The case for and against genius
All 24 messages in topic - view as tree
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 5, 6:07 am show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 5 Oct 2004 06:07:37 -0700
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 6:07 am
Subject: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
t=infinite)
The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
(genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
out of an university is near impossibility. All instances of multi
genius generation can be explained sociologically by envy. For
instance, Voltaire writing the Encyclopedia, Bacon writing
Shakespeare, Mendelssohn giving away compositions/themes to his
friends, Hegel (Kant? Fichte?) giving away ideas to other
philosophers, Heisenberg (Bohr?) in the quantum mechanics generation,
etc.
We can envision each generation as a hyperplane in the space of human
possibility where there is (at some moments in time, with certain
frequency) a high peak, global macimum, followed by other minor peaks
and a continuum varying about an average, (for the intelligence
measure, whatever it is taken).
That the works of genius get distributed, voluntarily or forcefully,
would be an expression of th euniversal motive of envy...
(The equation is just to impress! Easy way to take notes, though I
guess it can be expressed more formally in a model of gene trait
distribution along whole populations).
Reply
Uncle Al Oct 5, 9:34 am show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: Uncle Al - Find messages by this author
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 09:34:41 -0700
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 9:34 am
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
"Fabrizio J. Bonsignore" wrote:
> P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> t=infinite)
> The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> out of an university is near impossibility.
[snip]
1900-1930, Relativity plus quantum mechanics. Richard Feynman at
Cornell or Caltech.
Caltech, MIT today; Edward Witten, Frank Wilczek, Alain Connes in the
same room.
Stooopid.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
Reply
Morituri-Max Oct 5, 10:25 am show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: "Morituri-Max" - Find messages by this author
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 17:25:05 GMT
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 10:25 am
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
lots and lots of stuff snipped.. in fact quite a bit more stuff for someone in
your dire straights to have time to post...
Reply
robert j. kolker Oct 5, 2:20 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: "robert j. kolker" - Find messages by this author
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 17:20:20 -0400
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 2:20 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
> We can envision each generation as a hyperplane in the space of human
> possibility where there is (at some moments in time, with certain
> frequency) a high peak, global macimum, followed by other minor peaks
> and a continuum varying about an average, (for the intelligence
> measure, whatever it is taken).
Hyperplanes in affine space are flat.
Bob Kolker
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 5, 4:48 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 5 Oct 2004 16:48:56 -0700
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 4:48 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Uncle Al wrote in message ...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> "Fabrizio J. Bonsignore" wrote:
> > P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> > t=infinite)
> > The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> > (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> > probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> > out of an university is near impossibility.
> [snip]
> 1900-1930, Relativity plus quantum mechanics. Richard Feynman at
> Cornell or Caltech.
> Caltech, MIT today; Edward Witten, Frank Wilczek, Alain Connes in the
> same room.
> Stooopid.
Sorry, don`t know them save Feynman. How many scientific or
technological revolutions are they starting? (not personal, for the
sake of argumentation 8)
And if you read in lines (not inbetween the lines), the argument says
`out of an university`. We have to take into account the increasing
size of wrold population...
Stupid is writeen with u.
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 5, 4:53 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 5 Oct 2004 16:53:10 -0700
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 4:53 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
"Morituri-Max" wrote in message ...
> Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
> lots and lots of stuff snipped.. in fact quite a bit more stuff for someone in
> your dire straights to have time to post...
Who does not speaketh is not heard... my dire straits are precisely to
have time to post, instead of writing formally in a comfortable home.
And my time I am being told is running out, at which point I start
going hysteric...
Reply
Uncle Al Oct 5, 5:08 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: Uncle Al - Find messages by this author
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 17:08:56 -0700
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 5:08 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
"Fabrizio J. Bonsignore" wrote:
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> Uncle Al wrote in message ...
> > "Fabrizio J. Bonsignore" wrote:
> > > P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> > > t=infinite)
> > > The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> > > (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> > > probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> > > out of an university is near impossibility.
> > [snip]
> > 1900-1930, Relativity plus quantum mechanics. Richard Feynman at
> > Cornell or Caltech.
> > Caltech, MIT today; Edward Witten, Frank Wilczek, Alain Connes in the
> > same room.
> > Stooopid.
> Sorry, don`t know them save Feynman. How many scientific or
> technological revolutions are they starting? (not personal, for the
> sake of argumentation 8)
[sbip]
Hopeless ignorant idiot. You are empirically disproven. Have the
good taste to shut up.
--
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 5, 5:16 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 5 Oct 2004 17:16:02 -0700
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 5:16 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
And this kind of little traps I have been experiencing the whole
year... But it was not an insult, it was a statement of fact...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Uncle Al wrote in message ...
> "Fabrizio J. Bonsignore" wrote:
> > P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> > t=infinite)
> > The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> > (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> > probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> > out of an university is near impossibility.
> [snip]
> 1900-1930, Relativity plus quantum mechanics. Richard Feynman at
> Cornell or Caltech.
> Caltech, MIT today; Edward Witten, Frank Wilczek, Alain Connes in the
> same room.
> Stooopid.
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 5, 7:53 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 5 Oct 2004 19:53:23 -0700
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 7:53 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
"
Morituri-Max" wrote in message ...
> Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
> lots and lots of stuff snipped.. in fact quite a bit more stuff for someone in
> your dire straights to have time to post...
And the fact is that if I don`t post, then who would care if I am in dire straits?
Search `Fabrizio J Bonsignore` in google groups, sort by date
visit ghamac.org GHAMAC Home: Art, Music And Computers
Danilo J Bonsignore (Danielo, Daniello, this is for search engines...)
(8(>={\
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 5, 11:02 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 5 Oct 2004 23:02:26 -0700
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 11:02 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
"robert j. kolker" wrote in message ...
> Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
> > We can envision each generation as a hyperplane in the space of human
> > possibility where there is (at some moments in time, with certain
> > frequency) a high peak, global macimum, followed by other minor peaks
> > and a continuum varying about an average, (for the intelligence
> > measure, whatever it is taken).
> Hyperplanes in affine space are flat.
> Bob Kolker
What kind of plane would give a single, very steep, maximum in only
one dimension while having an average value, in an infinite dimension
space?
Reply
Mike Oct 6, 2:05 am show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: elea...@yahoo.gr (Mike) - Find messages by this author
Date: 6 Oct 2004 02:05:36 -0700
Local: Wed, Oct 6 2004 2:05 am
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> Uncle Al wrote in message ...
> > "Fabrizio J. Bonsignore" wrote:
> > > P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> > > t=infinite)
> > > The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> > > (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> > > probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> > > out of an university is near impossibility.
> > [snip]
> > 1900-1930, Relativity plus quantum mechanics. Richard Feynman at
> > Cornell or Caltech.
> > Caltech, MIT today; Edward Witten, Frank Wilczek, Alain Connes in the
> > same room.
> > Stooopid.
> Sorry, don`t know them save Feynman. How many scientific or
> technological revolutions are they starting? (not personal, for the
> sake of argumentation 8)
> And if you read in lines (not inbetween the lines), the argument says
> `out of an university`. We have to take into account the increasing
> size of wrold population...
> Stupid is writeen with u.
Your kind of stupidity is written stooooooooooooopid.
Mike
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 6, 10:34 am show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 6 Oct 2004 10:34:11 -0700
Local: Wed, Oct 6 2004 10:34 am
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
elea...@yahoo.gr (Mike) wrote in message ...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> > Uncle Al wrote in message ...
> > > "Fabrizio J. Bonsignore" wrote:
> > > > P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> > > > t=infinite)
> > > > The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> > > > (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> > > > probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> > > > out of an university is near impossibility.
> > > [snip]
> > > 1900-1930, Relativity plus quantum mechanics. Richard Feynman at
> > > Cornell or Caltech.
> > > Caltech, MIT today; Edward Witten, Frank Wilczek, Alain Connes in the
> > > same room.
> > > Stooopid.
> > Sorry, don`t know them save Feynman. How many scientific or
> > technological revolutions are they starting? (not personal, for the
> > sake of argumentation 8)
> > And if you read in lines (not inbetween the lines), the argument says
> > `out of an university`. We have to take into account the increasing
> > size of wrold population...
> > Stupid is writeen with u.
> Your kind of stupidity is written stooooooooooooopid.
> Mike
Can you explain why is stupidity? If you don`t then
stuuuuuuuuuuuuuupydyty id yours...
Reply
Morituri-Max Oct 6, 1:04 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: "Morituri-Max" - Find messages by this author
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 20:04:58 GMT
Local: Wed, Oct 6 2004 1:04 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
> "Morituri-Max" wrote in message
> ...
>> Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
>> lots and lots of stuff snipped.. in fact quite a bit more stuff for someone
>> in
>> your dire straights to have time to post...
