There Were Errors

There were errors -it's time to move to Journal of mercedo - vol. III. See you there.

The Age of Computers
2005.07.16 20:56

As I suggested in my latest journal 19c-20c-21c, at the age of pre-modern society everything was decided according to God's criteria, only after the age of reason arrived first in Europe the age of human domination on overall criteria started.
Now the times are not pre-modern, modern but post-modernism.
In our company there are many rooms for many purposes - for employees to take a rest, for customers to choose our products, for products to store, for computers to maintain. Because we just ended having a lengthy rainy season unlike we experienced in the last year, hot summer abruptly began. Every day over 30 celcius degrees. Everybody agrees the showroom for customers has to be kept cool in order for customers to feel comfortable so that they can purchase more and our products are supposed to be kept cool to keep quality.
The problem is in our backyard - a computer room and our cafeteria. Computers are supposed to be regarded as the most crucial part of our company -management, sales, communication to the headquaters so the room has to be kept always airconditioned for around the clock. But when it comes to our cafeteria, we have to turn off airconditioning when we all are away, besides even if we were present, the temparature can't go down below 28 celsius which means still the room is hot and humid.
We have some break depends on our working hours -so when we came back from cafeteria where all employees have to take a rest, we even feel that ' now working hours more comfortable than the lunch break starts.'
I can't help but say that we are now in the age of computer domination, human resources are apt to be thought replaceable anyway.

Waiting For A Good Tidings
2005.07.16 10:38

I am still waiting for a good tidings, believing her word 'it's too late', which means it was too late to start wearing protection because she was already pregnant. I hope so but if it failed I only have to repeat my attempt with her consent.
One thing is certain -her pregnancy will bring about a Copernican turning in our life for both of us.

Legality or Biological Fact?
2005.07.16 10:19

I am going to propose a more extreme case which is more spotlighted to the issue. One married couple was thought to be no biological offspring but adopted a child who has no biological lineage with his parents who adopted him. Only later a husband appeared to have a child between anoter woman and him. The child is biologically connected with his father but on paper he remained to be an illegitimate and his father's adopted child is legitimate.
Suppose his bilogical child were certified through scientific method -DNA test or somethng.
Which should be regarded as his succeessor, just ignoring the father's will?

Legitimacy, Illegitimacy, Primogeniture
2005.07.16 9:51

The wife of Abraham was unable to reproduce their offspring for sometime after their marriage. Obviously in order to produce their offspring Abraham let another woman have his child with his wife's consent. The first child between another woman and Abraham was Ishmael.
Later his wife had a baby with Abraham. His name is Isac.
Bioloically speaking Ishmael is the first son and Isac is the second, under the primogeniture Ishmael had to succeed all the fortunes and wealth, land, etc. of Abraham. But the reality was different. Because Isac was a son born protected under the legal system -marriage where the meaning of legitimacy comes from, Isac was loved by his father and Ishmeal was not regarded as important as his younger brother -Isac, later Ishimael was kicked out of their house.
My question is marriage on paper as a form of legal registration should be prior to the biological reproduction held before the outcome from the legal liason appeared.

Great Expectations
2005.07.16 1:45

If I were able to marry her and have kids with her, I would have her run a foreign language school in which she would teach conversations. I would like to found a think tank for the international relations.
By then 'The Journal of mercedo' was published and printed more than a million, I would not have to worry about how to raise our kids any more.

May She Be Pregnant!
2005.07.16 0:40

Our partner's pregnancy is one of most effective ways to enhance our world. I am not interested in marriage on paper as a form of social system but a biological liason based on our mutual offspring, obviously pregnacy firmly connects ourselves.
May she be pregnant! Her pregnancy not only connects ourselves but our world, entirely different culures -Africa & Asia. But believe me for us our world is much closer than two different continents.

Having Date & Insemination III
2005.07.16 0:13

On the 14th of February, 2004 we drove together around Kokura, my home town. During the drive she agreed to stay with me but slightly before the drive was over she changed her mind. After a lengthy persuation finally we were able to have another night since last time we met on the 14th of August six months before.
I managed to have another night with her the day though again I failed to make up my mind that night. Followings are a list of our having date & record of insemination date.
2003.08.14 Thursday -first encounter & first night
2004 02.14 Saturday -St Valentine's Day, second night
2004.02.24 Tuesday -first & second insemination
2004.04.10 Saturday -having date
2004.04.11 Sunday -having date
2004.04.17 Saturday -third insemination
2004.05.04 Tuesday -fourth insemination
2004.09.24 Friday -having date
2004.10.30 Saturday -having date
2004.10.31 Sunday -having date
2005.05.02 Tuesday -having date
2005.05.27 Sunday -having date
2005.06.17 Friday -fifth & sixth insemination
2005.06.24 Friday -seventh & eighth insemination
2005.07.08 Friday -ninth insemination
2005.07.13 Wednesday -first wearing protection
Thus we met sixteen times since we met for the first time in which I inseminated ninth times. Now my concern is whether she's pregnant.

Having Date & Insemination III
2005.07.16 0:13

On the 14th of February, 2004 we drove together around Kokura, my home town. During the drive she agreed to stay with me but slightly before the drive was over she changed her mind. After a lengthy persuation finally we were able to have another night since last time we met on the 14th of August six months before.
I managed to have another night with her the day though again I failed to make up my mind that night. Followings are a list of our having date & record of insemination date.
2003.08.14 Thursday -first encounter & first night
2004 02.14 Saturday -St Valentine's Day, second night
2004.02.24 Tuesday -first & second insemination
2004.04.10 Saturday -having date
2004.04.11 Sunday -having date
2004.04.17 Saturday -third insemination
2004.05.04 Tuesday -fourth insemination
2004.09.24 Friday -having date
2004.10.30 Saturday -having date
2004.10.31 Sunday -having date
2005.05.02 Tuesday -having date
2005.05.27 Sunday -having date
2005.06.17 Friday -fifth & sixth insemination
2005.06.24 Friday -seventh & eighth insemination
2005.07.08 Friday -ninth insemination
2005.07.13 Wednesday -first wearing protection
Thus we met sixteen times since we met for the first time in which I inseminated ninth times. Now my concern is whether she's pregnant.

Having Date & Insemination II
2005.07.15 11:25

Last night I must have been very tired. I could manage to stay up late one night, staying up two consecutive night is really hard. This time I didn't stay up late but combined sleeping hours count just seven hours (three hours at office in previous night and four hours in her room the following night ).
On the 14th of August, 2003, in the very night we met we slept together. I hesitated to inseminate while we were one because I was unable to give her a total, unquestionable trust -can she truely be my future wife?
Normally it would be hard to feel such a total credit over somebody's character in the very night we met, but in my case it is oftentimes crutial to be able to determine whether the one is suitable simply because I've got extremely scarece oppotunity to encounter such a nice girl in any occasion given.
Because I failed to make up my mind in its very precious oppotunity once in a blue moon in my life time, which caused her further misunderstanding - my intention might not have been a serious one, the night we fell in love might have been a mistake, fling, as a result of infatuation at best, she kept on refusing to see me for six months - I just kept on writig to her about ten times through email, I kept on being unable to get her reply slightly before the 14th of February, 2004 - the St. Valentine's Day when many love and lovers are eager to have date with -.
Now another precious moment appeared in my life -this time I've got to make up my mind in time of being one.

