Chaos Manor Home Page> Mail Home Page > View Home Page > Current ViewCHAOS MANOR MAILMail 416 May 29 - June 4, 2006 |
||||||||
CLICK ON THE BLIMP TO SEND MAIL TO ME. Mail sent to me may be published. FOR THE CURRENT VIEW PAGE CLICK HERE
If you send mail, it may be published. See below. For boiler plate, instructions, and how to pay for this place, see below. |
This week: | Monday
May 29, 2006 Memorial Day We remember Subject: May 29th column I could relate to your dilemma with OneNote/paper logs/Filemaker. You mentioned a quick and dirty database like InfoSelect and AskSam. You should take a look at a program I have been using for years that is inexpensive and intuitive. It is AuctionOutline 2.1 by Green Parrots Software (http://www.greenparrots.com/) . I have been using this software for years to keep track of notes on every project, every piece of documentation, organization notes, phone numbers and other random pieces of information. For me it completely eliminated my Daytime, little notes and Post-its. The software uses a 3x5 card metaphor so it's easy to understand. Objects are easy to manipulate. The notes can be styled (RTF format) and you can include images. Best part of it is that it's small. I can load the program and all my "notebooks" onto a thumb drive and move it from system to system easily. It's nice to be able to search and find out when the last time I worked on a program or how I replaced a system disk in a system years ago. I like to tell everyone about this software because it changed my life and made me more organized and productive -- it simply "works". Jim Jacobus thanks! I will look into it.
d |
This week: | Tuesday,
Subject: Then why is it not in the Constitution? Jerry, Just read last week's View. I fully understand your point, and am not at all sure of my stance on the matter (I was quite sure until I read your posts, BTW, and I was fully on the side of the Executive). One of my first thoughts on hearing of the search of Mr. Jefferson's office was, in fact, "That sure wouldn't have happened on Sparta!" But on Sparta, such was written into the Constitution. I wonder why no such clarity was provided in our Constitution. Was it simply "presumed" by the Founders that we'd never need it? As always, thanks for all you do, so that we don't have to. Steven J. Howell, CPA Many of our Constitutional necessities were not written into the document, in part because they were assumed or understood to be "necessary and proper", and in part because they just weren't thought of. There was considerable debate over what titles the President might have. Some Republics used titles such as "His High Mightiness." John Adams settled the matter by addressing G. Washington as "Mr. President." It is easy to infer some degree of legislative immunity from the doctrine of separation of powers. All immunities and exceptions to rule of law are less than desirable, but often that is the only way to prevent a greater danger. The danger that the executive will overwhelm the legislative power is historically great; the harm that an individual corrupt legislator can do is small compared to the potential harm of inherent in executive corruption of the legislative body. ========= Subject: Why Search Gather More Information Just because it appears that you have enough information to bring charges; it doesn’t mean you stop an investigation. You gather as much information as time allows. Every thing you can add to the case adds to the tools that the prosecutor has to work with. There’s always the chance that some element of the case will be thrown out. Along the way, you may turn up more information. If you’re an agency as over funded as the FBI, is then you have plenty of time to do these sorts of detailed investigations. Those of us in local law enforcement often have to compromise because our call volume or case load wouldn’t generally allow this sort of detailed investigation. I fail to see the big issue here. As Mr. Hembree pointed out, this is a search pursuant to a warrant. Of course, I’m a cop, and I favor generally favor seeking the truth and taking enforcement actions. While I generally have nothing good to say about federal law enforcement, it sounds like they’ve legitimately found a bad guy, in spite of hamstringing themselves by sending in agents to serve a search warrant who hadn’t been working the case. Still, it sounds like a job well done to me. Jason Mitchell Were I Speaker I would be hearing Articles of Impeachment of the Attorney General right now. I understand the attitude: catch the bad buy and nail him no matter what unintended consequences. I also know the history of legislative intimidation. ==