> And the fact is that if I don`t post, then who would care if I am in dire
> straits?
Your posts till now haven't made me care one iota more, especially since it is
more and more likely that you are making all this stuff up as you go.. you might
as well have us believe that you're an illiterate homeless guy who somehow can
post here using a corporate network, your story makes no sense..
Reply
AaronB Oct 6, 10:38 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: amino_acid...@hotmail.com (AaronB) - Find messages by this author
Date: 6 Oct 2004 22:38:35 -0700
Local: Wed, Oct 6 2004 10:38 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> t=infinite)
> The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> out of an university is near impossibility.
[snip
]
Your argument is analogous to the argument that it is a good idea to
bring a bomb onto a plane when you travel, since the probability of
TWO people on the plane both having a bomb is infantessimally small.
As an aside, isn't this a bit off topic for sci.phys anyway?
A.
Reply
Mike Oct 7, 8:23 am show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: elea...@yahoo.gr (Mike) - Find messages by this author
Date: 7 Oct 2004 08:23:08 -0700
Local: Thurs, Oct 7 2004 8:23 am
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
[snip]
> > Your kind of stupidity is written stooooooooooooopid.
> > Mike
> Can you explain why is stupidity? If you don`t then
> stuuuuuuuuuuuuuupydyty id yours...
id or is stooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooid
You are stupid because you make a statement involving "genious"
without defining what the term means forst. Then, if you spent some of
you wasted time to read history of science you'll find out there are
many genious around in each time period. The problem is that there are
many many more morons around.
Mike
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 7, 4:36 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 7 Oct 2004 16:36:13 -0700
Local: Thurs, Oct 7 2004 4:36 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
elea...@yahoo.gr (Mike) wrote in message news:<9c1b39be.0410070723.514600b4@
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
posting.google.com>...
> fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> [snip]
> > > Your kind of stupidity is written stooooooooooooopid.
> > > Mike
> > Can you explain why is stupidity? If you don`t then
> > stuuuuuuuuuuuuuupydyty id yours...
> id or is stooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooid
> You are stupid because you make a statement involving "genious"
> without defining what the term means forst. Then, if you spent some of
> you wasted time to read history of science you'll find out there are
> many genious around in each time period. The problem is that there are
> many many more morons around.
> Mike
I am appealing to a common sense, consensus definition of genius. I
studied history of science. The actual defiintion is a debate that has
been going on for a while. If you visited ghamac.org you found that I
am promising a long dissertation on the meaning of genius, but I am
waiting for a more comfortable time to sit down and write it.
Meanwhile, genius is the difference between, say, Morleyson and
Einstein. One imaginated a genial experiment; the latter created a
revolution in physics and a new branch of studies (plus a lot of
speculatio in science fiction), besides leaving a deep impression in
the colective psique of Humanity.
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 7, 5:01 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 7 Oct 2004 17:01:38 -0700
Local: Thurs, Oct 7 2004 5:01 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
amino_acid...@hotmail.com (AaronB) wrote in message news:<564024e.0410062138.1745c36a@
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
posting.google.com>...
> fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> > P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> > t=infinite)
> > The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> > (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> > probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> > out of an university is near impossibility.
> [snip]
> Your argument is analogous to the argument that it is a good idea to
> bring a bomb onto a plane when you travel, since the probability of
> TWO people on the plane both having a bomb is infantessimally small.
> As an aside, isn't this a bit off topic for sci.phys anyway?
> A.
Oh, sorry, I am not paying too much attention to the groups I am
posting to. But I want to appeal to trained, intelligent people used
to reasoning.
I don`t see the relationship with the bomb. The value of a probability
has nothing to do with necessity. The idea is that the existence of
generations of geniuses is a SOCIAL phenomenon, rather than a purely
biological one. Biologically, the necessary conditions for an
individual to exhibit what most (or all) people would call genius are
such, whatever those conditions are, the probability of there being
more than one peak in the probability distribution of intelligence in
the whole population is zero or so near to zero that at any moment
there is only one individual who can actually be called Genius, many
other individuals who can be called geniuses and so on. Then the
probability of two geniuses coinciding in space and time *naturally*
is zero, though that doesn`t preclude the possiblity of the available
geniuses of coiciding after several social cribs, in a university, for
instance.
Then we can explain geniuses generations as the social pressure to
bring down expressions of great intelligence to a more manageable
social level that makes a group of individual plagiarize or downright
steal the contributions of the exeptioal individual. I believe
examples abound, as I pointed in the first article of this thread. A
special case is that of painters, where genius is more easily
distributed through assimilation of style after a thorough study of
technique. One great painter finds a language of expression and lots
of other painters explore the possibilities of the new language, time
selecting those who exhibit the best technique. I would have to do
some research, but I don`t remember Gris having works other than
cubist, while Picasso changed style at some point in his life.
Crosspolinization in painting must be easier than in other
disciplines, since tematic content is not as important as expression
and technique.
Everybody should agree that a Genius would makes contributions in
several disciplines. It can be advanced as a hypothesis that there are
at any moment peaks of intelligence in single disciplines which we
would call genius, while a single overall peak we call Genius that may
or may not be as `high` as the rest of the peaks. The point is that
this can be expressed as a probability distribution where the
underlying variable is the combinations of genotypes brought about by
sexual mixing of genes. This can serve the double purpose of
categorizing intelligence or human possibility as a series of equatios
(a model of Man), while at the same time explaining some phenomena
that originate in the individual and then have effects in society or
population interaction. I still need more time to order this ideas and
formulate a comprehensive model or theory of man (pompous title, but
ideas are, at first, difficult to verbalize).
Reply
Morituri-Max Oct 12, 8:37 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: "Morituri-Max" - Find messages by this author
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 03:37:39 GMT
Local: Tues, Oct 12 2004 8:37 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
> Unfortunately, Genius is seen as dangerous by common folk, who don`t
You seem to want to make people want to think you know a lot about genius, when
in fact you don't seem very smart yourself.. why do you spend so much time on a
concept so far from your own situation?
I would think someone like yourself would be talking more about how to get a
place to live, how to use the welfare system till you're on your feet, how to go
job hunting, etc etc.
You say you're homeless and such, and yet you have ALL this time to post lots
and lots of pretty uninteresting stuff to a relatively obscure newsgroup on the
internet..
wish I had that much time to blow on something when i am homeless looking for a
house to live in and no job..
Reply
ZZBunker Oct 14, 1:20 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: zzbun...@netscape.net (ZZBunker) - Find messages by this author
Date: 14 Oct 2004 13:20:04 -0700
Local: Thurs, Oct 14 2004 1:20 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> t=infinite)
> The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> out of an university is near impossibility. All instances of multi
> genius generation can be explained sociologically by envy. For
> instance, Voltaire writing the Encyclopedia, Bacon writing
> Shakespeare, Mendelssohn giving away compositions/themes to his
> friends, Hegel (Kant? Fichte?) giving away ideas to other
> philosophers, Heisenberg (Bohr?) in the quantum mechanics generation,
> etc.
Genius is the most overrated quantity, "science"
has ever invented. Which is the one positve
result from Einstien's Gedanker experimente's
which the QM paychos of 26 + ch dimensions.
Since as he was ever quick to point-out to the
mathematical cretins of the fields of mathematical-muscial
schema of the heavens:
Tonality is banality in the hands of the
mathematically untutored.
So, in the greater truths of the universe,
tonality = banality. And it is the
harmony of the music relative to
space that is music's message, and
not the fork's of the mathematical
road to readiness. Which is simply
an economic equation, to be solved
by a patent clerk, rather than a
mathematian with imaginary particles
in his mind and no waves of matter,
to make a matter to matter.
Education is the source of all human error,
and thus requires merely an Engineer
and a rubber eraser to correct it, rather than
the assistance of an inebriated aether-army
of the sectretaries of mathematicians,
and their logic of flat space to correct it.
Since what begins in flat-space, will end
in flat-space.
And, artistic flurish is merely the means to
a means, and is intended for only the lonely,
as Astophysicists would be, since they are
merely Mecury's companion matrix of Mars.
And thusly are seriously in error in
their bio-genuis theory of Black Holes,
and the push-pull nature of gravity forces.
And Bohr was the ONLY genius of the quantum mechanics generation.
Since he is still the ONLY Physicist on record
in the whole of the 20th Century that ever told
Einstein that he should take a long mathematical walk on
the shoulders of a Goedel or a Newton rather than making
foppish pretenses that he is familiar
with the science of probability theory.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> We can envision each generation as a hyperplane in the space of human
> possibility where there is (at some moments in time, with certain
> frequency) a high peak, global macimum, followed by other minor peaks
> and a continuum varying about an average, (for the intelligence
> measure, whatever it is taken).
> That the works of genius get distributed, voluntarily or forcefully,
> would be an expression of th euniversal motive of envy...