Having Date & Insemination
2005.07.15 0:42

Insemination means much much more than just having date with a woman, at least for me. I encountered my future wife on 14th, August, 2003, in the very night we met for the first time we slept together though I was unable to inseminate simply because I thought I didn't know her yet. I was unable to see her for 6 months after we met first because mainly of my hesitation when I had date with her - I was unable to inseminate. That a moment of hesitation prevented us from seeing one another for 6 months, misunderstanding counts more just because I was unable to inseminate simply I didn't know her.

Pregnancy Test
2005.07.14 23:40

Last night I went to see her. I went to her room at 11:00 p.m. on time. I was waiting in front of the entrance of her appartment house, then she appeared from the road after fifteen minutes.
I brought a pregnancy test for her, but she seemed to be embarassing to use it in front of me so this time she just kept it and she said she's going to use it when I am away.
For the first time we had sex my wearing condom because she repeatedly refused to have sex with me without my wearing condom.
As might be the same as other men, I don't like to wear condom. You see, as I've been told her to have sex with wearing condom is a proof our having sex is just play, if we are serious enough, we might not wear a condom.
She rigidly refused to have it without a protection, so finally I wear it. She seemed so good but for my part, I felt much less than not wearing a condom. Beside I felt like I would invite a neurosis through exercising this -wearing condom. I was so frustrated.
I tried to get accustomed to have sex wearing a condom simply because she wanted me to, but believe me if she were pregnant I have no need to wear a protection. If she had babies for us, we would like to marry her. If she chose not to, I would liquidate our relationship any more. Pregnancy is for women it is a life event. I understand the feeling she had last night.

Happy Tidings
2005.07.13 1:36

0:47 In Yahoo City -The voice was very very small. I realised the phone call was made from here at a glance I saw her number being displayed on the panel. She hadn't gone to Australia. At least yet today. She had been claiming something in her tiny voice. Hard to hear. ..I managed to hear the word 'unfair' ' protection' ' Everytime you didn't wear condom.' ..'It's too late' I understand she's claiming she might be pregnant.
I said,' I am very glad to hear your being pregnant. I am very happy and very proud of your being pregnant. ' She said, 'Still not sure. Can you come to me tonight?' 'Tonight I am in charge, still at work, so how about tomorrow?. ' 'Eleven o'clock p.m.' 'O.K.'
Tomorrow I'm going to buy a pregnancy test kit in pharmacy and bring it to her room. For the first time we were able to see such an early at night.
Through pregnancy our friendship is going to be temporary to eternal.
This time too I might fail to be a deliquent again.

Middle-Aged Deliquent
2005.07.12 23:21

I am a middle-aged deliquent.
I've never read books of manga since I was a kid. I have no memory of watching TV from at age eleven to twenty-five. It was the first time to watch TV only after I went to America since I was eleven.
I raised up without knowing many popular singers and TV talents.
Now I want to be deliquent, middle-aged deliquent.
But I've got a problem. Because I was sufferred from emphysema, bronchitis, I cannot take a breath in a bar.
In my youngerdays -throughout my thirties, I never encounterred such difficulties, at least I hadn't noticed. I am not young. I intend to go clubing with great care.
That's why I call myself middle-aged deliquent. If I were a juvenile deliquent, I would not care for myself as much as I do now.
With great care.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Middle-Aged Deliquent Preferences Top 4 comments Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold: -1: 4 comments 0: 4 comments 1: 4 comments 2: 2 comments 3: 0 comments 4: 0 comments 5: 0 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Hmmm(Score:2)
by Otter (3800) on 2005.07.12 23:28 (#13041970) (Last Journal: 2005.09.28 11:54)
You're a bit old to take up sniffing paint thinner, but the bosozoku can always use some fresh blood!
Re:Hmmm(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) on 2005.07.13 7:00 (#13047843) (http://slashdot.org/~mercedo/journal/109855 Last Journal: 2005.09.27 11:22)
It was neither America nor Japan but Hoek von Holland, a harbour town where a ferry from Holland and England stops, in the afternoon on 27th June 1991, when I first encounterred the bunch of bosozoku, I was waiting for a ferry there. They were 20-30 members people Harley lovers.
One of them saluted me, unlike other anticipation I had had they all were polite.
Their fashion is OK. As long as they abide by the laws and regulations, it is acceptable for us to admit their way of life as a form of unconventional life transient to the adult.
If I were to be a deliquent, I would be eager to limit only mimicking to their fashion in appearance.--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters [ Parent ]
Mid-Life Crisis(Score:2)
by Stargoat (658863) on 2005.07.12 23:39 (#13042038) (http://www.stargoat.com/ Last Journal: 2005.09.29 2:15)
It's a Mid-Life Crisis. You should have fun with this. You are old, and undoubtedly have credit.
Do they have big Harleys [harley-davidson.com] or Indians [indianmotorcycle.com] in Japan?
Let's see now. We can get you into a bomber jacket [ebay.com] and helmet [ebay.com] for fairly cheap. Get yourself a pair of jeans and a belt from Farm and Fleet [farmandfleet.com]. (If you need help here, see if you can find a catalog.)
Then, ride like the wind. Chicks will totally dig you. Get yourself a baseball bat, strap it to your bike, and people will step out of your way.
Re:Mid-Life Crisis(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) on 2005.07.13 7:25 (#13048109) (http://slashdot.org/~mercedo/journal/109855 Last Journal: 2005.09.27 11:22)
Yes, I have heard the people who wear a full metal jacket or black leather jacket or something have a hobby to ride not 750cc class but 1500cc class Harleys. They were generally middle-aged.
Retracting what I mentioned above, I'd prefer spending my extra hours in a quiet bar listening to a sound of piano. I seem unable to put myself against the grain.--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Importance of Simplicity
2005.07.12 14:40

First of all this story is not my invention. I read in a textbook while I was looking for a teaching material 17 years ago.
One farmer who has eleven cattles needed to give them to his three sons in his leaving. He said, 'I give a half to my eldest son and one-third to my second son and one-twelfth to my youngest son. Then he left.
Sons were in trouble sharing their father's cattles.
One traveller who carries one cattle run into them and insisted he can settle the problem. Then he added his cattles to the sum of twelve, then he alloted according to their father's saying - 1/2=6, 1/3=4, 1/12=1
Sons are so glad and asked him what to want. Traveller just asked is the cattle he added and left somewhere.
The lesson we have to learn from this fable must be somthing like the importance to accept someone even unknown to us. But believe me this was very dangerous. In this real world, he would request more than one cattle he added to allot. Three sons might have to give away one cattle each has to the traveller.
The lessons from this fable is what is to blame is their father - instead of saying such a riddle all he had to say is ' I give 6 cattles to my eldest and 4 cattles to my second and 1 to youngest. He didn't have to use unneseccarily difficult formula to explain simpler matters - that's the lesson.