====== Subject: Tragedy and Irony The earthquake in Indonesia provoked this short take in the "USA Today Daily Briefing" via email, Dr. Pournelle: "Indonesians want more aid." http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-05-29-quake_x.htm If memory serves, Indonesia has the largest Muslim of any nation. I believe it is also much closer geographically to the oil-rich Muslim nations than to the USA. Most Muslims, if one believes the screaming headlines, want the USA out...until something goes wrong. So why are they asking us for aid instead of their co-religionists in Iran, for example? Charles Brumbelow Last night's network news made the Indonesians sound like whiney crybabies: "there hasn't been much aid yet." I do know that the Navy has dispatched ships in that direction. Too little, too late, apparently. Oh -- and by the way, ask permission before you land, respect our sovereignty, don't send your troops ashore armed, and gimme gimme gimme. You expected something else? ============= Subject: An upgrade opportunity for you http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1964321,00.asp Faster, heavier, AND more expensive. What more could you want? . png Indeed. ========== Inconstant neutron star. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060529_compact_jets.html - Roland Dobbins =========== Subject: The Raid On Representative Jefferson's Congressional Office Denounced by WSJ Opinion Interesting article here, reinforcing your commentary on the events, Dr. Pournelle: http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008444
Enjoy! Although sometimes one might wish to be proven wrong, unfortunately this isn't such a situation. If there is truth to the rumor about the AG and AssAG threatening to resign, I agree that Bush should accept those forthwith...and can a few others while he is at it. Charles Brumbelow =========== Subject: Federalist 51. http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa51.htm -----
------ Roland Dobbins ========= I will let this represent several letters to the same effect: Subject: WSJ Needs to Do Better Reporting The WSJ opinion piece on the Raid On (A) Congress(man) said: "Yet with all of this evidence in hand, the question is why prosecutors also felt the need to raid Mr. Jefferson's office in the middle of the night--the first such raid in the history of Congress." Well: - they had sent a subpoena that had been ignored. - they had information from an informant (who has pled guilty for his part in the case) that there were documents related to the case in the office In any case, the DoJ has gone to extensive lengths to protect Congressional immunities. First, the raid was conducted by agents not already working on the case. Second, the documents were to be screened for protected information by attorneys not already working on the case. Third, a full accounting of the decisions are to be delivered to the Hon. Rep.'s attorneys for review. Finally, the speech and debate clause is narrow in what it says (i.e. they can be arrested for felonies), and Supreme Court decisions on it are pretty clear that bribery is one of the areas where the Executive is given some latitude. The ConLaw experts I've read all concur on this. Edmund Hack Perhaps it is far better that the Congressman, already doomed given the evidence they had, be convicted seven times over than that we give too tender an attention to the principle of legislative independence and privilege. Adding five more years to this wretch's sentence will do more for the Republic than leaving stand a precedent of 200 years of legislative privilege. Not charging him with all the crimes he might be charged with -- after all, another wretch has said there were papers in that office -- would threaten the life of the Republic. Surely the Congress cannot be allowed to defy the law! Of course the Congress was not in fact in defiance of the law, but that is not to the point. The man was a crook! He ought to be charged with every possible charge of his crookedness! And if that establishes the point that it was time and past time for this hoary old notion of Congressional Independence to be swept into the dustbin of history, so much the better. The Executive must not be defied. The FBI could not possibly swear out falsities in a warrant, no more than would the BATF. The Attorney General could not possibly be involved in sending in armed agents on the basis of evidence from a self-serving accomplice! And of concealing the very doors of the place they raided after a fire fight broke out. The Executive must not be defied. As for me, I would rather that Mr. Jefferson get only 20 years rather than 25 or 30, if that be the cost of retaining legislative independence, but then I am one of those hopeless paleo conservatives. But I note that Bob Walker has the same opinion that I do. ========== Norm Ornstein on the Jefferson Affair. http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.24459/pub_detail.asp -- Roland Dobbins |
This week: |
Wednesday,
