct to say I appreciate them, despite my not agreeing with everything they think or accept. At the same time, they appreciate me for what they approve of in me. Tolerance, as a value, is good for keeping the peace and that's about all. That's a good thing, I suppose, but not as good as appreciating whatever you believe to be a good, or denouncing or decrying evil. We should keep an open mind, but not so open our brains fall out. :-)

That's the one. :-) Kat, have you noticed that under your avatar, you're listed as having joined in 1969? Where did you find a computer back then?

Well, looking back, I found elements of Objectivism in China in Tiananmen Square when an individual stood up for freedom. Uhmmm, :-) one of my most heroic ... dunno what you would call them, ... but that lone individual refusing to yield right of way to a PRC tank, ... I would love to hug the guy, assuming he survived. Thanks. :-|

Well, Gladiator could be seen to support Imperial Rome, and there was lots of religion in it (which Objectivists might find offensive). Me, I just see the "One man vs. an inhuman system bent on grinding him to dust" sort of stuff, and Maximus fits my definition of heroic. Sorry, but I've been through that one before too. Apache is the #1 httpd on the internet, hence (by your theory) there ought to be many more Apache related exploits than there are IIS exploits. Not true, because Apache is good code, and IIS is bad code, hence IIS has far more extant problems than does Apache. MS' code is vulnerable to exploits because of their *choices* in system design. Lots of people run video games on Windows, so Microsoft ties game performance directly into kernel space to provide that performance. Mistake, for the security-wise. MS chooses to minimize distinctions about "What type of file is that?" It chooses to make it the default that the OS auto-loads incoming files to make it easier on the user. Oops, autoloading many MS file formats leads to files which can corrupt the entire system, due to the close ties user space apps have to OS internals. NP.

Gladiator: Really? I love it. Quality production, excellent acting, brilliant script, a seriously evil antagonist, and they even avoided a typical Hollywood style fairytale ending. Somalia: I tend to agree with your assessment. All is not sweetness and light there. However, it's also not the Hellhole that we're traditionally taught to expect from anarchy. See <http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/stateless-somalia.html>: "... As for Somalia being lawless, Van Notten, a Dutch lawyer who married into the Samaron Clan and lived the last dozen years of his life with them, specifically challenges that portrayal. He explains that Somalia is a country based on customary law. The traditional Somali system of law and politics, he contends, is capable of maintaining a peaceful society and guiding the Somalis to prosperity. Moreover, efforts to re-establish a central government or impose democracy on the people are incompatible with the customary law ..." Free Software: Certainly, Stallman is a traditional Bostonian "pinko, hippie creep", but Free Software is more than Richard Stallman. It also includes Eric Raymond, who's about as far from Stallman philosophically as you can get. As for Microsoft, I'm all for Capitalism, but bad software is bad software, whether produced by capitalists or fascists. They've had years to fix the most egregious flaws and they've failed miserably. "XP", I thought, would be the version which *finally* fixed the problem of software piracy (enforcing their "End User Licence Agreement"). Days after release, that too was shown to be pathetically flawed. Add in the problems of viruses/malware, ActiveX, Passport, etc., etc., and I can't imagine why any sane individual would choose to use it. Add in all the junk about "Trusted Computing" (aka "Palladium") and anyone can see Microsoft is not on the side of its customers; it's on the side of content producers (RIAA, MPAA, et al). By the way, not even Stallman's all bad. He's right about software patents. The Usenet Newsgroup "comp.risks" had an interesting piece in it the other day(Risks Digest 24.20): -------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:13:31 -0500 From: Steve Summit Subject: When trusted systems fail On Friday, March 10, McAfee's antivirus program gave users a nice lesson on the meaning of the term "trusted system". Due to a faulty virus definition file, the software began deleting or "quarantining" hundreds or thousands of legitimate system files (including, among others, Microsoft's excel.exe). <http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2802> <http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/03/mcafee_update_flags_hundreds_o.html> -------------------------------------------------- Not all bad software comes from Microsoft. When software you purchased to protect your system begins to attack it instead, I'd say it's time for a re-think. 8-[ Tooduls. :-)

Where can you find examples of Objectivism around you? Think about art, music, movies, plays, books, entertainment, news and current events, and on down to just everyday life. Where are the strong individualists, the heroes, the capitalists, the role models for our children? Kat Well, that's depressing. The above was posted more than three months ago, and since then there have been no replies. That's downright shocking, don't you think? In an attempt to rectify this, here's my suggestions: * "Gladiator" the movie. "The general who became a slave, the slave who became a gladiator, the gladiator who defied an emperor." I confess I'm fully and irreparably addicted to this movie. In daily life, when something brings me down, I find myself reciting Maximus' speech to myself ("My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius, Commander of the armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, loyal servant of the true emperor, Marcus Aurelius, father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife, and I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next."). * "Free Software". While much of the industrialized world is addicted to "bad software" based around that toy operating system produced by the Redmond, WA based conglomerate ("Bill's a Capitalist, so it must be good!"), others are happily and proudly avoiding it by using the cooperatively produced, far more robust and secure, and essentially costless alternatives produced by the Free Software community. Included in this article are multitudinous examples of applications which have been under constant development and support for decades, updated with new features and secured against even the latest discovered threats to system security. * Somalia. Even the CIA Fact Book remarks on how well this country manages with no government in sight. * "Buena Vista Social Club". Who'd have thought that such brilliance could come from the occupants of Fidel Castro's failed revolution? It only goes to show that no matter how malevolent communism is, it's a toothless tiger. There, that should offer a good start. I've tried to pick some potentially controversial items, hoping to elicit discussion. Fire away.

Is there anything like a list of definitions I could use to decipher the TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms) I see bandied about? If not, I'll be happy to start one. Please fill in the answers if you know them: ARI - Ayn Rand Institute IOS - ? ITOE - ? PAR - Passion of Ayn Rand PARC - Passion of Ayn Rand's Critics RoR - ? SOLO - ? TOC - The Objectivist Center TIA - The Intellectual Activist?!?

That depends on what reality is. Sorry. I'm thinking of the scientific community here. Reputations are often more important than accepting competing theories which better explain reality. Scientists go along for years accepting something as ... "truth"? Well, perhaps as "the accepted status quo" is a better description. Then some whipper-snapper shows up out of nowhere and invalidates everything they know with a new theory. The old guard circle the wagons, much storm and fury happens, and out of this process, a new (I hate this word!) paradigm emerges which better explains the Universe and opens up multitudinous doors to new research and new understanding. It's an adversarial system, often frought with personality cults, nepotism, blind acceptance of peer influence, and an "Eat the young!" mindset. But, if you happen to be one of those "whipper-snappers", the experience can be most gratifying and educational: To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best night and day to make you like everybody else means to fight the hardest battle any human being can fight and never stop fighting. -- e.e. cummings ... anyone who survives the process enriches mankind and grows stronger from the experience (theoretically). :-k

Hey Kat. I may have one you've missed, or perhaps what I have was re-published under another title? This is a large format book, ca. 8.5"x11", hardcover. It was described to me at the time I bought it as a reprinting of her regular column in (?) The New York times. Each individual "Letter" is subscripted "... published fortnightly by The Ayn Rand Letter, Inc. 183 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10016. Contributing Editor: Leonard Peikoff; ..." Frontispiece says: The Ayn Rand Letter (Volumes I-IV, 1971-1976) Published by Palo Alto Book Service, 200 California Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94306 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 79-52719 It begins with Vol. 1, No. 1; October 11, 1971 and runs to Vol. IV, No. 3; January-February 1976. HTH. O:)

Barbara, should you ever grow tired of what you're doing, know that with that attitude, you'll be welcomed with open arms into the scientific community. O:)

Thank you for that, sir. Though I dearly love the woman's philosophy and sense of life, I've always been dismayed at her personal judgements of esthetics. She condemned Asian music due to its being based on a scale of notes different from the West's, and at the same time valued tap dancing as an art form. Well, among other works, Yo Yo Mah's "Japanese Melodies" continues to be one of my all-time favourites. I'm also a big fan of Vivaldi and Mahler, and see no contradiction in enjoying all of them with one mind. As for Rand's artistic tastes, I attribute it to, "There's only so much you can do in a lifetime." She chose to concentrate her efforts on other things, to our lasting benefit. You take the good with the not so good.

I've been wondering about this one for quite a while now. BTW, none of that should be construed as criticism of either Nathaniel or Stuart, in case that isn't clear. This is just a personal daemon I'm trying to come to grips with. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

I've been wondering about this one for quite a while now. Early in The Fountainhead, Roarke is sitting in his office, watching the minutes tick away, hoping a client will call to buy his services ... and no-one does. Roarke packs up, turns out the lights, and shuts the door behind him, off to the quarry to earn a living. Roarke wasn't giving up his plan to be an architecht. He was simply putting it on hold until he could afford to pursue it further. Do you think Roarke asked himself the question you ask above? I think either he already knew the answer, or didn't care what the answer was. He was going to do what he wanted to do regardless of whether there was a market for it or not. He knew _there ought_ ("Things as they could, and should be.") to be a market for his skills, and damned if he wasn't going to find it or die trying! So, in reality , how long would you hold onto your dream, offered little or no encouragement, in the face of overwhelming odds, etc., etc., yadayada? It's all well and good to say, "Hey, ya gotta pay the rent." On the other hand, I've heard at least one guy reply, "I've lived under a bridge before. I can do it again." Tough question? :-s

Hello everyone. I've spent about the last three hours of my life in the company of some very interesting people; you! Thank you for that. I've been missing that lately. :-({|= I was looking for somewhere here I could simply post that in thanks, but there appears to be no way to communicate anything here without registering. Ah well, welcome to the 21st Century. Bite the bullet. Jump in. Accept my apologies in advance for any faux pas I may unknowingly commit. I'm ordinarily not a Web Forum kind of guy. I'm more a Usenet News & mailinglist sort. This format feels a little odd to me ... Eh. So hi. Thanks for the rays of sunshine. 8-[