It's Nowhere - Original Version
2005.07.12 13:47

One night God assigned a homework to me.
Define what is good & evil and submit before me while you yourself are placed beyond good & evil.
I am placed myself where beyond good & evil then I thought what good & evil.
I thought & thought & tought again.
Then I hit upon a brainwashing idea.
I submitted my reply to God.
God refused to accept it saying,
'How come you knew what is good & evil while you yourself are placed beyond good & evil. You can't know that.
I tried again, three times.
I submitted my thoughts on what is good & evil while still I placed myself where beyond good & evil.
Then I realised.
Oh, I see beyond good & evil,
It's nowhere. That's answer.

Way Out
2005.07.12 11:54

In 1991, summer I was travelling around Europe, I don't remember where though in some place in Germany, I was sitting on the coach facing each other. In the other side one German was taking a nap and I was just watching him and the landscape outside without serious intention.
After we passed one station (Should I say Bahnhof?) he abruptly woke up and asked me in German 'Where are we now? ' I couldn't understand his quick way of speaking so I replied 'I don't understand German.' It is needless to say he replied as I mentioned above. I replied with a smile, 'Here's Ousgang.' Because I managed to read the billboard in the departing station. He replied 'Eh?' I repeated with confidence, 'Here's Ousgang.'
Seemed he understood something he fell in sleep after he saw around. He seemed to understand there was not the station he's supposed to get off.
But believe me I did the right thing - if it were the station he's supposed to get off, he would have to get off even after the train took off - It was only much later I learned the German word Ousgang means Way out in English. I noticed there are many 'Ousgang' stations in Germany.

After the Rain
2005.07.12 10:16

This summer it was too late to start rainy season and it was not continuous but relatively heavy rainfall from time to time.
After the rainfall this morning, it was not hot because of the effect of cool-down the temperature of the surface of the earth, besides many sounds of cicadas start concerting here and there.
It seems thanks to the rainfall, the soil that enclosed the worm softened and softened enough to let them appear all at once.
I am listning to their music while still being unable to realise the effectiveness of rainfall.

It's Nowhere
2005.07.12 6:15

One night -before I go to sleep God assigined to me the question - in which he asked, 'Define what is good and evil and submit before me when you wake up, but you have to place yourself beyond good and evil then try to answer my question.' I went asleep.
As God suggested I tried to place myself where beyond good and evil then I define it and submit in front of God. I was still asleep. God refused to accept my reply saying,' How come you knew what is good and evil while you placed yourself where beyond good and evil.' I hesitated to wake up and again I kept on sleeping and tried to think about what is good and evil.
As God suggested very beginning of his question I again placed myself where beyond good and evil - the place was little to be left but I placed. Then I thought I found what is good and evil then I submitted my answer to God before I wake up. God said ' You believe you found the answer what is good and evil and you placed yourself beyond good and evil as I suggested but your answer is wrong. You couldn't define what is good and evil. How come you define what is good and evil while you placed yourself beyond good and evil. The place where beyond good and evil was already very little but as God suggested in the very very beginning of his question, I placed myself in what I think it's very very little to be left and again I submitted my answer what is good and evil. But again God told me, ' You submitted your answer before me before you wake up. You yourself are placed where beyond good and evil but believe me your answer is wrong. You cannot define what is good and evil while you placed yourself beyond good and evil.
Then I woke up.
The answer was nowhere. We cannot define what is good and bad, let alone we cannot place ourselves where beyond good and evil.
The only thing we are allowed to is we placed ourselves in what is thought to be good or what is thought to be evil. Anybody cannot know what is good and evil, just we are determined to be good or evil by the standard we ourselves have to decide. Good and evil depends on ourselves. It's nowhere -beyond good and evil.

The Final War Over Japan Post Privatisation
2005.07.12 3:01

The Japan Post privatisation bill passed already in the lower house and the stage of battle moved in the upper house. Mr premier said if the bill did not passed in the upper house he intend to dissolve the lower house instead. He seems to intend to ask the will of the nationals over this issue. The time has come to make or break. Already reached the point of no return for both sides -pro and con of privatisation of postal services.
Any reactionary movement deters the progress we have to make. Please surrender reactionaries.

The Difference in Terror and Terrorism
2005.07.12 2:28

Terror is rather separated incident or just being considered to be anyway it does not necessarily have to do with entire movement by some sects, or belief, etc.
Terrorism is a belief that some political agenda has to be achieved by use of force in a peacetime with resort to violence, the idea is previously or primarily represented by the theorem Karl Marx expressed suscinctly in his political manifesto. Lenin did too in his statement somewhere.
Obviously the roots of terrorism is deeper than the single incident of terror. The most important thing we all have to bear it in our mind is we've got to head for the society where we don't have to resort to means of violence to achieve any political ends.
Kant used to write I believe 'For the sake of world peace' ( In addition in the Russian terms, world/ mir and peace/mir are so similar. ) League of Nations was established for the world to realise peaceful settlement in conficts and The United Nations too.
The use of force certainly bears another possibility of use of force from the other side that the forces were used. Vicious circles never cease. It is the most important to thing to meet the agreement both sides can accept. Now the age is not the Tower of Babel built. The time is nigh- Everyone can understand one common language- the differnce in language caused lots of difficulty in understanding each other in ancient Babylon. People dispersed widely and greatly in order to fill in this tiny sphere. Now thanks to the globalisation it is possible for all the people to understand.
People, be wise.

The Importance of Love
2005.07.12 1:58

Love is power to pull one another. Because I happened to love someone from where their second national language is English, I learned to think and write in their language. It's because of love. Now I feel some anxiety. She might have been my muse, now she's gone though it's temporarily, how do I dispense with her while she is out here. I am able to go clubbing but I am not confident to gain another girlfriend from overseas. Worst of all I am poor at long distance love.
Let it be. I hope I can find an objective of love in a physical term, not necessary to have a love in mind any more.

A Daydream
2005.07.12 0:24

On the way back from her room, I stood beside the small sewage -actually it's a river but very small. This river used to be used as a transportation of coal from the upper area where lots of coal used to be produced. At that time this area must have been prosperous much more than now.
Twenty-eight years ago when I was still in the first grade of the high school, I used to visit here. At that time I was a member of the swimming team, honestly speaking I am very poor at sports except for swimming and iron bar. When I attended the swimming club for just three months(it's quite short!), we used to exercise swimming 5km, but only I was unable to swim such a long course, I was alloted to swim 2km instead any way our team was strong and the strongest team in our metropolitan area. We went to an inter high schools in our metropolitan area for swimming. Our high school was one of two strongest among many. We went to the other strongest high school in our region. Both schools were competing in many areas, in baseball, in academic record, etc.
There I encountered two beautiful people - one is a woman and the other is a guy - the woman was very pretty and had round, big and seems bouncy bosoms, the other guy was handsome and very tall - seemd to me they were a best couple even saw. As a matter of fact both took the first prize in their play competitions. Glittering in my eyes..
While I was standing beside the river, I recalled what I saw there in the first place 28 years ago. People out of work were playing Chinese chess. Not two or three but many and more people were watching their playng a Chinese chess. Now they are gone. 28 years ago the street along the small stream counted lots of people out of work. 28 years ago the time was changing from coal to oil in energy that came up lots of unemployed. Now they are gone, now this area came to be a school town where lots of juveniles can be seen.
On the way back from her room I just realised the best couple is us as if it were just transported from the one I saw here in my high school days but now Eri and I seemed the best couple we ever encountered in our life.
She flew to Australia today... As if I lost something very precious in my mind.
Daydream, illusion, vacancy.