May 31, 2006 Harry Erwin's Letter from England A little belated, but we spent four days in the Lake District (see < http://scat-he-g4.sunderland.ac.uk/~harryerw/blog/index.php>). London Times story on Iraqi massacre. <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2201470,00.html> European Court of Justice protects EU privacy. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1786343,00.html> Cohabitation rights for unmarried couples. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5032196.stm> <http://www.guardian.co.uk/gayrights/story/0,,1786469,00.html> Hunting with dogs on National Trust lands in England to be permitted. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5032250.stm> Perhaps there's light at the end of the tunnel. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/5032724.stm> But maybe not. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/5029086.stm> Al Gore deliberately misquoted by the Guardian. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1786322,00.html> NHS stories. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5029960.stm>--good news. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5029660.stm>--typical news. Three links from Bruce Schneier's blog -- "The data (or the marks when teaching) are sacrosanct--they tell us what actually happened." Harry Erwin, PhD http://osiris.sunderland.ac.uk/~cs0her -- Harry Erwin, PhD, Program Leader, MSc Information Systems Security, University of Sunderland. <http://scat-he-g4.sunderland.ac.uk/~harryerw> Weblog at: <http://scat-he-g4.sunderland.ac.uk/~harryerw/blog/index.php> ========== Felony battery. http://www.local6.com/news/9296454/detail.html - Roland Dobbins Local nonsense best dealt with locally. Surely there is common sense in that district? But of course we must act globally... ============= Subject: Copyright Law, was enacted on this day, May 31, 1790 Copyright President George Washington signed the first U.S. copyright law in 1790, which gave protection for 14 years to books written by U.S. citizens. Copyright developed out of the same system as royal patent grants, though the purpose of such grants was not to protect authors' or publishers' rights but to give the government revenue and control over the contents of publication. In a major revision of copyright law in 1976, the U.S. Congress specified that copyright subsists in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of _expression. The general term of copyright protection is now the life of the author plus 70 years. For anonymous works, pseudonymous works, and works made for hire, the term of copyright protection is 95 years from first publication or 120 years from the date of creation of the work, whichever is shorter. Sue =========
==========
I can testify to this: in the 1950's it was possible to get a PhD in psychology without ever having heard of the DSM, and in fact the notion of such a document was generally met with derision in those days. Our Abnormal Psychology textbook was Henderson and Gillespie, A Textbook of Psychiatry. The DSM has arguably been one of the worst influences in the history of medicine; I am no particularly competent to make that argument but I know many who have. ===========
============= My university doesn't seem to have a site license for this journal. I'm kind of curious about what sort of population data they found. It's available for download here: http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/vaop/ncurrent/index.html "Polymorphisms in the dopamine D4 receptor gene (DRD4) contribute to individual differences in human sexual behavior: desire, arousal and sexual function"
Jason == Jason, But note that they don't say *which* "populations" contain which variants of the gene! In societies where women are chattel, I would guess that their sexual interest matters a lot less... Jim ========== Subject: Rep Jefferson is a common crook Rep. William Jefferson is not only a crook, he is an arrogant and STUPID crook... highlights I have read 1-Captured on tape taking a $100,000 bribe, during which he jokes about the FBI watching 2-FBI finds $90,000 of the bribe in his freezer, and during the search of his home the agent detailed to watch Jefferson sees him place documents into a bag that had already been inspected... when confronted, he lies about the documents (lie is easily proved when the bag is reopened and contents inspected) 3-FBI issues a supboena which Jefferson ignores for 8 months... leading to the search of his office, during which a "filter team" of agents inspect the items to be seized, to be sure nothing not in the supboena is taken in error Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution - reads that senators and representatives “shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.” Bribery at the $100,000 level is a Felony, so I do not see why Jefferson's office should not be searched just like any other crook John Thomas Smith I am sure you do not see why. Clearly it is more important to get even more evidence on this wretch than to adhere to a 200 year old precedent. Indeed, this makes for a great opportunity to throw out that hoary old notion. Good riddance, and a great case for it. Nevertheless I predict that you will live to regret your joy in this matter. == Subject: Legislative Immunity Explicit in Article I Dr Pournelle, Does not Article I, Sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution make the principle of Legislative Immunity explicit? The last line of Section 2 says; "The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment". Section 3 says; "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present. Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law." Article I makes it clear that it is Congress that has jurisdiction over elected officials, whether it be the President or one of its own members. Note in particular that it says a party convicted under impeachment proceedings is then liable to idictment and trial, but only after convicted in impeachment proceedings and removed from office (the sole allowable punishment). Does this not make it clear that The Executive and Judicial Branches have no buisiness stepping in until Congress has concluded its impeachment proceedings? Does this not make the principle of Legislative Immunity explicit in our Constitution? Executive immunity as well? After all, the executive branch (FBI) cannot execute a search without a warrant issued by the courts and Article I does state that the Senate shall have the "sole power to try all impeachments", which to me means that no court may issue a warrant for such a search. I am no Constitutional scholar but this whole thing has prompted me to dust off a copy and re-read it. Am I missing something? Thanks very much Matt Kirchner Kirkuk, Iraq That was the principle I was taught. But that was a long time ago, and the Constitution is a Living Document, and Mr. Jefferson is obviously a cheap crook and a Felon, so we may dispense with all this needless moomeraw and get on with searching his office and jailing him. Living Documents change to suit the times, and the times they are a'changing. ============ Subject: 42nd Line, on full kits! Note the reporter's emphasis that the *aircraft* don't have to fly into a danger zone. Wonder if he asked the paratroopers? Yours Aye, RGMcF
============= Wisdom from Australia: Subject: Illegal Aliens? Illegal aliens? Shit! I didn't even know we'd made contact with another planet, let alone know that the USA had made these visits from another planet illegal. You Yanks never cease to amaze me! You don't know your left wing from your right wing - hence really ignorant statements like "Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for Western Civilization as it commits suicide." The stunning levels of stupidity contained in that phrase will keep the rest of the world rolling about in a strange mix of laughter and despair for months. Thanks for all the laughs. As long as Americans keep saying things like that we'll all know that you're incapable of running the world - and just as well. ~Dave By the way, they're illegal immigrants, not aliens... unless of course you just want to vilify them, put them down, shit on them and are doing the good old Nazi right wing trick of dehumanising them so that you can kill them without conscience... Thank you for sharing that with us. I understand you are too busy to explain your wisdom. I suppose we will have to endure our ignorance. == Subject: Lee Harris needs an editor and English lessons "Roland Dobbins and Julie Woodman both recommend: http://www.tcsdaily.com/Article.aspx?id=050506I <http://www.tcsdaily.com/Article.aspx?id=050506I> on why socialism is not dead." Well, I read it, and all I can say is that Lee Harris - like so many Yanks - doesn't know the difference between socialism and communism, and doesn't understand the English language - another Yank failing. You might want to pass the following on to him: populist: doesn't mean someone who is popular or appeals to 'the People' - it means "an advocate of democratic principals". Very flattering of Harris to call Chavez and Morales populists... Castro is not a socialist, he is a communist. (And I thought everyone knew that - apparently not). He desperately needs an editor - perhaps then we would not see stupid phrases like "its ultimate aim would be economic autarky for the region, free from foreign control." Autarky means "economic independence as a national policy" (gee, that sounds really evil...) so Harris is saying "It's ultimate aim would be economic economic independence as a national policy for the region, free from foreign control." See why he needs an editor? Economic economic independence? National policy for a region? What? And precisely what is wrong with economic independence? Strikes me as highly desirable! ~Dave PS Haven't any of you Yanks heard of a mixed economy? Oh that's right - you're all extremists (black/white, good/evil, wrong/right, them/us etc) - no appreciation of the shades of grey, no tolerance, no compassion. No common sense. Again, thank you for sharing that with us. Incidentally, it's usually "its" when used as posessive. ========= Subject: Amd-ATI and the CIA Jerry: From Forbes, a rumor about ATI and AMD merging. Besides graphics, ATI also makes AMD chip-sets. http://www.forbes.com/2006/05/31/amd-ati-technologies-0531markets10.html?partner=yahootix <http://www.forbes.com/2006/05/31/amd-ati-technologies-0531markets10.html?partner=yahootix> and a claim that the CIA under Hayden is about to embark on massive (and illegal) monitoring of US citizens: http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_8753.shtml <http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_8753.shtml> The article talks about FBI and CIA people leaving, because the program is so distasteful. "I will never hand over America's security decisions to foreign leaders and international bodies that do not have America's interests at heart." George W. Bush ============ Surprise!!!