> (The equation is just to impress! Easy way to take notes, though I
> guess it can be expressed more formally in a model of gene trait
> distribution along whole populations).
Reply
Joe Oct 15, 5:21 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: jhelf...@umd.edu (Joe) - Find messages by this author
Date: 15 Oct 2004 17:21:02 -0700
Local: Fri, Oct 15 2004 5:21 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Fabrizio,
> P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> t=infinite)
> The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> out of an university is near impossibility. All instances of multi
> genius generation can be explained sociologically by envy.> (The equation is just to impress! Easy way to take notes, though I
> guess it can be expressed more formally in a model of gene trait
> distribution along whole populations).
First, what the hell does that equation mean? I am impressed (it's
easy to do!) but impress me more by telling me what that equation
means. Also, when you say that the probability of a "genius" in one
generation is near zero, how near? Is 0.0000000001 near, or 0.01
near? Also how do you calculate the probability of "coinciding in
time and place", for example, I might say, genius or dumbass you still
have a couple of Fermions, and its hard to stick them in the same time
and place at the same time. Now as to Universities, Universities do
tend to attract the smarter among us (what ever that means). And
there is "leading edge" research at a University, so it kinds of feeds
on itself. For example, it is difficult to contribute to some
esoteric wayout their contribution, if you are not familiar first with
what's going on. So going to school can do this. So it is hard to
make break throughs in science with out ever having gone to school,
but I'm sure it's been done before. Now as for genius, I'd ask aren't
you a genius?!
Take Care,
Joe
Reply
robert j. kolker Oct 15, 11:40 am show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: "robert j. kolker" - Find messages by this author
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:40:23 -0400
Local: Fri, Oct 15 2004 11:40 am
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Morituri-Max wrote:
> Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
>> Bravo! So it was Bohr the source... and the rest...
> Negative.. quantum mechanics wasn't the fruit of one man's labors, it
> was the fruit basket of a great many people, many many many people..
The Early Days of quantum physics were a kalidescope of wierd, wonderful
and new ideas. It was said about that era, the second rate men were
producing first rate work (first rate men were producing even firster
rate wor, of course). We have not had anything like the period from
1900-1935 before or since. It was a hoot. In under four decades most of
our Newtonian and determinsitic baggage was discarded.
Bob Kolker
Reply
ZZBunker Oct 15, 6:17 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: zzbun...@netscape.net (ZZBunker) - Find messages by this author
Date: 15 Oct 2004 18:17:50 -0700
Local: Fri, Oct 15 2004 6:17 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> zzbun...@netscape.net (ZZBunker) wrote in message ...
> > fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> > > P(n[IQ] > q) = k for all C(g1,g2) where k -> 0 when q -> max(IQ
> > > t=infinite)
> > > The probability of there being more than one great intelligence
> > > (genius) during a generation is near zero, and of course the
> > > probability that two ro more intelligences coincide in time and place
> > > out of an university is near impossibility. All instances of multi
> > > genius generation can be explained sociologically by envy. For
> > > instance, Voltaire writing the Encyclopedia, Bacon writing
> > > Shakespeare, Mendelssohn giving away compositions/themes to his
> > > friends, Hegel (Kant? Fichte?) giving away ideas to other
> > > philosophers, Heisenberg (Bohr?) in the quantum mechanics generation,
> > > etc.
> > Genius is the most overrated quantity, "science"
> > has ever invented. Which is the one positve
> > result from Einstien's Gedanker experimente's
> > which the QM paychos of 26 + ch dimensions.
> > Since as he was ever quick to point-out to the
> > mathematical cretins of the fields of mathematical-muscial
> > schema of the heavens:
> > Tonality is banality in the hands of the
> > mathematically untutored.
> > So, in the greater truths of the universe,
> > tonality = banality. And it is the
> > harmony of the music relative to
> > space that is music's message, and
> > not the fork's of the mathematical
> > road to readiness. Which is simply
> > an economic equation, to be solved
> > by a patent clerk, rather than a
> > mathematian with imaginary particles
> > in his mind and no waves of matter,
> > to make a matter to matter.
> > Education is the source of all human error,
> > and thus requires merely an Engineer
> > and a rubber eraser to correct it, rather than
> > the assistance of an inebriated aether-army
> > of the sectretaries of mathematicians,
> > and their logic of flat space to correct it.
> > Since what begins in flat-space, will end
> > in flat-space.
> > And, artistic flurish is merely the means to
> > a means, and is intended for only the lonely,
> > as Astophysicists would be, since they are
> > merely Mecury's companion matrix of Mars.
> > And thusly are seriously in error in
> > their bio-genuis theory of Black Holes,
> > and the push-pull nature of gravity forces.
> > And Bohr was the ONLY genius of the quantum mechanics generation.
> > Since he is still the ONLY Physicist on record
> > in the whole of the 20th Century that ever told
> > Einstein that he should take a long mathematical walk on
> > the shoulders of a Goedel or a Newton rather than making
> > foppish pretenses that he is familiar
> > with the science of probability theory.
> Bravo! So it was Bohr the source... and the rest...
And the rest, of the dark matter Newton evangelical
Astrologers of the Big Fart would say:
is History with a twist.
Since Bohr's atom is still the leading contender
for putting moronic Einstone photon-economics
out-of-buisness permanently.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> > > We can envision each generation as a hyperplane in the space of human
> > > possibility where there is (at some moments in time, with certain
> > > frequency) a high peak, global macimum, followed by other minor peaks
> > > and a continuum varying about an average, (for the intelligence
> > > measure, whatever it is taken).
> > > That the works of genius get distributed, voluntarily or forcefully,
> > > would be an expression of th euniversal motive of envy...
> > > (The equation is just to impress! Easy way to take notes, though I
> > > guess it can be expressed more formally in a model of gene trait
> > > distribution along whole populations).
Reply
Joe Oct 15, 5:04 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,sci.physics,seattle.general,la.general,sci.econ
From: jhelf...@umd.edu (Joe) - Find messages by this author
Date: 15 Oct 2004 17:04:36 -0700
Local: Fri, Oct 15 2004 5:04 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Fabrizzio,
What kind of diar straights are you in?
Take Care,
Joe
Reply
djbonsign...@beethoven.com Dec 15, 12:23 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general, sci.physics, seattle.general, la.general, sci.econ
From: djbonsign...@beethoven.com - Find messages by this author
Date: 15 Dec 2004 12:23:59 -0800
Local: Wed, Dec 15 2004 12:23 pm
Subject: Re: The case for and against genius
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Oh, not much, juts no money for 6 months and a bad cas of ignoritis and
identity theft, plus harassment and communications blocked, etc.
Reply
fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> In 1999 I rented an appartment in Mexico City, behind the WTC. In
> 2000, after I bought my guitar, the bathroom toilet started failing...
> During 2001 everytime I called the plumber the toilet would fail. An I
> was living with four cats! Even holding a job is difficult without a
> working toilet... In 2002 my neighbours upstairs started threatening
> me to death to steal my computer. The night they planned to poison my
> cats I fled to my mother's home, cats, computer, guitar and books. The
> next morning they broke into my appartment and stole my notes and a
> collection of AI magazine, among other things.
> The police came, but they did NOTHING. That week they let me know they
> had the key... They setup the boiler to explode while I bathed, but
> didn't work. Next day my bathroom flooded. I went to the police but
> they wouldn't hear. Why bother if I was moving out of the appartment?
> Why make it so complicated as to actually name the culprits and give
> their address? Mordida? (bribe) The police did nothing. As a
> consequence I ended up hunted by this guys, the remaining of my 8000
> books barricaded, evicted, and locked myself up for fear of burglary
> for one year... During which time there happened a shooting in the
> place I was living in and I don't know the details, but fear for
> people I knew and worked with...
> I don't know their names, except for one Fraunhofer who plotted once,
> saw twice. And my old associate Luis Bistrain Gonzalez and politically
> powerful family. There was also the woman who was my actual neighbour
> and whose name I never knew but can find.
> 2003 in Veracruz was a similar experience. I fled the place the day I
> started to be videotaped by the local gang... Now I don't even know if
> it was another criminal group or the same guys who followed me. The
> day the music from a small italian's town page I hit came at the same
> time from outside the window I knew I had a problem again... Other
> things happened, but after almost two years of near retirement,
> dedicated myself to the simple joy of creating in my computer, I
> arrived in America safe.
> But now, 2004, feeling safe and out of the shock, I wondered, for how
> long did they have the key? Did they forced me to live in a place
> witout toliet during the months it tool me to move out of there, and
> with all my cats sharing the disgrace...? I mean, was my computer and
> my music and my programs wide open for this guys to copy while I
> waited for my documentation to be straighten up...? Did the engagement
> ring I never delivered and never found ended up in those two guys'
> hands? Do they have the invoices of my computer and guitar, my
> agendas, school yearbooks, school notebooks, the notes of ten years of
> ideas? Was my life's work stolen by those guys? Would you know if you
> are living alone if somebody enters your home and copies your files?