In Chopin's Case
2005.07.10 1:20

In the case of Chopin, the problem is so severe. No pianist including some of highest virtuoso is unable to play the piano fully expressing what Chopin intended to express.
But even the problem is more severe. Chopin's music is located deeper than what he expressed in various signs and notes, so his expression cannot meet his intended music.
His music is so perfect that anyone including any virtuoso and he himself cannot express. To feel his music in our mind. That is the only way left for us.

Bach; Chaconne
2005.07.10 0:53

What lacks in Bach's chaconne? It's love. What is Bach's chaconne all about? It's severity, strictness, solemnity, seriousness, of life.
How many times I listen to this song? Every time I hear this song, I learn how our life is severe.
I prefer piano solo in Bussoni's.
This song lacks love and harmony. I just feel his strict attitude forwarding to his life, without love he composed this song. - No harmony but sometimes confused and stormed but respectful and solemn.

The African Night
2005.07.10 0:32 M; 10:50 a.m.

Won't you see me tonight? How about around midnight?

As is usual I sent an email at 10:50 a.m. on Friday, usually we make it a rule to see on Friday nights, we both need to work on Saturday.

E; 15:59 p.m. Please call me after 7. It's urgent. M; Alright

Seems we can see. I got excited.

I called her twice in 19:00 and 19:40 but I was unable to talk to her, instead I left a message, like I try calling you later again, I call you later. Soon I got a email from her saying , 19:55 Got your message. No need to call. Will be in touch with you. I replied; OK, thanks.

The time is nigh.

23:53 I got an email from her saying; Will be home at one. Come when you can, but you have to leave early.

I got on a car and start driving to her apartment at 00:15. Usually it takes more than one hour to get to her room.

0:59 Mercedo, I have to leave really early tomorrow.. before 6, so if it's too early for you, then let's meet another time. I just can't awake too long tonight. If you're still in Yahoo City then stay there. Let me know.

1:11 Yeah, I just start driving to so still in Yahoo City. How about Sunday around 10 p.m.? Now you take a rest. -I was one-third of the way to her room.

1:12I'm leaving for Australia. Maybe see you in September.

I replied. 1:19 That's another story. Let me see you just at a moment. Please let me come to see tonight. Any way I'm arriving soon.

1:22 Only if you're close. Otherwise we can hang out another time, fine, I have a long day tomorrow, can't stay up late.

I left unanswered, and busy heading for her room.

Around 2:10 I arrived her room, because I had to stop to reply her email, I was delayed a little.

She said; 'Why you don't wear condom? You want me to get pregnant? I'm not pregnant though.' Everytime I meet her I ner wear condom, so she can be pregnant, just so far not.

I said,' It is just a natural thing for men and women to have babies. as a result of our encounter, I intend to accept the consequences we will have. She came out the breath she saved, I undersood she felt relaxed. -Our African night just started.

After a short liason, I wanted her to sleep because I knew she leaves very early in the morning, so I was sitting on the sofa, having beer and meditating... She said after a while, 'What are you doing?' I said, 'I am meditating as is always. ' I know it was not a time to meditate but... 'Come!'

Last night was much more than the whole nights combined. I was extremely happy and proud of spending the last African night in Japan, indeed it was just beyond discriptions.

Chopsticks
2005.07.09 23:18

Needless to say, we Asians use chopsticks in eating. And usually we eat in using a pair of chopsticks, two chopstics are pair in colour, design, shape, length, etc. No one feels ever it's strange.
But believe me, we don't have to use a pair of chopsticks necessarily in order just to eat. Colour, design, shape, length, no need to use the same one as the other. I wonder it's OK to use various combination of chopsticks. If one is white, it's fine to use black in the other. It doesn't have to be the same length, it has nothing to do with how convenient to use them.
Why am I writing this? I am suggesting that it is merely based on a vague assumption why we have to use an exactly same pair of chopsticks. That's an illusion. We can use any combination we prefer.
Why am I writing this? My love is from overseas, our appearances are indeed very different. But our friendship is solidly based on common interest, belief, value. What is important is not our appearances but functions we -a pair of both chopsticks - have.