Astonishing!
|
This week: |
Thursday,
June 1, 2006 Planning ahead is considered racist? http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/272248_future01.html ---- Roland Dobbins Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for the West as it commits suicide. ========== Subject: PLOS This is doing a fair job of shaking up scientific publishing, and about time. Mark =========== Subject: Newt Gingrich agrees with you Dr. Pournelle, Don't know if you've seen Newt Gingrich's latest e-mail newsletter in which he answers a question from one of his readers about why he opposes the FBI search of Representative Jefferson's office. I've attached a copy of the entire newsletter, but here below is the text of the relevant portion: (P.S. It was great to see you and Larry Niven at Baycon. I always enjoy listening to your talks.) Regards, Paul "Thomas" Miller Houston, TX
|
This week: |
Friday, June
2, 2006 The truth will out.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ --- Roland Dobbins ========== Subject: China calls in loans http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13048272/site/newsweek/?rf=nwnewsletter Brice Yokem Don't be surprised... ========== Subject: Unskilled and Unaware Hi Jerry. Last week a link to The Arrogance of Ignorance was supplied by one of your correspondents: http://www.industryweek.com/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=11260 Well, here's something closely related to that article. Take a look at "Unskilled and Unaware of It" at Damn Interesting: http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=406 Cheers, Mike Casey ========= Subject: Walter Williams on Creative Destruction Dear Jerry, I've read most of your comments about the abandonment, more or less, of the skilled worker in America, the people that made up a goodly portion of the middle class that have now been cast aside for efficiency's sake. That is, their jobs have leaked away to the Far East. What is to be done with this expanding pool of skilled workers that now have no useful role to play, since their jobs have been filled by, perhaps, several people making a puny fraction of what that skilled worker made? I know that you're looking for an answer. I don't have one to offer, at least for the question you're posing. I think that "creative destruction" covers the the situation as presented, though the question as to the human cost will settle itself over time. For example, this brief piece by Walter Williams on "Disappearing Manufacturing Jobs", makes the point: http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/walterwilliams/2006/05/03/196039.html The point being one that we've all heard many times: should something have been done for the buggy whip manufacturers or the whalebone corset manufacturers or the lamp oil manufacturers? What should have been done over the period that our agricultural sector shrank from 41% of the population at the turn of the 20th century down to 2% in the 21st century? (Of course, some will point out that there sure seem to be a lot of illegal immigrants in agriculture, but that's a side issue!) Williams asks what happened to the switchboard operators of the 70s. Anyone can add to this list. American RAM manufacturing jobs, American TV and electronics manufacturing jobs, crafts industry (needles and thread, crocheting, rug hooking, doll making, artificial flowers) manufacturing jobs, flower-picking jobs, office supplies manufacturing jobs, auto manufacturing jobs,...so many of these jobs no longer exist in this country. But how is it that we're still able to buy all of this stuff? Is it because we're borrowing money that can't be paid back? Or is it because we continue to offer things to other countries through our own changing comparitive advantages? I'm certain that the reasons are many, but it sure looks to me like our economy props up a goodly portion of the world. I try to visualize just what sorts of things would happen to us if we slapped tariffs on everything to allow us to, what? Catch our economic breaths? Restore pensions and health insurance? The industries that overspent on all sorts of things, whether it was fancy-schmancy world headquarters or gold-plated pension plans or expensive product features were bound to fail in world markets eventually. It's that creative destruction that catches up with them. The only thing that is NOT creatively destroyed anywhere in the entire world is government. And since only government can impose a tariff, I'm sure they'll get around to it during the next administration. What do you envision would be the result of such a tariff? The preservation of jobs? How many jobs will be lost because the tariff raises the price high enough that less of those protected goods are purchased? I would say just look at the steel tariffs from the early days of the Bush administration. What did they do for us? How many jobs were saved? I've considered that maybe a 10% tariff would help provide job training for those people most threatened by job losses. But then I wondered whether we'd just be setting up another bureaucracy that would never close up shop but would ask for larger and larger budgets year after year. Pournelle's Iron Law triumphs again. I don't