> Nightmare or real life? The works in this site are progressing and
> growing. There is internal coherency, nothing can bend truth, not
> forever...
> Is this supposed to happen in a civilized country? Isn't barbarism
> what happens when police fails? Will I get justice in case the worst
> happen...? Who will have to admit he or she was deceived by a pair of
> thieves? Will he or she be up to that responsibility when the time
> comes...?
> This will offend many people but I don't care: Mexico is a country
> where impunity reigns, where thievery is sanctioned by society, where
> police works for money, not ideals, where people's work is sabotaged
> by those who can't stand others to advance in life, where piracy is a
> way of living, where justice is applied selectively as example and not
> by principle, where it is easier to let a criminal go than to punish
> it, where it is risky to have money and not to have money, where
> treachery is a historical constant, where everything is impossible,
> can't be done or isn't available (el no-hay tv character)... And many
> people suffer because of it.
> In the last ten years I was assaulted with everything, from keys to
> submachine guns. Ten times at least, threatened to death twice,
> chased, a murder attempt (or two?), the five places I lived in where
> robbed... Even the police robbed me after I reported a theft!!! The
> judiciales stole my game boy, that the thieves (which I knew, by the
> way, and were preying on the people of my office, he even told me it
> was him), missed because it was under a drawer...
> Nice place to visit? Sure! But don't try living there... even less try
> to make a living there... Are you offended? Then maybe you will do
> something to change it. I gave up, it was not my land after all.
> This poem is disrespectful but, who would dare appropriating it? And
> if I wrote this, then it follows that my other poems are mine, too...
> I care for each and every one of my works, however imperfect and poor
> they may be... Piracy and intellectual property thievery is awful, but
> it is even more not to be recognized for what you contribute to the
> accumulated wealth of humanity. That, is total horror. But even more
> horror is to imagine the hypothetical situation of being mirrored in
> all I do and denied in whatever I say, being called a liar when, in
> fact, creating is in itself a form of Truth.
> Will I be persecuted de oficio, slandered, incriminated for telling
> the truth? Or even worse, eliminated and problem solved? Bad for
> business, sure, but everyday truth in Mexico.
> Did those guys acquired fame and are reknown because of my work, or
> derivations thereof? Will they "turn over the pancake" and blame me of
> their crimes? Will they pay if identified?
> This is my experience, and unfortunately this site still reflects it.
> Eventually it'll wear off. Sorry to impose it on you, unwarned reader,
> hope it won't downgrade your enjoyment of this site.
> And all this because I started playing the guitar...
> And there are so many things I still don't know... but
> ghamac.org/miniface.jpg
> Search Fabrizio J Bonsignore in google groups, sort by date
> Truth will set us free
> Los Angeles, April 2004
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 5, 8:36 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,dc.general,la.general,tx.general,sci.econ
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 5 Oct 2004 20:36:33 -0700
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 8:36 pm
Subject: Re: Going through Hell... The story
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
z...@hotmail.com (zerge) wrote in message ...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> You poor guy, you have gone off the deep end. Seek help.
> http://www.mentalhealth.com/>
> fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> > In 1999 I rented an appartment in Mexico City, behind the WTC. In
> > 2000, after I bought my guitar, the bathroom toilet started failing...
> > During 2001 everytime I called the plumber the toilet would fail. An I
> > was living with four cats! Even holding a job is difficult without a
> > working toilet... In 2002 my neighbours upstairs started threatening
> > me to death to steal my computer. The night they planned to poison my
> > cats I fled to my mother's home, cats, computer, guitar and books. The
> > next morning they broke into my appartment and stole my notes and a
> > collection of AI magazine, among other things.
> > The police came, but they did NOTHING. That week they let me know they
> > had the key... They setup the boiler to explode while I bathed, but
> > didn't work. Next day my bathroom flooded. I went to the police but
> > they wouldn't hear. Why bother if I was moving out of the appartment?
> > Why make it so complicated as to actually name the culprits and give
> > their address? Mordida? (bribe) The police did nothing. As a
> > consequence I ended up hunted by this guys, the remaining of my 8000
> > books barricaded, evicted, and locked myself up for fear of burglary
> > for one year... During which time there happened a shooting in the
> > place I was living in and I don't know the details, but fear for
> > people I knew and worked with...
> > I don't know their names, except for one Fraunhofer who plotted once,
> > saw twice. And my old associate Luis Bistrain Gonzalez and politically
> > powerful family. There was also the woman who was my actual neighbour
> > and whose name I never knew but can find.
> > 2003 in Veracruz was a similar experience. I fled the place the day I
> > started to be videotaped by the local gang... Now I don't even know if
> > it was another criminal group or the same guys who followed me. The
> > day the music from a small italian's town page I hit came at the same
> > time from outside the window I knew I had a problem again... Other
> > things happened, but after almost two years of near retirement,
> > dedicated myself to the simple joy of creating in my computer, I
> > arrived in America safe.
> > But now, 2004, feeling safe and out of the shock, I wondered, for how
> > long did they have the key? Did they forced me to live in a place
> > witout toliet during the months it tool me to move out of there, and
> > with all my cats sharing the disgrace...? I mean, was my computer and
> > my music and my programs wide open for this guys to copy while I
> > waited for my documentation to be straighten up...? Did the engagement
> > ring I never delivered and never found ended up in those two guys'
> > hands? Do they have the invoices of my computer and guitar, my
> > agendas, school yearbooks, school notebooks, the notes of ten years of
> > ideas? Was my life's work stolen by those guys? Would you know if you
> > are living alone if somebody enters your home and copies your files?
> > Nightmare or real life? The works in this site are progressing and
> > growing. There is internal coherency, nothing can bend truth, not
> > forever...
> > Is this supposed to happen in a civilized country? Isn't barbarism
> > what happens when police fails? Will I get justice in case the worst
> > happen...? Who will have to admit he or she was deceived by a pair of
> > thieves? Will he or she be up to that responsibility when the time
> > comes...?
> > This will offend many people but I don't care: Mexico is a country
> > where impunity reigns, where thievery is sanctioned by society, where
> > police works for money, not ideals, where people's work is sabotaged
> > by those who can't stand others to advance in life, where piracy is a
> > way of living, where justice is applied selectively as example and not
> > by principle, where it is easier to let a criminal go than to punish
> > it, where it is risky to have money and not to have money, where
> > treachery is a historical constant, where everything is impossible,
> > can't be done or isn't available (el no-hay tv character)... And many
> > people suffer because of it.
> > In the last ten years I was assaulted with everything, from keys to
> > submachine guns. Ten times at least, threatened to death twice,
> > chased, a murder attempt (or two?), the five places I lived in where
> > robbed... Even the police robbed me after I reported a theft!!! The
> > judiciales stole my game boy, that the thieves (which I knew, by the
> > way, and were preying on the people of my office, he even told me it
> > was him), missed because it was under a drawer...
> > Nice place to visit? Sure! But don't try living there... even less try
> > to make a living there... Are you offended? Then maybe you will do
> > something to change it. I gave up, it was not my land after all.
> > This poem is disrespectful but, who would dare appropriating it? And
> > if I wrote this, then it follows that my other poems are mine, too...
> > I care for each and every one of my works, however imperfect and poor
> > they may be... Piracy and intellectual property thievery is awful, but
> > it is even more not to be recognized for what you contribute to the
> > accumulated wealth of humanity. That, is total horror. But even more
> > horror is to imagine the hypothetical situation of being mirrored in
> > all I do and denied in whatever I say, being called a liar when, in
> > fact, creating is in itself a form of Truth.
> > Will I be persecuted de oficio, slandered, incriminated for telling
> > the truth? Or even worse, eliminated and problem solved? Bad for
> > business, sure, but everyday truth in Mexico.
> > Did those guys acquired fame and are reknown because of my work, or
> > derivations thereof? Will they "turn over the pancake" and blame me of
> > their crimes? Will they pay if identified?
> > This is my experience, and unfortunately this site still reflects it.
> > Eventually it'll wear off. Sorry to impose it on you, unwarned reader,
> > hope it won't downgrade your enjoyment of this site.
> > And all this because I started playing the guitar...
> > And there are so many things I still don't know... but
> > ghamac.org/miniface.jpg
> > Search Fabrizio J Bonsignore in google groups, sort by date
> > Truth will set us free
> > Los Angeles, April 2004
Que te estan pagando? O eres uno de los criminales que planearon esto?
Salud mental tengo, lo que no tengo es JUSTICIA...