The Cause of Terror
005.07.08 4:40

I just juxtaposed two entire different causes in terror - and I am not still sure which factor is more than the other. Maybe proverty might be a reason in part but not in the least all the causes of terror, at the same time just show-off in a world stage does not explain everything.
Battle is an act of terror in time of war.
Terror is an act of battle in time of peace.
We cannot argue the cause of terror as the same lebel as the war held between countries though, now it is certain we live under the age of unpredictability, the fact we've been living in peace till yesterday does not guarantee the peaceful day today.
In other words, the age of uncertainty.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Cause of Terror Preferences Top 20 comments Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold: -1: 20 comments 0: 20 comments 1: 20 comments 2: 15 comments 3: 0 comments 4: 0 comments 5: 0 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.08 5:23 (#13007342) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
To me- the time of war (official declaration) isn't as important as the targets and purposes. Battle is an act of violence between opposing military forces whose commanders choose where, when, and how the conflict happens, in hopes of overcoming one's enemies by sheer force. Terrorism is an act of violence by a military force against a civilian population- carefully timed and designed to create some form of political response. The two major differences therefore are 1. who is harmed (civilian vs military casualties) and 2. what the aim in mind is (gradual political change vs change by force).Of course, there are acts that are both battle and terrorism- the use of WMDs, such as the United States vs Japan at the end of WWII, is an obvious example. But by and large throughout history, there's been a major attempt on the part of the world's armies to not affect civilian populations.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both!
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:1)
by eglamkowski (631706) <eglamkowskiNO@SPAMangelfire.com> on 2005.07.08 5:34 (#13007471) (http://www.angelfire.com/nj/eglamkowski Last Journal: 2005.09.29 4:06)
But by and large throughout history, there's been a major attempt on the part of the world's armies to not affect civilian populations. *blink*And when exactly does your version of history begin? And end? And what parts of the planet does it cover?Complete and total obliteration of entire enemy populations was common in ancient times. Carthage is merely the most famous example.And such actions are hardly confined to ancient times, although the scope of such actions hasn't always been as grand (though sometimes it has, such as with the Nazis in Russia or the Japanese in China during WWII).Indeed, most of history has been the victors slaughtering or enslaving enemy civilian populations after wars are won. The idea of avoiding civilians is both relatively modern and mostly over-romanticized. General Sherman in the US civil war, for example, or the US treatment of indian populations in general, are just two examples, aside from the obvious Nazi and Japanese examples mentioned above. We could go through a whole litany of modern (i.e. 18th century to the present) examples where civilians are targetted by militaries.--Glamkowski's Law of Email: Co-workers will never read more than two lines worth of any email you send them. [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.08 5:51 (#13007633) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
We can also go through a whole litany, begining with the Bahgavad Gita in the Hindu Vidas, of holy books and holy armies specifically AVOIDING civilian populations- and last I looked, that holy book was about 500 years older than Moses. There are plenty of examples on both sides- but when the military codes of honor get written down, they tend to avoid the counter examples you mention- and thus most soldiers in the world TODAY are taught with avoidance of civilian casualties being a major point of the just war.Of course- the point can be made that it's very rare that a just army defeats an unjust one without commiting acts of terrorism by the above definitions, in fact I can't point to a single example. But to say that they don't try would also be an exageration.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both! [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:1)
by eglamkowski (631706) <eglamkowskiNO@SPAMangelfire.com> on 2005.07.08 6:41 (#13008173) (http://www.angelfire.com/nj/eglamkowski Last Journal: 2005.09.29 4:06)
I still disagree with you - the laws of war, the military codes of honor, were well known to Sherman, Grant, John Kerry (in Vietnam, along with many others) the japanese military, the german military, and all the rest, but they intentionally, deliberately ignored them.I'm not talking about collateral damage here. Targetting of civlians happens regardless of what the laws of warfare say about it. Whether the violators get charged or not usually depends on whether their side wins or loses is all.Hell, we got people today claiming the US military is intentionally and deliberatelly targetting civilians (especially journalists) in Iraq. I'm not convinced yet that that is true, myself, but the claim is out there.Now, maybe in WESTERN countries, soldiers are taught avoidance of civilians, but I doubt that's much part of the training in most countries. Heck, in much of Africa soldiers are frequently teenagers and I doubt the corrupt officers in charge bother with teaching them such nicities. And whatever muslim armies may or may not teach, there's no shortage of muslim soldiers who will happily slaughter "infidels" (including other muslims who are not of the same sect, shiite vs. sunni vs. sufi) - see the Darfur region.Yeah, there's a law of warfare that tells us to avoid civilian casualties, but my point is that adhereing to it seems to be the exception rather than the norm.--Glamkowski's Law of Email: Co-workers will never read more than two lines worth of any email you send them. [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.08 6:54 (#13008304) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
I still disagree with you - the laws of war, the military codes of honor, were well known to Sherman, Grant, John Kerry (in Vietnam, along with many others) the japanese military, the german military, and all the rest, but they intentionally, deliberately ignored them. In fact, if anything, I'm coming over to your side- in at least three other messages today I've argued that to win it's NECESSARY to ignore these codes of honor- deliberately and with as much intent to induce terror as the terrorists.One great way to beat your enemy is to make the civilian population supporting him unable to bear the burden of that support.I'm not talking about collateral damage here. Targetting of civlians happens regardless of what the laws of warfare say about it. Whether the violators get charged or not usually depends on whether their side wins or loses is all. Agreed. In fact- it might be impossible to win without such acts. I've been thinking since our last exchange, and I don't know of a single war in the last 500 years- or maybe the last 2000- that was won without such acts of terrorism.Hell, we got people today claiming the US military is intentionally and deliberatelly targetting civilians (especially journalists) in Iraq. I'm not convinced yet that that is true, myself, but the claim is out there. I hope so in some ways- we won't win this war without such acts.Now, maybe in WESTERN countries, soldiers are taught avoidance of civilians, but I doubt that's much part of the training in most countries. Heck, in much of Africa soldiers are frequently teenagers and I doubt the corrupt officers in charge bother with teaching them such nicities. And whatever muslim armies may or may not teach, there's no shortage of muslim soldiers who will happily slaughter "infidels" (including other muslims who are not of the same sect, shiite vs. sunni vs. sufi) - see the Darfur region. And yet, the Koran itself contains instructions that label it a sin to slaughter civilian non-combatants. But like other examples- the actions differ greatly from the words.Yeah, there's a law of warfare that tells us to avoid civilian casualties, but my point is that adhereing to it seems to be the exception rather than the norm. Or at least, it's the exception among winners in warfare- and might actually be neccessary to the win.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both! [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Stargoat (658863) on 2005.07.08 11:15 (#13010352) (http://www.stargoat.com/ Last Journal: 2005.09.29 2:15)
TamerlaneShermanAttilaGhengis KhanScipio the YoungerMaoPol PotXerxesBaburLi ZichengStalinSimon de Montfort
Anyway. It's not terror that wins wars.
Wars are won by making the enemy not able to fight you. There are three ways to accomplish this.
1. Make him dead. (Easy explanation.)
2. Place him in jail. (Concentration camp, prison camp, just plain ole' prison.)
3. Make him not want to fight you. (Scare him too badly to fight you, give him something better to do like pray, make money, etc)[ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.09 2:35 (#13014936) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
Anyway. It's not terror that wins wars. A funny thing to say right after a list of terrorists who won wars through correct use of terror.Wars are won by making the enemy not able to fight you. There are three ways to accomplish this.1. Make him dead. (Easy explanation.)2. Place him in jail. (Concentration camp, prison camp, just plain ole' prison.) 3. Make him not want to fight you. (Scare him too badly to fight you, give him something better to do like pray, make money, etc)Did you note that all three of these can most easily be acomplished through terrorism of some sort? Making him dead through a weapon of mass destruction is obvious. Placing him in jail requires kidnapping him first (though of course the winners call this arresting). Making him not want to fight you is easiest to accomplish by "Scaring him too badly to fight you", the inducement of terror, which is the very definition of terrorism. So most certainly terrorism CAN win wars- the real question is, are there other ways to win wars? I can't seem to find an example of a victory that does not include at least some form of terrorism.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both! [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Stargoat (658863) on 2005.07.10 13:58 (#13024657) (http://www.stargoat.com/ Last Journal: 2005.09.29 2:15)
You completely missed the point.
Terror is a means to an end. It is not the end, nor the only means to the end.
For example, the recent unpleasantness in Yugoslavia was not solved through terrorism. The local people were convinced there was something better to do.
The trouble in Carthage was solved by killing everyone.
The Boer War solution involved placing the entire populance in jail and killing the rest.[ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.11 23:15 (#13032555) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
Asside from Yugoslavia (and even there, HOW were they convinced to do something better? By a genocide and mass graves and war crimes trials), your examples are all terrorism of one form or another. But yes, I completely agree that terrorism is only a means to an end- but the problem is, it seems to be a neccessary means- the ends would not be accomplished without it. The real value lies in the search for different means.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both! [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Stargoat (658863) on 2005.07.12 1:53 (#13034049) (http://www.stargoat.com/ Last Journal: 2005.09.29 2:15)
In Yugoslavia, the people were convinced that NATO would back them up. I've spoken with some of the people in the final protest, and they were just tired of being hungry, and hated by the rest of Europe. They knew that the war was wrong, and they wanted to get on with their lives.
Carthage had nothing to do with terror. It had everything to do with solving the problem permanently.
The Boer War was solved by placing the civilian population in concentration camps, denying the guerrillas access to the population that was supporting them. It worked well, and the war ended. It was not about spreading terror.