have the answers, but a temporary measure like a 10% tariff for revenue wouldn't do much more than reduce consumption so that that 10% would eventually be counter-balanced by job reductions to offset the reduced demand. Is it worth trying? Well, sure, pick an industry that's hurting and "save" it with a 10% revenue tariff. I'll make a Julian Simon bet that in 10 years that industry will be less of a factor in the economy than it is today since cheaper and more efficient alternatives will have been found, and that that industry will employ fewer people than today. Matter of fact, I wish there indeed were a way to test this. Simon had a much easier time of it with the bet he had with Erlich. They just had to monitor the commodities markets. What about book publishing? What if the market for books changed so much that the traditional author/publisher relationship were altered significantly? I mean, hardback book publishing would decline in favor of paperback, then paperbacks would decline in favor of e-books, then e-books would decline in favor of video. You, personally, may not be affected by those sorts of changes in the industry because you have so many areas and interests to write about...and you're in the, shall we say, sunset of your career. But doesn't it seem reasonable to assume that public buying trends regarding book publishing will change beyond recognition? What, if anything, should be done about that? As a sample of the changing nature of publishing, I just posted a book review of John Derbyshire's new book, "Unknown Quantity" on Amazon.com this week. That's the second of two reviews I've written in two years. Out of curiosity I checked my "ranking". I am currently ranked 259,373rd. I don't know how many reviewers there are, but I do know that the top reviewers have posted more than 10,000 book reviews each! To me it seems one of the easiest ways to get "published" that I know of, except for blogging. But if one posts a book review of a new book right away, the chances are a lot of people interested in that book will read it. Anyway, I've gotten off the track. Again, I wish there were a way to gather more information about the effects of a limited tariff such as you suggest. Sincerely, Steve Erbach, Neenah, WI http://TheTownCrank.blogspot.com "The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits." -- Plutarch If one's god is Mammon, then maximization of consumption is clearly the proper goal. I had this conversation with Dr. David Friedman, an old friend among the sanest people I know, last week; it is a repeat conversations I always have with economists: what are the TRUE COSTS of Free Trade in a world in which there are political realities? What is the economic cost of anomie? When you export a job, the benefits are to those who import and sell the goods, and to their customers; when you support the person whose job has been exported by giving him a place at the public trough, who bears the cost? What are those costs? And what is the cost of taking an independent, self-supporting, taxpaying citizen and converting him into a public burden who knows that he is no longer contributing to his society; is no longer the breadwinner for his family? Who knows now that the only way to "get a raise" is to support even greater "social spending"? What is the economic cost of anomie? I have never heard an answer from the economists. Nor have I heard an analysis that distinguishes between a job lost due to technological change -- the classic buggy whip maker -- and a job lost to an overseas sweat shop that pollutes the environment and pays the highest wages in its region -- and those are paltry. Creative destruction of poverty in Canton, China is a Good Thing; but is it good for Canton, Ohio? I have seen few analyses that even address these questions. ========= Subj: Arrogance of Ignorance not new Hate to break it to your correspondent(s?), but what he/they recently called the "Arrogance of Ignorance" was recognized as endemic in the West since at least 1930; indeed, was recognized then as merely the then-contemporary instance of an ancient pattern of degeneracy: =A world superabundant in possibilities automatically produces deformities, vicious types of human life, which may be brought under the general class, the "heir-man," of which the [merely hereditary] "aristocrat" is only one particular case, the spoiled child another, and the mass-man of our time, more fully, more radically, a third.= -- p. 100 of the 1993 reissuing of the 1964 Norton paperback edition of the 1932 English translation of Jose Ortega y Gasset, _The Revolt of the Masses_, first published in Spanish in 1930. =The mass is all that which sets no value on itself -- good or ill -- based on specific grounds, but which feels itself "just like everybody," and nevertheless is not concerned about it; is, in fact, quite happy to feel itself as one with everybody else.= -- pp 14-15. That is: the defining characteristic of the mass-man is being, not merely mediocre, but rather *complacently self-satisfied* in that mediocrity. Rod Montgomery==monty@sprintmail.com And I count Ortega one of the indispensable writers of the 20th Century; alas, few have heard of him, and fewer have read him.