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 12, 11:34 am show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,dc.general,la.general,tx.general,sci.econ
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 12 Oct 2004 11:34:24 -0700
Local: Tues, Oct 12 2004 11:34 am
Subject: Re: Going through Hell... The story
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
In 1999 I rented an appartment in Mexico City, behind the WTC. In
2000, after I bought my guitar, the bathroom toilet started failing...
During 2001 everytime I called the plumber the toilet would fail. An I
was living with four cats! Even holding a job is difficult without a
working toilet... In 2002 my neighbours upstairs started threatening
me to death to steal my computer. The night they planned to poison my
cats I fled to my mother's home, cats, computer, guitar and books. The
next morning they broke into my appartment and stole my notes and a
collection of AI magazine, among other things.
The police came, but they did NOTHING. That week they let me know they
had the key... They setup the boiler to explode while I bathed, but
didn't work. Next day my bathroom flooded. I went to the police but
they wouldn't hear. Why bother if I was moving out of the appartment?
Why make it so complicated as to actually name the culprits and give
their address? Mordida? (bribe) The police did nothing. As a
consequence I ended up hunted by this guys, the remaining of my 8000
books barricaded, evicted, and locked myself up for fear of burglary
for one year... During which time there happened a shooting in the
place I was living in and I don't know the details, but fear for
people I knew and worked with...
I don't know their names, except for one Fraunhofer who plotted once,
saw twice. And my old associate Luis Bistrain Gonzalez and politically
powerful family. There was also the woman who was my actual neighbour
and whose name I never knew but can find.
2003 in Veracruz was a similar experience. I fled the place the day I
started to be videotaped by the local gang... Now I don't even know if
it was another criminal group or the same guys who followed me. The
day the music from a small italian's town page I hit came at the same
time from outside the window I knew I had a problem again... Other
things happened, but after almost two years of near retirement,
dedicated myself to the simple joy of creating in my computer, I
arrived in America safe.
But now, 2004, feeling safe and out of the shock, I wondered, for how
long did they have the key? Did they forced me to live in a place
witout toliet during the months it tool me to move out of there, and
with all my cats sharing the disgrace...? I mean, was my computer and
my music and my programs wide open for this guys to copy while I
waited for my documentation to be straighten up...? Did the engagement
ring I never delivered and never found ended up in those two guys'
hands? Do they have the invoices of my computer and guitar, my
agendas, school yearbooks, school notebooks, the notes of ten years of
ideas? Was my life's work stolen by those guys? Would you know if you
are living alone if somebody enters your home and copies your files?
Nightmare or real life? The works in this site are progressing and
growing. There is internal coherency, nothing can bend truth, not
forever...
Is this supposed to happen in a civilized country? Isn't barbarism
what happens when police fails? Will I get justice in case the worst
happen...? Who will have to admit he or she was deceived by a pair of
thieves? Will he or she be up to that responsibility when the time
comes...?
This will offend many people but I don't care: Mexico is a country
where impunity reigns, where thievery is sanctioned by society, where
police works for money, not ideals, where people's work is sabotaged
by those who can't stand others to advance in life, where piracy is a
way of living, where justice is applied selectively as example and not
by principle, where it is easier to let a criminal go than to punish
it, where it is risky to have money and not to have money, where
treachery is a historical constant, where everything is impossible,
can't be done or isn't available (el no-hay tv character)... And many
people suffer because of it.
In the last ten years I was assaulted with everything, from keys to
submachine guns. Ten times at least, threatened to death twice,
chased, a murder attempt (or two?), the five places I lived in where
robbed... Even the police robbed me after I reported a theft!!! The
judiciales stole my game boy, that the thieves (which I knew, by the
way, and were preying on the people of my office, he even told me it
was him), missed because it was under a drawer...
Nice place to visit? Sure! But don't try living there... even less try
to make a living there... Are you offended? Then maybe you will do
something to change it. I gave up, it was not my land after all.
This poem is disrespectful but, who would dare appropriating it? And
if I wrote this, then it follows that my other poems are mine, too...
I care for each and every one of my works, however imperfect and poor
they may be... Piracy and intellectual property thievery is awful, but
it is even more not to be recognized for what you contribute to the
accumulated wealth of humanity. That, is total horror. But even more
horror is to imagine the hypothetical situation of being mirrored in
all I do and denied in whatever I say, being called a liar when, in
fact, creating is in itself a form of Truth.
Will I be persecuted de oficio, slandered, incriminated for telling
the truth? Or even worse, eliminated and problem solved? Bad for
business, sure, but everyday truth in Mexico.
Did those guys acquired fame and are reknown because of my work, or
derivations thereof? Will they "turn over the pancake" and blame me of
their crimes? Will they pay if identified?
This is my experience, and unfortunately this site still reflects it.
Eventually it'll wear off. Sorry to impose it on you, unwarned reader,
hope it won't downgrade your enjoyment of this site.
And all this because I started playing the guitar...
And there are so many things I still don't know... but
ghamac.org/miniface.jpg
Search Fabrizio J Bonsignore in google groups, sort by date
Truth will set us free
Los Angeles, April 2004
Reply
Tiny Human Ferret Oct 12, 5:51 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,dc.general,la.general,tx.general,sci.econ
From: Tiny Human Ferret - Find messages by this author
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 20:51:59 -0400
Local: Tues, Oct 12 2004 5:51 pm
Subject: Re: Going through Hell... The story
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
> Did those guys acquired fame and are reknown because of my work, or
> derivations thereof? Will they "turn over the pancake" and blame me of
> their crimes? Will they pay if identified?
They might pay if you Meow them.
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbon, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire"
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 13, 10:55 am show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,dc.general,la.general,tx.general,utexas.general
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 13 Oct 2004 10:55:53 -0700
Local: Wed, Oct 13 2004 10:55 am
Subject: Re: Going through Hell... The story
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
In 1999 I rented an appartment in Mexico City, behind the WTC. In
2000, after I bought my guitar, the bathroom toilet started failing...
During 2001 everytime I called the plumber the toilet would fail. An I
was living with four cats! Even holding a job is difficult without a
working toilet... In 2002 my neighbours upstairs started threatening
me to death to steal my computer. The night they planned to poison my
cats I fled to my mother's home, cats, computer, guitar and books. The
next morning they broke into my appartment and stole my notes and a
collection of AI magazine, among other things.
The police came, but they did NOTHING. That week they let me know they
had the key... They setup the boiler to explode while I bathed, but
didn't work. Next day my bathroom flooded. I went to the police but
they wouldn't hear. Why bother if I was moving out of the appartment?
Why make it so complicated as to actually name the culprits and give
their address? Mordida? (bribe) The police did nothing. As a
consequence I ended up hunted by this guys, the remaining of my 8000
books barricaded, evicted, and locked myself up for fear of burglary
for one year... During which time there happened a shooting in the
place I was living in and I don't know the details, but fear for
people I knew and worked with...
I don't know their names, except for one Fraunhofer who plotted once,
saw twice. And my old associate Luis Bistrain Gonzalez and politically
powerful family. There was also the woman who was my actual neighbour
and whose name I never knew but can find.
2003 in Veracruz was a similar experience. I fled the place the day I
started to be videotaped by the local gang... Now I don't even know if
it was another criminal group or the same guys who followed me. The
day the music from a small italian's town page I hit came at the same
time from outside the window I knew I had a problem again... Other
things happened, but after almost two years of near retirement,
dedicated myself to the simple joy of creating in my computer, I
arrived in America safe.
But now, 2004, feeling safe and out of the shock, I wondered, for how
long did they have the key? Did they forced me to live in a place
witout toliet during the months it tool me to move out of there, and
with all my cats sharing the disgrace...? I mean, was my computer and
my music and my programs wide open for this guys to copy while I
waited for my documentation to be straighten up...? Did the engagement
ring I never delivered and never found ended up in those two guys'
hands? Do they have the invoices of my computer and guitar, my
agendas, school yearbooks, school notebooks, the notes of ten years of
ideas? Was my life's work stolen by those guys? Would you know if you
are living alone if somebody enters your home and copies your files?
Nightmare or real life? The works in this site are progressing and
growing. There is internal coherency, nothing can bend truth, not
forever...
Is this supposed to happen in a civilized country? Isn't barbarism
what happens when police fails? Will I get justice in case the worst
happen...? Who will have to admit he or she was deceived by a pair of
thieves? Will he or she be up to that responsibility when the time
comes...?
This will offend many people but I don't care: Mexico is a country
where impunity reigns, where thievery is sanctioned by society, where
police works for money, not ideals, where people's work is sabotaged
by those who can't stand others to advance in life, where piracy is a
way of living, where justice is applied selectively as example and not
by principle, where it is easier to let a criminal go than to punish
it, where it is risky to have money and not to have money, where
treachery is a historical constant, where everything is impossible,
can't be done or isn't available (el no-hay tv character)... And many
people suffer because of it.