As I stated earlier, there are four ways to get a person to not do something. Make them afraid to do it, kill them, place them in jail, or give them something better to do. Everything else is a derivitive of these four things.[ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.14 5:27 (#13057162) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
My point is that terrorism is in the eye of the victim. From that point of view, do you think the Carthageans thought that their own genocide was mere convential warfare? Or the Boers on their imprisonment? Both of these examples would likely be called terrorism by the populations they were applied to.You're still stuck in winner-written history; try looking at it from the loser's point of view before you condemn utterly (I'm one to talk- I support the destruction of Mecca at this point).--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both! [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Stargoat (658863) on 2005.07.14 5:51 (#13057344) (http://www.stargoat.com/ Last Journal: 2005.09.29 2:15)
The Carthageans did not think much about their genocide. They were dead.
The Boers were imprisoned, not terrorized. They might have been annoyed, even scared, but not terrorized.
I'm not stuck in any winner-written history, rather I am forcing the actions to be viewed the way they took place. Actions are what matter in this case. The complete destruction of Mecca, for example, would be terrorism, as it does not kill a specific nation of people; much as the bombing of Dresden was terrorism. The complete destruction of everyone in Saudi Arabi would be genocide, not terrorism.
In order for something to be terrorism, the intent must be to terrorize. The action itself is the definition of action, not the action's effect (supposed or otherwise). True, it is Kantian, but still correct.[ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.14 6:04 (#13057447) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
I never quite agreed with Kant. Effects to me are often as important as the original intent. Especially when you're dealing with the type of people who have yet to forgive the Mongols for Ghengis Kahn.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both! [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Stargoat (658863) on 2005.07.14 10:39 (#13059464) (http://www.stargoat.com/ Last Journal: 2005.09.29 2:15)
Heh. But Khan wanted to cause terror.
Normally, I would agree with you, but in this case, because we are attempting to define different styles of warfare, we must acknowledge the aggressor's Grand Strategic intent. The actual outcome is technically irrelevant, as long as it resembles what was intended. (If it is not, it's called a failure.)[ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.15 4:59 (#13066388) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
Then we have agreement- because I most certainly consider the Iran and Afghani fronts in the war on terror to be FAILURES.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both! [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:1)
by iminplaya (723125) on 2005.07.15 11:20 (#13069364) (Last Journal: 2005.09.04 7:21)
...try looking at it from the loser's point of view before you condemn utterly (I'm one to talk- I support the destruction of Mecca at this point). Oh thank you for saying that. That kind of honesty is SOOO refreshing. I've been trying to get people to see things from the other side for so long. It's a big part of my rant against the machine. You are the first that I've seen to acknowledge that, and I salute you for it. As that line of thinking becomes more prominent, the urge to destroy should diminish over time. Please, don't ever lose that thought.--Oooo...standing for the Queen, are we? RTFM [bfi.org] [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.16 0:44 (#13073620) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
Oh thank you for saying that. That kind of honesty is SOOO refreshing. I've been trying to get people to see things from the other side for so long. It's a big part of my rant against the machine. You are the first that I've seen to acknowledge that, and I salute you for it. As that line of thinking becomes more prominent, the urge to destroy should diminish over time. Please, don't ever lose that thought. What you don't understand is that the urge to destroy is NOT comming from the history- it's comming from what we're currently faced with. The current terrorism is in DIRECT response to our own terrorism committed in the Middle East since the Ottoman Empire fell. Unless you know of a way to go back in time, we can't change that cause at all. We're stuck with it. The result will be a genocide. It can be a genocide of people on our side. It can be a genocide of people on their side. OR, alternatively, it can be a genocide of the two ideas that cause the current conflict: Islamic Nationalism and Free Trade.In the last, it will cost us entire cities and economic health- but no humans need die, just ideas and the symbols of ideas. It will require Mecca and Medina be sacrificed to a monument so horrific that nobody ever even THINKS about Islamic Nationalism and a world government from there ever again- but they can be evacuated first and the radioactive monument that replaces those cities can wait until the cities have been evacuated. It will require, in the United States, an end to Wall Street and quite likely the final economic failure of the East Coast, and distributism in the west replacing shipping networks. It might very well mean the end of Federalism- damn hard to keep track of the West Coast, Alaska, and Hawaii if we're once again limited to non-fossil-fuel modes of transportation (I seem to remember mail taking six months between the coasts- it won't be that bad because INFORMATION is more free now thanks to the Internet, but goods will have to be produced and sold locally, and people will be less likely to meet in person, thus making government slightly hard). Are we willing to give up all of that to avoid the real human genocides? I'm not sure. But it points out that the destruction that is required does not have to include human lives.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both! [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:1)
by iminplaya (723125) on 2005.07.16 3:09 (#13075330) (Last Journal: 2005.09.04 7:21)
We're stuck with it. I'm still willing to see what happens when we stop antagonizing them. Then an appropriate conclusion can be drawn. Until then, we just can't know what their intentions are. It's going to take a giant step on our part, but this time, we have to make the first move. They will not stop until we make that move. If they don't stop afterword, then we will know, and we can act. Justly, this time. We won't have to let them reach our shores. We just have to watch very carefully. As it is, there is no good guy. Just OUR guy. And I want us to be the good guy. I want to be able to support our people with a clean conscience. Right now that's not possible. One thing they have over on us is that they don't desparately cling to life on this planet the way we do.(from what I hear and read. I coundn't know for sure) This will always give them an edge...until we apply the "final solution"...or accept that life here isn't the end-all [wonderlyrics.com].--Oooo...standing for the Queen, are we? RTFM [bfi.org] [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.16 3:30 (#13075541) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
I'm still willing to see what happens when we stop antagonizing them. Ghengis Khan stopped antagonizing them 600 years ago- and Mongols who stray to Afghanistan still get pelted with rocks. What makes you think the anger will go away just because we stop unilaterally?Then an appropriate conclusion can be drawn. Until then, we just can't know what their intentions are. It has been tried in the past with semitic cultures- it almost always fails. I'm not sure if that's a flaw in their culture- in many ways it's a strength that we lack.It's going to take a giant step on our part, but this time, we have to make the first move. They will not stop until we make that move. If they don't stop afterword, then we will know, and we can act. On the plus side- we're going to have to take that move eventually. The Hubert Peak might not have been hit globally yet- but Saudi production and water percentage statistics now clearly show that the Saudi oil fields are running dry. We don't have a choice about making that move eventually- the only question is, will they kill us before we find the courage to make that move?Justly, this time. We won't have to let them reach our shores. We just have to watch very carefully. My favorite Just War theory was the very first- Augustine of Hippo. By that, you can't have a Just War WITHOUT letting them reach your shores- because the first rule of Just Warfare is that you fight only on your own soil against an invader, and you don't follow him back to his country to take revenge. But I'd point out that it's impossible to fight a just war against an unjust enemy- and thus control of the borders is neccessary to even be able to watch.As it is, there is no good guy. Just OUR guy. And I want us to be the good guy. Then you're about 160 years too late- our "good guy" status left the day the government made corporations first rate citizens and the rest of us second rate.I want to be able to support our people with a clean conscience. Right now that's not possible. And it's not going to be possible as long as we continue to engage their culture at all- because capitalism and Islam are NOT compatible (neither are capitalism and Christianity, strictly speaking, but there's a little more leeway there).One thing they have over on us is that they don't desparately cling to life on this planet the way we do.(from what I hear and read. I coundn't know for sure) This will always give them an edge...until we apply the "final solution"...or accept that life here isn't the end-all. And that's a big part of the reason why Bush won't win the war with the current tactics- that even attempting to fight using conventional warfare against terrorism is cowardly and foolish. Oh- BTW, check out my journal- I moved one of our discussions there when the previous discussion was archived.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both! [ Parent ]
Re:I disagree with your split(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) on 2005.07.09 11:22 (#13018538) (http://slashdot.org/~mercedo/journal/109855 Last Journal: 2005.09.27 11:22)
Battle is a use of force in time of war, basically between regular armed forces in which to fight is duty, obligation so it is completely in line with law and order, regulation, etc. But the word terror connotes illegality, that ought not to be occurred. Terror is a use of force by those who are not authorised to exercise use of force, so use of force by armed forces toward civilians who don't bear arms falls in this category in narrow sense, but use of force against militia - civilians who bear arms, and guerillas - not regular armed foces but bear arms, and rebels alike are regarded as a justifiable use of force by regular army.
Basically the term terror is used in time of peace, for those who acted terror would insist their use of force is a batlle, but indeed their acts are regarded as nothing but a crime in any country in time of peace. So I had to state instead ' Battle is a legitimate use of force in time of war and terror is an abuse of force in time of peace '
But by and large throughout history, there's been a major attempt on the part of the world's armies to not affect civilian populations
I hope so yet especially since the WWI, the nature of war changed from the limited use of force by regular armies to just all out war where all the people of the other side were thought to be enemies. But you are right - thanks to the development of information technology throughout the world, people regardless which regime they belong to can have relatively easier access to the more accurate information from outside the world.
So now, 'Their regime is wrong but they are just the same as other people' type of thinking has been prevailed. So unless any army being accepted as a liberator not an oppressor, there's no way to prevail. It is very important for liberators to be supported by the very local populations they liberated. Let alone use of force against civilians are just out of the question.--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