|
This week: | Saturday,
June 3, 2006 Subject: The future of book publishing Dear Jerry: Steve Erbach wrote: What about book publishing? What if the market for books changed so much that the traditional author/publisher relationship were altered significantly? I mean, hardback book publishing would decline in favor of paperback, then paperbacks would decline in favor of e-books, then e-books would decline in favor of video. You, personally, may not be affected by those sorts of changes in the industry because you have so many areas and interests to write about...and you're in the, shall we say, sunset of your career. But doesn't it seem reasonable to assume that public buying trends regarding book publishing will change beyond recognition? What, if anything, should be done about that? In my view, book publishing has already changed. Conventional book publishing is a mass market phenomenon, which seeks to satisfy all initial demands by choking every channel of distribution. The result of this is overprinting of those few titles that do make it through the marketing department's gauntlet of what they think will sell. (Forget about literary merit. That has been delegated to the professional agents who must pass on all entries to this race and have exclusive rights of presentation. Since they can only make a living by presenting "best sellers" the midlist has disappeared, as has the careful nurture of new talent for the long term. Maxwell Perkins is very dead at this point.) This crisis especially affects fiction, which is forced into defined genres that must meet these same expectations, and a marketplace where non-fiction is the preferred flavor. Since the incremental cost of printing another book shrinks as the the quantity goes up, the result is a glut of books. Because of the doctrine in law called "First Sale", no further author royalties will be paid, and because of the disintermediation provided by the Internet, a secondary market in used copies quickly springs up, driving the price on some as low as a penny when the new copies cost as much as thirty dollars. This puts authors in a nice little squeeze. Selling the next book depends very much on whether or not the advance for the present one has been "earned out". Complicating that is the fact that the size of the advance dictates the size of the promotional budget. If that is not adequate, then unsold copies soon crowd the remainder sales table. No one maintains a backlist anymore. For tax reasons, as well as the fact that storage costs. The disintermediation in the marketplace provided by on-line booksellers has led to the gradual disappearance of the small independent bookstore. Only chains have the economies of scale to survive the costs of direct retailing and their selection pales next to that of Amazon and the rest. Indeed, the 80/20 rule applies here, with most of the books on the shelves selling so seldom that they are known in the trade as "wallpaper". Retailers cannot make up the difference with special orders or even better coffee. If one is going to go to the trouble of ordering a book, then the Internet provides a much easier and more convenient method. And people who used to sell books to used book stores now have found that Amazon and eBay give them a much more diverse and profitable channel. So the used book store has retreated from the street to the spare bedroom, with a marketplace that is open 24/7. I do this myself a little, and most of my stock comes from library and other charity sales. Most of it is work long out of print, so the canard that used book sales on the Internet hurt those of new books is not entirely accurate. Again the 80/20 rules applies. The future of publishing may be changed by the advent of "print on demand" books. Many small presses have already taken this route since it allows them to closely match supply to demand. E-books will continue to be a niche category because they really have to be printed out to be read with any ease. (I speak as the publisher of these.) What e-books do provide is another form of disintermediation by eliminating the conventional publishers from the equation. As they demand more perfect, ready to sell, texts, the advantage in small publications shifts to the author who is willing to to make a more direct connection to the consumer. Amazon Shorts is a case in point. I am not the only author who is serializing a novel there, and one was recently dropped in six parts at once. The genius of this program is that it allows everything to be printed out and gives authors a much higher royalty than conventional publishing. with its multiple levels of distribution, allows. My current novel, in 14 parts, will ultimately pay me a better per copy royalty than conventional hardbound publication probably will. And there are no remainders. It is no coincidence that Amazon now has its own "Print on Demand" book printing company. So what is to be done, is for authors to become better business people and embrace these changes in the marketplace and the technology for delivering text to customers and give serious consideration to not letting old school publishers and agents dictate the terms by which their work is published. Supply and demand is a sword with more than one edge. Sincerely, Francis Hamit ========== And on copyright: Amateur-to-Amateur: The Rise of a New Creative Culture. I don't agree with all of the assumptions of the authors, but this is definitely worth reading, IMHO: http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6359 - Roland Dobbins Being in the midst of deadlines, I haven't had a chance to read it. I'll get to it. Thanks ======== Background info related to the Jefferson Affair.