In the last ten years I was assaulted with everything, from keys to
submachine guns. Ten times at least, threatened to death twice,
chased, a murder attempt (or two?), the five places I lived in where
robbed... Even the police robbed me after I reported a theft!!! The
judiciales stole my game boy, that the thieves (which I knew, by the
way, and were preying on the people of my office, he even told me it
was him), missed because it was under a drawer...
Nice place to visit? Sure! But don't try living there... even less try
to make a living there... Are you offended? Then maybe you will do
something to change it. I gave up, it was not my land after all.
This poem is disrespectful but, who would dare appropriating it? And
if I wrote this, then it follows that my other poems are mine, too...
I care for each and every one of my works, however imperfect and poor
they may be... Piracy and intellectual property thievery is awful, but
it is even more not to be recognized for what you contribute to the
accumulated wealth of humanity. That, is total horror. But even more
horror is to imagine the hypothetical situation of being mirrored in
all I do and denied in whatever I say, being called a liar when, in
fact, creating is in itself a form of Truth.
Will I be persecuted de oficio, slandered, incriminated for telling
the truth? Or even worse, eliminated and problem solved? Bad for
business, sure, but everyday truth in Mexico.
Did those guys acquired fame and are reknown because of my work, or
derivations thereof? Will they "turn over the pancake" and blame me of
their crimes? Will they pay if identified?
This is my experience, and unfortunately this site still reflects it.
Eventually it'll wear off. Sorry to impose it on you, unwarned reader,
hope it won't downgrade your enjoyment of this site.
And all this because I started playing the guitar...
And there are so many things I still don't know... but
ghamac.org/miniface.jpg
Search Fabrizio J Bonsignore in google groups, sort by date
Truth will set us free
Los Angeles, April 2004
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 14, 10:45 am show options
Newsgroups: ny.general,dc.general,la.general,tx.general,utexas.general
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 14 Oct 2004 10:45:52 -0700
Local: Thurs, Oct 14 2004 10:45 am
Subject: Re: Going through Hell... The story
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
In 1999 I rented an appartment in Mexico City, behind the WTC. In
2000, after I bought my guitar, the bathroom toilet started failing...
During 2001 everytime I called the plumber the toilet would fail. An I
was living with four cats! Even holding a job is difficult without a
working toilet... In 2002 my neighbours upstairs started threatening
me to death to steal my computer. The night they planned to poison my
cats I fled to my mother's home, cats, computer, guitar and books. The
next morning they broke into my appartment and stole my notes and a
collection of AI magazine, among other things.
The police came, but they did NOTHING. That week they let me know they
had the key... They setup the boiler to explode while I bathed, but
didn't work. Next day my bathroom flooded. I went to the police but
they wouldn't hear. Why bother if I was moving out of the appartment?
Why make it so complicated as to actually name the culprits and give
their address? Mordida? (bribe) The police did nothing. As a
consequence I ended up hunted by this guys, the remaining of my 8000
books barricaded, evicted, and locked myself up for fear of burglary
for one year... During which time there happened a shooting in the
place I was living in and I don't know the details, but fear for
people I knew and worked with...
I don't know their names, except for one Fraunhofer who plotted once,
saw twice. And my old associate Luis Bistrain Gonzalez and politically
powerful family. There was also the woman who was my actual neighbour
and whose name I never knew but can find.
2003 in Veracruz was a similar experience. I fled the place the day I
started to be videotaped by the local gang... Now I don't even know if
it was another criminal group or the same guys who followed me. The
day the music from a small italian's town page I hit came at the same
time from outside the window I knew I had a problem again... Other
things happened, but after almost two years of near retirement,
dedicated myself to the simple joy of creating in my computer, I
arrived in America safe.
But now, 2004, feeling safe and out of the shock, I wondered, for how
long did they have the key? Did they forced me to live in a place
witout toliet during the months it tool me to move out of there, and
with all my cats sharing the disgrace...? I mean, was my computer and
my music and my programs wide open for this guys to copy while I
waited for my documentation to be straighten up...? Did the engagement
ring I never delivered and never found ended up in those two guys'
hands? Do they have the invoices of my computer and guitar, my
agendas, school yearbooks, school notebooks, the notes of ten years of
ideas? Was my life's work stolen by those guys? Would you know if you
are living alone if somebody enters your home and copies your files?
Nightmare or real life? The works in this site are progressing and
growing. There is internal coherency, nothing can bend truth, not
forever...
Is this supposed to happen in a civilized country? Isn't barbarism
what happens when police fails? Will I get justice in case the worst
happen...? Who will have to admit he or she was deceived by a pair of
thieves? Will he or she be up to that responsibility when the time
comes...?
This will offend many people but I don't care: Mexico is a country
where impunity reigns, where thievery is sanctioned by society, where
police works for money, not ideals, where people's work is sabotaged
by those who can't stand others to advance in life, where piracy is a
way of living, where justice is applied selectively as example and not
by principle, where it is easier to let a criminal go than to punish
it, where it is risky to have money and not to have money, where
treachery is a historical constant, where everything is impossible,
can't be done or isn't available (el no-hay tv character)... And many
people suffer because of it.
In the last ten years I was assaulted with everything, from keys to
submachine guns. Ten times at least, threatened to death twice,
chased, a murder attempt (or two?), the five places I lived in where
robbed... Even the police robbed me after I reported a theft!!! The
judiciales stole my game boy, that the thieves (which I knew, by the
way, and were preying on the people of my office, he even told me it
was him), missed because it was under a drawer...
Nice place to visit? Sure! But don't try living there... even less try
to make a living there... Are you offended? Then maybe you will do
something to change it. I gave up, it was not my land after all.
This poem is disrespectful but, who would dare appropriating it? And
if I wrote this, then it follows that my other poems are mine, too...
I care for each and every one of my works, however imperfect and poor
they may be... Piracy and intellectual property thievery is awful, but
it is even more not to be recognized for what you contribute to the
accumulated wealth of humanity. That, is total horror. But even more
horror is to imagine the hypothetical situation of being mirrored in
all I do and denied in whatever I say, being called a liar when, in
fact, creating is in itself a form of Truth.
Will I be persecuted de oficio, slandered, incriminated for telling
the truth? Or even worse, eliminated and problem solved? Bad for
business, sure, but everyday truth in Mexico.
Did those guys acquired fame and are reknown because of my work, or
derivations thereof? Will they "turn over the pancake" and blame me of
their crimes? Will they pay if identified?
This is my experience, and unfortunately this site still reflects it.
Eventually it'll wear off. Sorry to impose it on you, unwarned reader,
hope it won't downgrade your enjoyment of this site.
And all this because I started playing the guitar...
And there are so many things I still don't know... but
ghamac.org/miniface.jpg
Search Fabrizio J Bonsignore in google groups, sort by date
Truth will set us free
Los Angeles, April 2004
Reply
djbonsign...@beethoven.com Dec 15, 12:27 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general, dc.general, la.general, tx.general, utexas.general
From: djbonsign...@beethoven.com - Find messages by this author
Date: 15 Dec 2004 12:27:02 -0800
Local: Wed, Dec 15 2004 12:27 pm
Subject: Re: Going through Hell... The story
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
keeping it alive
Reply
djbonsign...@beethoven.com Dec 15, 12:29 pm show options
Newsgroups: ny.general, dc.general, la.general, tx.general, utexas.general
From: djbonsign...@beethoven.com - Find messages by this author
Date: 15 Dec 2004 12:29:09 -0800
Local: Wed, Dec 15 2004 12:29 pm
Subject: I am a systems architect
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
If you are interested... new game architecture! I am a professional,
but that doesn`t matter. Professionalism doesn`t mean inspiration, more
important the latter.
Reply
Search `Fabrizio J Bonsignore` for The Speciation Process
All 3 messages in topic - view as tree
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 2, 10:27 am show options
Newsgroups: sci.bio.evolution
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 17:27:55 +0000 (UTC)
Local: Sat, Oct 2 2004 10:27 am
Subject: Search `Fabrizio J Bonsignore` for The Speciation Process
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Should have posted here, sorry. A discussion based on Alive and Human
about the possible futures of man.
Reply
Michael Ragland Oct 2, 9:02 pm show options
Newsgroups: sci.bio.evolution
From: raglan...@webtv.net (Michael Ragland) - Find messages by this author
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 04:02:57 +0000 (UTC)
Local: Sat, Oct 2 2004 9:02 pm
Subject: Re: Search `Fabrizio J Bonsignore` for The Speciation Process
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
I'm curious Mr. Bonsignore why you just didn't post your little article
instead of requesting others look it up on the internet. Were you
possibly concerned it wouldn't get posted in this moderated group? I
don't know if our moderator would have allowed it but it is certainly
junk, shorn of any scientific pretense or actual value. Your "article"
"Future of Man: the Speciation Process" is irrational, grotesque and
tinged with rambling incoherency. It is befitting a bizarre grotesque
brutalized fantasy novel. Let's hope there aren't any young "Hitlers"
out there enthralled by your "Future of Man: the Speciation Process".
You're few minutes of time are hopefully exhausted.
[moderator's note: I have to agree with Michael; at the time I could
not fire up a browser so I took a chance, and of course I now regret
having done so. My apologies to the readers. - JAH]
Michael Ragland
Future of Man: the Speciation Process
by fbonsignore@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) Sep 14,
2004 at 09:34 PM
That Evolution is stopped in relation to Reason doesn`t mean that the
basic definition of the human species is not changing, only that this
change is so slow that for practical purposes is irrelevant. And yet the
basic requirements for the speciation process in Man are already given.
There are, not only geographical barriers to cross breeding but also
sociopolitical ones. In fact, each national state is in itself a melting
pot where one of the possible futures of Man is being born.
There are strong barriers to cross race procreation. How long before
those barriers turn from social to biological ones? Strictly speaking,
the Down syndrome children are *already* a different species; a
different number of chromosomes which, if allowed to interbreed will
eventually lead to a totally different species, unable to procreate with
`normal` humans.
Exactly what space of possibilities in the Reality of biological beings
will they be exploring, quite literally only they know. To many people
they are indeed special, and that speciality might in te future reveal
in interesting ways if a population of them is allowed to form and
develop for itself.
Even is Reason is the defining characteristic in the human species
doesn`t mean that it must remain so for the unforseeable future. Whole
populations can be interbreeding to select, from a social (mores,
prejudices) point of view, characteristics that emphatize not an
increase in intelligence but a decrease, an involution. Nowhere says or
is written that intelligence as we know it must remain in the definition
of the species. Though language very probably will remain a basic
characteristic of future humanities (too useful to ignore), different
roles for it may develop accordingly to other biological characteristics
and different humanities may grant it a bigger or lesser importance in
their everyday behaviour (there are societies that read an write little,
while others dedicate lots of resource to verbal and/or written
communication). DNA is a language that changes in subtle and almost
continuous way, give the enormous quatities of information that go in
the definition of an individual.
Unfortunately, this speciation process is such that it introduces
tensions in the human family. By its mere definition, the speciation
process can lead to wars and other social unrest among Nations. That we
be able to manage this divergent differences peacefully is one of the
most challenging aspects of the future of Man...
"It's uncertain whether intelligence has any long term survival value.
Bacteria do quite well without it."
Stephen Hawking
Reply
Michael Ragland Oct 5, 4:02 pm show options
Newsgroups: sci.bio.evolution
From: raglan...@webtv.net (Michael Ragland) - Find messages by this author
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 23:02:08 +0000 (UTC)
Local: Tues, Oct 5 2004 4:02 pm
Subject: Re: Search `Fabrizio J Bonsignore` for The Speciation Process
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
(Moderator) Josh Hayes
My most distinguished fellow, I would like you to explictly state in
what manner this notes can be considered: irrational, when there is an
argument to each idea even if it is not so easily grasped and Reason can
and should look for possibilities in Reality; grotesque, when it is
written with maximum objectivity; or incoherent, though it certainly
makes use of the characteristics of this new medium to develop an
argument incrementally and with the help of others.
Michael Ragland:
You're absolutely right, I didn't qualify my arguments against
Fabrizio's short article and for that I was wrong. Just because
something seems like an erroneous argumentation to me doesn't
necessarily mean others will view it the same way. I don't help my case
in such circumstances but weaken it. I didn't particularly notice,
however, Fabrizio argument was assisted with the help of others. I'm
sure he has read other authors but there were no references on the
particular page I found that he wrote.
(Moderator) Josh Hayes:
I would like you to explicitly enlighten possible readers as to the
wrongness of these arguments and not only throw adjectives in the way of
criticism, for good criticism uses reasoning, not colorful words.
Michael Ragland:
I agree.
(Moderator) Josh Hayes:
As for the qualification of `young Hitler` I am most offended, for race
is NOT a main element of the article and it has nothing to do with
proposing genocides or brutality, but with understanding tensions in
society and what the future holds for us in the short and long term. It
is just a snap in a very long argument and your comments make me think
that emotion prevented you from reading the whole thread and emit a
rational comment.
Michael Ragland:
Yes, the young Hitler comment was a colorful flourish. Although "race"
was not the main element or even a direct element at all Mr.
Bonsignore's statements of Down Syndrome people reproducing and creating
a "new species", his idea of "extrinsic factors" of isolated
reproduction among the human species such as geographic, socio-political
and racial procreative boundaries possibly leading to "intrinsic
factors" of isolated reproduction within a species which results in
speciation (the inability of some human species to reproduce with a
"different" human species. There is his statement, "
Unfortunately, this
speciation process is such that it introduces tensions in the human
family. By its mere definition, the speciation process can lead to wars
and other social unrest among Nations. That we be able to manage this
divergent differences peacefully is one of the most challenging aspects
of the future of Man
." This somewhat contradicts his opening line,
however, "
That Evolution is stopped in relation to Reason doesn`t mean
that the basic definition of the human species is not changing, only
that this change is so slow that for practical purposes is irrelevant.
And yet the basic requirements for the speciation process in Man are
already given
." Darwinian evolution is a well known long evolutionary
process and "speciation" takes even long, even if one accounts for
punctuated equilibrium as there are long periods of stasis. It seems to
me Mr. Bonsignore is describing speciation events as they occured in our
evolutionary past when constant struggle, war, genocide and divergent
differences resulted in our speciation events. For numerous reasons I
don't think that model of speciation is no longer applicable in our
present evolutionary situation.
Mr. Bonsignore doesn't seem to have much faith in Darwinian evolution as
he states it has "stopped" in relation to "Reason". In states, "Even if
Reason is the defining characteristic in the human species doesn`t mean
that it must remain so for the unforseeable future. Whole populations
can be interbreeding to select, from a social (mores, prejudices) point
of view, characteristics that emphatize not an increase in intelligence
but a decrease, an involution. Nowhere says or is written that
intelligence as we know it must remain in the definition of the
species
." First of all, I would not state "reason" is "the" defining
characteristic of the species. I would say it is "one" of the defining
characteristics precariously perched alongside irrationality and
aggressive instincts. I would argue if "reason" no longer becomes one of
the defining characteristics of our species this will not result in our
future speciation events but in our extinction. In any event, I've
argued all along in s.b.e. that our species can't wait up for Darwinian
evolution to produce our next speciation or make us more adaptive to our
current environment and that we must use genetic engineering in the
future.
(Moderator Josh Hayes)
I would like you to deny argumentatively that national barriers and
culture DO act as a procreation barrier.
Michael Ragland:
I can't and you know that. National barriers and culture Do act as a
procreation barrier but that doesn't mean that a fertile healthy
Norwegian or Swedish woman couldn't travel to Africa or Mexico and meet
a "stud" and have a viable pregnancy and birth. Or that a healthy and
fertile Hasidic Jewess couldn't theoretically travel to Austria and meet
an "Austrian stud" and have a viable pregnancy and birth. Now if these
women tried to screw a fertile male chimpanzee I don't think they would
have any success.
(Moderator) Josh Hayes:
And I must point to you that when you wrote `You`re (sic) few minutes of
time are hopefully exhausted`, you were actually hoping that I would die
soon, a lapsus, though I understand what you really meant.
Michael Ragland:
No, I wasn't referring to you. You've been a great and fair moderator on
this newsgroup. I was referring to Fabrizio. Remember, I was the one who
looked up his article at his request. I asked him why he just didn't
post it to s.b.e. I have no problem continuing a thread with him despite
my hot words.
Fabrizio Bonsignore:
I hope the moderator won`t extinguish this thread as it may not be
`scientific` but certainly expresses very real possibilities and
understandings, which incidentally in my mind can be readily
mathematized, though my present circumstances (and the medium) don`t
help at all that undertaking. This can be modeled mathematically and
programmatically in several ways. Other readers may point to references
to models that can be adapted to fit this ideas.
Michael Ragland:
By all means.
raglan...@webtv.net (Michael Ragland) wrote in message
...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I'm curious Mr. Bonsignore why you just didn't post your little article
instead of requesting others look it up on the internet. Were you
possibly concerned it wouldn't get posted in this moderated group? I
don't know if our moderator would have allowed it but it is certainly
junk, shorn of any scientific pretense or actual value. Your "article"
"Future of Man: the Speciation Process" is irrational, grotesque and
tinged with rambling incoherency. It is befitting a bizarre grotesque
brutalized fantasy novel. Let's hope there aren't any young "Hitlers"
out there enthralled by your "Future of Man: the Speciation Process".
You're few minutes of time are hopefully exhausted.