The Cause of Terrorism
2005.07.08 3:44

Again you should bear it in your mind that I'm not implying the cause of terrorism is the proverty or something like that behind the very prosperity we face - no, I mean there are some one who eager to make the most of the prosperity we face so that they are likely to be the one they are spotlighted.
Make sense?

A Genealogy of Terrorism
2005.07.08 3:28

Ominous terror occurred again at the centre of London at the midst of Scotland summit soon after London came to be the city to hold the 2012 Olympics.
Something strange. Something strange in this world.
The more one place is spotlighted, the more likely to subject to an objective of negative attack, in the case of N.Y. so, at the very moment N.Y. was attacked by heinus terror, N.Y. was just as tidy as clearest pond.
We have to bear it in our mind, behind the prosperity we see there hide a very negative aspect as the same depth as the very prosperity we face.

A Genealogy of Terrorism
2005.07.08 3:28

Ominous terror occurred again at the centre of London at the midst of Scotland summit soon after London came to be the city to hold the 2012 Olympics.
Something strange. Something strange in this world.
The more one place is spotlighted, the more likely to subject to an objective of negative attack, in the case of N.Y. so, at the very moment N.Y. was attacked by heinus terror, N.Y. was just as tidy as clearest pond.
We have to bear it in our mind, behind the prosperity we see there hide a very negative aspect as the same depth as the very prosperity we face.

The Legend of Seventh Night
2005.07.08 2:47

The seventh day is decided to the day of rest. Remember when we were still in Egypt...
As far as as I know that was Moses who decided to take a rest once in seven days.
The legend of seventh evening might imply how important to see loves -girlfriends at least once in a week. Last week I failed to call her simply because I was very tired. Owing to not see her I spent a miserable week... I call her with confidence and respect tomorrow night. May it's going to be a fabulous night tomorrow!

Seventh Evening
2005.07.08 2:16

It is seventh evening tonight. Once in a year one prince and one princess can meet through the Milky Way, indeed it's a romantic night. Except here in my room. I am alone as it has been. Cloudy skies all over in recent weeks. Now they can pass through to see all over the skies.

The Age of Self Responsibility
2005.07.08 2:04

As society allows more and more freedom of individuals how to act in society, the less the responsibility government owes to its individuals becomes. Government/ corporate responsibility has been diminishing as the range of freedom we excercise enlarge, basically it is a very favourable trend our society ought to head for.
We have to prepare for our life plan ourselves.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Age of Self Responsibility Preferences Top 5 comments Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold: -1: 5 comments 0: 5 comments 1: 5 comments 2: 2 comments 3: 0 comments 4: 0 comments 5: 0 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
First Post!(Score:2)
by Frank T. Lofaro Jr. (142215) on 2005.07.08 2:29 (#13005326) (http://www.linux.com/)
I got this first post before the story even existed!Slashcode works so well!--Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Re:First Post!(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) on 2005.07.08 2:39 (#13005461) (http://slashdot.org/~mercedo/journal/109855 Last Journal: 2005.09.27 11:22)
First post to a journal discussion? Anyway thank you very much but still remains to be riddle - how it's possible to post before the story existed.--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters [ Parent ]
Re:First Post!(Score:1)
by Frank T. Lofaro Jr. (142215) on 2005.07.08 3:35 (#13006120) (http://www.linux.com/)
I found the newest SID for a story, added one, Slashdot said it was only for subscribers, added one to that and it let me use it.So Slashdot is using the same numeric SID space for journals and stories...I was hoping to post to an SID before it got used, then the post would automatically appear there.Slashdot is getting very buggy (the it's been x minutes since you posted bug where x>2, the lameness filter bugs, 503s)- hopefully finding and exposing these bugs will make it a better place.--Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should! [ Parent ]
The flip side of freedom is vunerability(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.08 3:53 (#13006329) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
The more free you are, the more free your neighbor is. The more free your neighbor is, the more chance there is that his bad behavior will affect you. In the end- no government and no corporations is just as bad as despotic government and despotic corporations.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both!
Re:The flip side of freedom is vunerability(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) on 2005.07.09 11:32 (#13018570) (http://slashdot.org/~mercedo/journal/109855 Last Journal: 2005.09.27 11:22)
Yet I love freedom much more than regulations - since it allows us how to tackle with the situations we face, we can come up with many alternatives to deal with it, unless our freedom were admitted, alternatives themselves would be limited.--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Diminishing Corporate Responsibility
2005.07.08 1:45