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjQzNDg4 --- Roland Dobbins A good background presentation. Thanks. There are still those who believe that this is about Mr. Jefferson and not the Privileges and Immunities of a co-equal branch of the Government. ============ Hello Jerry, I have an issue I would like to see you address on your website. It is an issue related to my previous e-mail to you, but stands on its own. How does one develop JUDGMENT? You have good judgment, while many other writers, who may be just as bright as you, and know lots of facts and theories, still have poor judgment. By JUDGMENT I mean something like prudence, like discernment, practical intelligence, like the ability to apply general principles to specific hard concrete cases. Phronésis, as opposed to sophía, if I remember my Aristotle right. A kind of educated common sense. I think a good number of the policy issues you deal with on your website, where you lament current policy, are due to poorly developed judgment of the policy makers. I'm both a college teacher (psychology) and a priest. I have professional interest in how judgment is developed, but the issue is, I think, a deep one of potentially broad interest. Some terribly bright economists, for example, don't have good judgment, and it leads them to support unfortunate policies. I certainly don't expect you to reply to me personally. It will take some work to write up something on this issue, and it would only make sense for you to do this if you think interest is broad enough to write up something for your website. Well thank you; but as a teacher you must know that Aristotle and most other thinkers have always believed that teaching "wisdom" or "good judgment" is a difficult proposition, takes a lot of time, and is usually suitable only for a small number of potential leaders as well as the future teachers. When I was a professor, I tried through seminars to develop critical thinking. In some sense that is what we try to do here. Economists think with models, and deliberately restrict their models to make sense of the world; this means that many factors, although labeled as externalities and thus outside the world of economics, are more important in determining real world outcomes than the models themselves. "Other things being equal" is much easier to say than to demonstrate -- or even believe in. One "externality" that governs is simple: if no one will defend a nation, it will collapse. Castro had far fewer troops than his predecessor; but if the army simply won't fire, if the police take the weekend off, if the fire department stays in the fire houses, a nation will not survive. None of this influences economic models; nor does the effect on the policeman of seeing his brother thrown on the dole after 25 years of faithful service in making buggy whips, or building furniture, or assembling cars, or building computers, while his job is exported to Bangalore or Canton Province. But I have no simple answers. Alas. ======= w f g
|
This week: | Sunday,
The current page will always have the name currentmail.html and may be bookmarked. For previous weeks, go to the MAIL HOME PAGE. FOR THE CURRENT VIEW PAGE CLICK HERE If you are not paying for this place, click here... IF YOU SEND MAIL it may be published; if you want it private SAY SO AT THE TOP of the mail. I try to respect confidences, but there is only me, and this is Chaos Manor. If you want a mail address other than the one from which you sent the mail to appear, PUT THAT AT THE END OF THE LETTER as a signature. In general, put the name you want at the end of the letter: if you put no address there none will be posted, but I do want some kind of name, or explicitly to say (name withheld). Note that if you don't put a name in the bottom of the letter I have to get one from the header. This takes time I don't have, and may end up with a name and address you didn't want on the letter. Do us both a favor: sign your letters to me with the name and address (or no address) as you want them posted. Also, repeat the subject as the first line of the mail. That also saves me time. I try to answer mail, but mostly I can't get to all of it. I read it all, although not always the instant it comes in. I do have books to write too... I am reminded of H. P. Lovecraft who slowly starved to death while answering fan mail. Search engine:
or the freefind search
If you subscribed: If you didn't and haven't, why not? Search: type in string and press return.
Strategy of Technology in pdf format:
Entire Site Copyright, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 by Jerry E. Pournelle. All rights reserved. |