triplesec

Oh, hahaha. But seriously. Lots of events , entertainment and art things. And i suspect some kind of complex measuring of things. Exactly what i'm not sure

al creativity starts with learning the moves, the tropes, and getting inspired. There's a reason Brahms' 1st symphony sounds like Beethoven that it's often called Beethoven's 10th, but his 5th much less so...

Ironically, the article itself suffers from too-grey text on a bright background

Catching up on economic growth is nothing to do with political repression. Racism is a social problem, and not a government repression. China has a lot of racism too, but it's more hidden, because the pres is not free.

OK, so the problems with your argument are at least 6-fold:

1. You're still committing a Red Herring fallacy by not addressing the obvious details of Chinese political repression, rather instead just claiming they are necessary

2. You are also diverting by Red Herring by claiming that America is worse or just as bad. Yes, the USA does many things badly, and worse thaan many other Western Democracies. This does not make China any better. Or indeed better than the US. There are many ways in which important principles of open society and government are much better in the US than in China. It is astonishing that this needs to be spelled out, unless you are Chinese and have an emotional bond to its system.

3. China is not in danger of invasion by Western powers. I really think you must be a member of the Chinese Communist party to believe such things. This paranoia is shared by Putin's elite in Moscow. The US might like oil and strategic power, but it's not about to invade huge countries on any whim. This is Cold War illogic and hugely irrational

4. The US press is much freer than most in the world. CErtainly more than China's. IT's not perfectly free, but the 1st Amendment makes it so much more powerful in principle than in the UK, Germany, France, and many other relatively free western democracies, and certainly than almowt all otehrs in the world. In practice, money rules, and it's hard to get balanced voices against the neocons, but NPR would really not happen in China

5. the Great Firewall of China.

6. Repression of Tibetan ethnic identity, and no there is no strategic reason for including Tibet in the Chinese empire. That's all about expansionism Tibet is a barren, mountainous poor country, and being culturally homogenised into Chinese Han culture by deliberate immigration policies such as the ones Stalin used to Russify the Soviet states.

7. China jails people for speaking freely. Political prisoners. It's even abducting booksellers and publishers from Hong Kong. The Hong Kongese are very upset about this and do't want to lose their freedom (and better quality of life) by being subsumed entirely into the Chinese patronage system.

Political freedom. The right to be an idiot in public, perhaps. A free press. Seems strange, but it seems that this is important. The USA 's terrible foreign policy is not the point here. Instead, contrast China with other democracies: Germany, Sweden, Italy, Spain, Ireland, Iceland etc instead in comparison perhaps

You are taking a very short sighted view here, because if Chinese social media became practical monopolies you would be much more worried than if an American company did, because the Chinese government is so much more repressive

Especially in the restrictive and rights-thieving T&C. The OS is badly compromised, and I'd like a better, proper open source option

Except their T&C are revoltingly grabbing of image rights. No thanks.

This is what concerns me about my Evernotes. Even though o regularly back up exports to all formats. Because then they're harder to use. And why i just used documents old palm pilot. I keep on thinking, time to write my own application...

Yes, and English is full of them, especially in law. It's hardly random. English law was informed by Roman jurisprudence. And Latin was used in books and courts (especially ecclesiastical courts). I'd have to look up more details, and if interested, your searches further into this would easily surpass anything i can remember!

Thanks for these extra data. I hadn't been aware of these details at all. More please, anyone! It seems there is much merit here but we must have caution, because of the unusual arrangement of Booker's metaphorical marbles / spoons. I I have read in Private Eye about some of these stories, but hopefully here we might learn of others, and other journalists interested. Journalists from what used to be Exaro News may have investigated some of these too.

In any case source caution is also worthwhile. I welcome that more investigators and actors are interested in this.

This is indeed the trouble here. Because the family courts are (for some very good reasons, like protection of children) held _in camera_, (which counterintuitively for english speakers means no cameras, nor direct reporting allowed), we don't have many details. This is of course something which we might be able to fix better with newer human-information technology approaches, or more oprn meta-processes regarding feedback loops for justice. But, it's a torny problem. We used to trust the authorities. Often, they mean well, but they can be corrupted by specific interests in specific cases (rich people networks), or make grave errors due to institutional cultural corruption.

This is the new film by Adam Curtis, the maker of The Century of the Self and other great documentaries. Worth a watch. It was just shown on the BBC TV and http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p04b183c/adam-curtis-hy... here , and ought to be available to those with BBC Worldwide subscriptions.