As to Marxist Hacker 42's question -Does still a Japanese corporation take care of their employees well to their retirement? I replied as 'yes, overall they look after their employees in response to loyalty their employees kept on showing. Indeed in spite of the labour standard law, it has been somehow taken for granted that people once employed in a company they have to work as much as they can even if it exceeds the limit being regulated in a related law, so any way they have to work even if some are subject to karoshi- death caused by too hard excessive overwork, but they will be rewarded fully in turn.
It was already ten years ago when karoshi was raised as a social problem but for these ten years our society has been in a transit period from what is called Japan type employment to America type employment and still now is the midst of this transit period. In overall social strata in Japan remains in what it calls Japan type employment - almost unlimited dedication to the company in exchange for almost unlimited(?) reward to their employees.
For example, we used to have a minimum wage law that requires least daily wage for their employees that was around 50 dollars, but now this law was abolished. This law allowed employees to have guranty of life at its minimum limit at the same time it required utmost dedication to the companies. Of course in replace of their least guranteed wage, they were considered not being allowed to work more than one company they belonged. This law was at the same time a regulation of which company exclusively they work.
But now least wage goes to hours basis not daily basis. Companies don't have to employ thier workers in full time, obviously companies had to pay minimum wages, so naturally they wanted us to work at least 7 hours in a day fully that at the same time allowed us to earn a minimum wage.
So in sequence we are subject to work more than one company, e.g. in one company in 6 hours in other in 6 hours in another the other company in 2 hours, etc. Regulation of working hours came to be meaningless, we just work as long as we want depend on individuals. At the same time corporate responsibility over individual's pursuit of happiness and succeess came to be so ambiguous, indeed they don't have to think about 'taking care of ' their employees to their retirement instead, we -employees don't have to show our 'loyalty' to our employer. Our responsibility limits in 6 hours so their responsibility never exceeds within our limited working hours.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Diminishing Corporate Responsibility Preferences Top 2 comments Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold: -1: 2 comments 0: 2 comments 1: 2 comments 2: 1 comments 3: 0 comments 4: 0 comments 5: 0 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
There is definately something lost(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.08 3:50 (#13006296) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
In the employer/employee relationship in the new way. It's the same thing that is theoretically lost in the change from chattel slavery to wage slavery- a lessening of the "owner's" responsibility to those he has power over. Noblese Oblige is what it used to be called in England- the obligation of the rich to create living wage jobs for the poor, to the extent that feudalism in England evolved from the Lord and Lady in the Castle providing work for the Serfs, to the Lord of the Manor providing work for the community at large. Then capitalism took over- and people rarely got to meet the person signing their paychecks.Without that human connection- there is no incentive to be good to your employees- and in return, there's no reason for your employees to work any harder than the pay you provide for them.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both!
Re:There is definately something lost(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) on 2005.07.09 22:04 (#13020098) (http://slashdot.org/~mercedo/journal/109855 Last Journal: 2005.09.27 11:22)
Some corporation starts the foundation of corporation pension fund that has been thought to be the role of government. On the other hands, the retirement age of their employees has been downwarding to 55 or something, and they are strongly encouraging retirement before 55 in exchange for prior payment of retirement perk, etc. What does these mean?
I think private companies are more prone to privatise for the sake of the few who promoted more than others. They are likely to get more at the expense of other employees who are less benifitted from the company.
Talking of the noblesse oblige, yeah domestic company used to have such kinds of moral responsibility over their employees. But because those kinder companies have been subject to an objective of M&A from both domestic and international giants, some of them just did nothing for it but to let their company go of and throw their employees away. Those 'good an old' days are gone...--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Japan Post Privatised?
2005.07.06 0:07

Today the bill for the privatisation of Japan Post passed in a 5 ballots margin through the House of Representatives (Lower House).
Current government has been run by Mr Prime Minister the flagship of the Reformers, he is the very man who represents the libertarian view, indeed he is a very liberal man.
Many people including the members of Democtatic Party of Japan, thought to be 'liberal ' in traditional meaning has been strongly opposed to the privatisation of postal services, but their reason to oppose the idea is really ambiguous.
When very liberal person took contol of government, the opposition parties are 'opposing for the sake of opposition', indeed ridiculous.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Japan Post Privatised? Preferences Top 3 comments Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold: -1: 3 comments 0: 3 comments 1: 3 comments 2: 2 comments 3: 0 comments 4: 0 comments 5: 0 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Government owned corporation or private?(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.06 4:32 (#12987999) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
Might have hit submit by accident there- but it should allow me to post again. Really private, or government owned corporation? In the United States we have 3 major corporations doing this job- two are privately owned, one is government owned. All three are profitable- none have taken government money as long as I've been alive. The privately held ones are about twice as expensive to ship by- but they offer more insurance. The government owned one hasn't raised stamp prices in the last 3 years.Of course, as technology advances, the Post becomes more and more obsolete. E-mail and nifty digital broadband applications take the place of regular mail. Spam takes the place of junk, or commercial, mail. And now the three dementional computer operated fabrication machines are taking the place of parcels- just send a 3-d image or CAD drawing and manufacture it on the other end.I'd say by 2150, all of these corporations will be extinct.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both!
Re:Government owned corporation or private?(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) on 2005.07.08 1:03 (#13004265) (http://slashdot.org/~mercedo/journal/109855 Last Journal: 2005.09.27 11:22)
I might say the privatisation of Japan Post would not have nothing to do with the recent development of information technology -especially in the Internet, personal letters were thought not supposed to be handled by private company. The reason Japan Post remained to be public. But now many people prefer using email or telephone in communication.
Japan telephone& telegraph privatised, Japan railway privatised, Japan Highway privatised. Japan Post is the last major company that is waiting to be privatised. I just wonder how many corporations were public owned as if Japan were a socialist country, indeed Japan used to be much more similar to socialist country than America is and still Japan post being privatise, large portion of its shares are owned by government. It takes more years to be truely privately owned.--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters [ Parent ]
Re:Government owned corporation or private?(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.08 3:42 (#13006191) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
Railways, Telephones, Telegraph, ISPs, and even sometimes roadways (depending on the government and the real reason for building the road) can all benefit from privatization. This is due to the technology involved- and how new technology can reduce costs. But the Post Office is relatively old tech- in essence it hasn't changed in the 40 years since the invention of the Jet Engine and the Automatic Sorting Machine, and until we have matter-energy conversion technology, there isn't a huge technical leap possible in this area in the near future. Due to that, the increased cost of being profitable is likely to result in an increase of postal rates upon privatization- and no real way to become more efficient or reduce the cost of transportation.--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both!

Heavy Rain
2005.07.05 23:48

It's heavy rain today, for these few days the rain has been falling consistently temporarily but oftentimes pours, like a skole in tropical countries. In some area in this city, some roads are subject to sinking into the pool. Small rivers come to big torrents. Dangerous indeed.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Heavy Rain Preferences Top 2 comments Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold: -1: 2 comments 0: 2 comments 1: 2 comments 2: 1 comments 3: 0 comments 4: 0 comments 5: 0 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Inland Sea: floating fishing villages(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.07.06 4:24 (#12987929) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.28 6:49)
I remember hearing about small villages on the inland sea being built as floats, tied to bamboo poles, back in the 1800s- to be able to handle flooding and high tides. Time to export the technology from the 19th century to the 21st?--Two chances to become a Dictator- and Bush blew them both!
Re:Inland Sea: floating fishing villages(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) on 2005.07.08 0:31 (#13003904) (http://slashdot.org/~mercedo/journal/109855 Last Journal: 2005.09.27 11:22)
You know much more than me.
In Japan many major cities are developed in a plain made of the accumulation of mud from the rivers, this land is vulnerable in many disasters -eathquake, flood, tsunami, etc. so what should we do? As long as we live in this tiny fragile piece of land, it is good to learn from not only modern but our ancester's idea derived directly from their life.--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters