From MohanR@STARS-SMI.com Thu, 05 Apr 2001 14:11:54 -0700 From: "Mohan, Ross" Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 14:11:54 -0700 Subject: RE: why is there dinosaur statues and evolution of human concious Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Title: RE: why is there dinosaur statues and evolution of human conciousness / RE: OT : Sinclair was RE: Metalink Again Keep it up, EP. I read every word.   Even understand most of them!
-----Original Message-----From: Adams, Matthew (GEA, 088130) [mailto:MATT.ADAMS@APPL.GE.COM]Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 5:20 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: why is there dinosaur statues and evolution of human concious I've said it before and I'll say it again.  Eric, you have entirely too much free time on your hands. ;) ---- Matt Adams - GE Appliances - matt.adams@appl.ge.com Doing linear scans over an associative array is like   trying to club someone to death with a loaded Uzi.                  - Larry Wall (creator of Perl) > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric D. Pierce [mailto:PierceED@csus.edu] > Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 5:00 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > Subject: why is there dinosaur statues and evolution of human > conciousness / RE: OT : Sinclair was RE: Metalink Again > > > > On 5 Apr 2001, at 11:01, David Messer wrote: > > Date sent:            Thu, 05 Apr 2001 11:01:26 -0800 > To:                   Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > > > > But, Eric, I'm not out to prove anything.  > > Never said you were. > > By "proof" I meant when two competing pieces of "factual" information > (or references to such) are posted to a public list, then questions > can, and perhaps ought to, be raised as to the veracity/legitimacy of > the sources of the information, and the nature of the "truth claims" > represented by the different perspectives in the argument. > > > >I'm only trying to show Gates in > > the worst light possible.  My desire to do so derives from > working day in > > and day out with Microsoft products. > > > I'm not exactly a fan of Gates/MS, and don't consider myself in > opposition to your main point, but I would suggest that if one has to > lie, deceive, or misrepresent in order to make the point, then one is > potentially exposing oneself to valid criticisms about a lack of > ethical consistency, and beyond that, the general efficacy of such > tactics. > > For background on tendencies toward dysfunctional (self-defeating) > nature of "social change" paradigms (and related tendencies toward > ideological/political oppositionality), I would suggest reading Rabbi > Michael Lerner's book "Surplus Powerlessness" (related commentary at > http://www.tikkun.org/). > > As I've said before, I think the sociological backdrop to the debate > about MS has to do with the conflicts in the value systems and "world > views" of: > > >  1) the (old time) industrial strength technical/engineering "purists" > > and > >  2) the "populists", unfortunately including Gates, that weren't >     afraid to do the messy job involved in taking the technology to >     the masses (cheaply). > > > These "opposites" are obviously an oversimplified representation of > the extreme ends of a spectrum containing more complex elements, and > also mirror pre-existing elements in broader scientific, technical > and business "subcultures". > > I think that part of the reason that the tech elites and "purists" > may hate Gates so much is because they realized, to late, that they > lost a great opportunity make a lot of money in the mass market > because of the limitations that their "purist" engineering/tech > aesthetic placed on their entreprenurial vision & reach. In the era > when "big iron" and extremely expensive software reigned supreme, the > "purist" aesthetic proved to be very successful, but it wasn't > universally competitive once the feasibility of a "mass market" > approach emerged. > > Ironically, the value systems of tech purists tend to align with > libertarianism (which I personally think is virtuous, at least when > seen from the perspective of a > progressive/integrative/univeralist/constructivist evolutionary model > of human conciousness based on the emergence of > transformational/transcendent archetypes, such as Ken Wilber's), > whereas PC technology essentially originally came from the great > state sponsored "establishmentarian" science and technology > development efforts in the space program and defense establishment. > > > On the other hand, as various people have pointed out, I could be > completely full of cr*p. :) > > > (apologies in advance to the old timers for duplication of info) > > regards, > ep > > > -- > Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com > -- > Author: Eric D. Pierce >   INET: PierceED@csus.edu > > Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051 > San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message > to: ListGuru@fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in > the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L > (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may > also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). >