Note: I hope it's available in other ways, so that others can buy this this public service institution is rewarded more so it can make more such things in the future. (ie, if you torent it, please find a way to contribute back, like buying old DVDs of Fawlty Towers, Jeeves and Wooster, Ab Fab, etc)

Be careful of the source here. Booker is variously a climate change denier and professional contrarian. He's very smart, but one of those iconoclasts who does get on a high horse. In this case it's worth knowing that he has been crusading against family and other civil court secrecy and rulings for years. ANd it's a worthy cause, but he's nt the world's most level headed journalist: hes sceptical of very reasonable judgements, like 99% of scientists re climate, for example.

In this case, some of his cases (and there are many articles, and they are worth a read) appear to be for good reason, and rthere will be some substance to some of them; but we don't know - which is partly why he rails against them. However, it is clear that he doesn't bring all the facts to our attention (like why the authorities may have had courts rule against unfit, manipulative and dangerous family members). Nonetheless, there is likely significant merit in at least some of his qualms.

Dig deeper using other sources, before coming to premature judgements. These stories are designed, DailyFail-style, to tug at your heartstrings. It's also worth knowing that The Daily Telegraph has always been the UK Rightwing broadsheet, but has since its change of ownership in recent years, turned more to Daily Mail-like reporting and sensationalism. IT has also taken a hard turn to the neoliberal Far-Right (think Brexit), and so you should take its stories with as much caution as perhaps the 'Washington Times', and worse than Murdoch's WSJ. It's not yet as bad as Beitbart, as it still advertises to octogenarian Colonels in Tunbridge Wells, but that may change.

Do not go gentle into that good night.

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

That's a good point, but nonetheless the article doesn't provide any figures or estimates. So other readers can point to the continued life on the reef and say 'lies', and bury their heads in the sand too. Even if it will all be dead in 20 years, or 40. The article talks of 450[units] carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. We're at 400 now. No data on when we get there nor graphs or estimates of when the rest dies off.

This article commits a grave rhetorical error. The reef is not all dead (about 25% irreversibly I believe) but will be soon unless we stop most emissions. They don't make this clear at all. This leads readers to ignore and shy away from the issue further because we think it's too late. Humans like to pretend bad news isn't there and will jump on any excuse for cognitive avoidance.

I agree with you in innovation terms, but there's a big economic difference: sailing used free energy and therefore could be developed over the long term by many actors. There are huge energy cost barriers to solar system travel which require bigger bets on economic return to be viable

Any links / which radio, which country, who's doing this? V interesting

Any idea of why this might be?

This appears to me to be a much more coherent picture of Green as a novelist: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2005/sep/24/classics.sebas...

Yes, I agree with your descriptions with one caveat. Being on mobile I took extreme shortcuts, so thank you for the more detailed explanation.

Also, re the question of a child post, Russia was politically its historically freest in the 1990s during the Yeltsin years, and even early Putin years, until he started murdering journalists.

My caveat is that the people support him only because any free media is marginalised, and most self censor in any case. Many know exactly what he is, but have given up on there being any meaningful change. Because Russia had mostly had terrible dictators and repression.

This is mostly because there is no free press in Russia since Putin ascended to the throne, and the elections are all fixed.

Yet don't forget that the deliberate, Orwellian rewriting of history is much much worse, and that's what the USSR, sorry, Russia is still doing, by imprisoning people for speaking the truth.

That doesn't happen (yet... until Trump) in the USA or western democracies.

I'd prefer a questionnaire which provides the benefits of self-questioning towards better self knowledge and actualisation. This can be done without MBTI which adds pseudo-science on top of any questioning it might provide, which falsely formalises bull and fossilises fake intellectual structures into public consciousness.

The scales are unsound. They actively direct people away from curiosity in discovering other structures which are less wrong.

Our modern ways of living, sedentary, often little visceral excitement, control by overlords and paperwork and rules do lead to an awful lot of depression and anomie. Why do you think so many people are unhappy? Indoor cats have that without any of the benefits.

It's not as black and white as you paint it

That's clearer and more reasonable. But what do you think should be done to achieve this?

Indoors is categorically not better for the cats. They're nocturnal predators. Let them hunt as is their desire and way of living. It's like keeping birds in cages and not letting them fly. Or chickens in battery farms. There are so many unhappy cats imprisoned for the benefit of their fluffy -loving captors. If you have cats, you must let them be cats.

So here's the rub: we really have to stop keeping so many cats

This is by far the clearest methodological explanation of the problem so far from someone who understands statistics and the problems of empirical research. Thank you. It's amazing how many people are too wedded to the truthiness of it, and are unable to let go of something they did once and believed because it was plausible.