[moderator's note: I have to agree with Michael; at the time I could not
fire up a browser so I took a chance, and of course I now regret having
done so. My apologies to the readers. - JAH]
Michael Ragland
Future of Man: the Speciation Process
by fbonsignore@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) Sep 14,
2004 at 09:34 PM
That Evolution is stopped in relation to Reason doesn`t mean that
the
basic definition of the human species is not changing, only that this
change is so slow that for practical purposes is irrelevant. And yet
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
the
basic requirements for the speciation process in Man are already given.
There are, not only geographical barriers to cross breeding but also
sociopolitical ones. In fact, each national state is in itself a melting
pot where one of the possible futures of Man is being born.
There are strong barriers to cross race procreation. How long before
those barriers turn from social to biological ones? Strictly speaking,
the Down syndrome children are *already* a different species; a
different number of chromosomes which, if allowed to interbreed will
eventually lead to a totally different species, unable to procreate with
`normal` humans.
Exactly what space of possibilities in the Reality of biological beings
will they be exploring, quite literally only they know. To many people
they are indeed special, and that speciality might in te future reveal
in interesting ways if a population of them is allowed to form and
develop for itself
.
Michael Ragland:
Here's some information about Down Syndrome:
"If a sperm or egg with an abnormal number of chromosomes merges with a
normal mate, the resulting fertilized egg will have an abnormal number
of chromosomes. In Down syndrome, 95% of all cases are caused by this
event: one cell has two 21st chromosomes instead of one, so the
resulting fertilized egg has three 21st chromosomes. Hence the
scientific name, trisomy 21. Recent research has shown that in these
cases, approximately 90% of the abnormal cells are the eggs. The cause
of the nondisjunction error isn't known, but there is definitely
connection with maternal age. Research is currently aimed at trying to
determine the cause and timing of the nondisjunction event.
Here's the karyotype of a
male with trisomy 21:
Three to four percent of all cases of trisomy 21 are due to Robertsonian
Translocation. In this case, two breaks occur in separate chromosomes,
usually the 14th and 21st chromosomes. There is rearrangement of the
genetic material so that some of the 14th chromosome is replaced by
extra 21st chromosome. So while the number of chromosomes remain normal,
there is a triplication of the 21st chromosome material. Some of these
children may only have triplication of part of the 21st chromosome
...
read more »
Reply
(Moderator) Josh Hayes
My most distinguished fellow, I would like you to explictly state in
what manner this notes can be considered: irrational, when there is an
argument to each idea even if it is not so easily grasped and Reason can
and should look for possibilities in Reality; grotesque, when it is
written with maximum objectivity; or incoherent, though it certainly
makes use of the characteristics of this new medium to develop an
argument incrementally and with the help of others.
Michael Ragland:
You're absolutely right, I didn't qualify my arguments against
Fabrizio's short article and for that I was wrong. Just because
something seems like an erroneous argumentation to me doesn't
necessarily mean others will view it the same way. I don't help my case
in such circumstances but weaken it. I didn't particularly notice,
however, Fabrizio argument was assisted with the help of others. I'm
sure he has read other authors but there were no references on the
particular page I found that he wrote.
(Moderator) Josh Hayes:
I would like you to explicitly enlighten possible readers as to the
wrongness of these arguments and not only throw adjectives in the way of
criticism, for good criticism uses reasoning, not colorful words.
Michael Ragland:
I agree.
(Moderator) Josh Hayes:
As for the qualification of `young Hitler` I am most offended, for race
is NOT a main element of the article and it has nothing to do with
proposing genocides or brutality, but with understanding tensions in
society and what the future holds for us in the short and long term. It
is just a snap in a very long argument and your comments make me think
that emotion prevented you from reading the whole thread and emit a
rational comment.
Michael Ragland:
Yes, the young Hitler comment was a colorful flourish. Although "race"
was not the main element or even a direct element at all Mr.
Bonsignore's statements of Down Syndrome people reproducing and creating
a "new species", his idea of "extrinsic factors" of isolated
reproduction among the human species such as geographic, socio-political
and racial procreative boundaries possibly leading to "intrinsic
factors" of isolated reproduction within a species which results in
speciation (the inability of some human species to reproduce with a
"different" human species. There is his statement, "Unfortunately, this
speciation process is such that it introduces tensions in the human
family. By its mere definition, the speciation process can lead to wars
and other social unrest among Nations. That we be able to manage this
divergent differences peacefully is one of the most challenging aspects
of the future of Man." This somewhat contradicts his opening line,
however, "That Evolution is stopped in relation to Reason doesn`t mean
that the basic definition of the human species is not changing, only
that this change is so slow that for practical purposes is irrelevant.
And yet the basic requirements for the speciation process in Man are
already given." Darwinian evolution is a well known long evolutionary
process and "speciation" takes even long, even if one accounts for
punctuated equilibrium as there are long periods of stasis. It seems to
me Mr. Bonsignore is describing speciation events as they occured in our
evolutionary past when constant struggle, war, genocide and divergent
differences resulted in our speciation events. For numerous reasons I
don't think that model of speciation is no longer applicable in our
present evolutionary situation.
Mr. Bonsignore doesn't seem to have much faith in Darwinian evolution as
he states it has "stopped" in relation to "Reason". In states, "Even if
Reason is the defining characteristic in the human species doesn`t mean
that it must remain so for the unforseeable future. Whole populations
can be interbreeding to select, from a social (mores, prejudices) point
of view, characteristics that emphatize not an increase in intelligence
but a decrease, an involution. Nowhere says or is written that
intelligence as we know it must remain in the definition of the
species." First of all, I would not state "reason" is "the" defining
characteristic of the species. I would say it is "one" of the defining
characteristics precariously perched alongside irrationality and
aggressive instincts. I would argue if "reason" no longer becomes one of
the defining characteristics of our species this will not result in our
future speciation events but in our extinction. In any event, I've
argued all along in s.b.e. that our species can't wait up for Darwinian
evolution to produce our next speciation or make us more adaptive to our
current environment and that we must use genetic engineering in the
future.
(Moderator Josh Hayes)
I would like you to deny argumentatively that national barriers and
culture DO act as a procreation barrier.
Michael Ragland:
I can't and you know that. National barriers and culture Do act as a
procreation barrier but that doesn't mean that a fertile healthy
Norwegian or Swedish woman couldn't travel to Africa or Mexico and meet
a "stud" and have a viable pregnancy and birth. Or that a healthy and
fertile Hasidic Jewess couldn't theoretically travel to Austria and meet
an "Austrian stud" and have a viable pregnancy and birth. Now if these
women tried to screw a fertile male chimpanzee I don't think they would
have any success.
(Moderator) Josh Hayes:
And I must point to you that when you wrote `You`re (sic) few minutes of
time are hopefully exhausted`, you were actually hoping that I would die
soon, a lapsus, though I understand what you really meant.
Michael Ragland:
No, I wasn't referring to you. You've been a great and fair moderator on
this newsgroup. I was referring to Fabrizio. Remember, I was the one who
looked up his article at his request. I asked him why he just didn't
post it to s.b.e. I have no problem continuing a thread with him despite
my hot words.
Fabrizio Bonsignore:
I hope the moderator won`t extinguish this thread as it may not be
`scientific` but certainly expresses very real possibilities and
understandings, which incidentally in my mind can be readily
mathematized, though my present circumstances (and the medium) don`t
help at all that undertaking. This can be modeled mathematically and
programmatically in several ways. Other readers may point to references
to models that can be adapted to fit this ideas.
Michael Ragland:
By all means.
raglan...@webtv.net (Michael Ragland) wrote in message
...
I'm curious Mr. Bonsignore why you just didn't post your little article
instead of requesting others look it up on the internet. Were you
possibly concerned it wouldn't get posted in this moderated group? I
don't know if our moderator would have allowed it but it is certainly
junk, shorn of any scientific pretense or actual value. Your "article"
"Future of Man: the Speciation Process" is irrational, grotesque and
tinged with rambling incoherency. It is befitting a bizarre grotesque
brutalized fantasy novel. Let's hope there aren't any young "Hitlers"
out there enthralled by your "Future of Man: the Speciation Process".
You're few minutes of time are hopefully exhausted.
[moderator's note: I have to agree with Michael; at the time I could not
fire up a browser so I took a chance, and of course I now regret having
done so. My apologies to the readers. - JAH]
Michael Ragland
Future of Man: the Speciation Process
by fbonsignore@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) Sep 14,
2004 at 09:34 PM
That Evolution is stopped in relation to Reason doesn`t mean that the
basic definition of the human species is not changing, only that this
change is so slow that for practical purposes is irrelevant. And yet the
basic requirements for the speciation process in Man are already given.
There are, not only geographical barriers to cross breeding but also
sociopolitical ones. In fact, each national state is in itself a melting
pot where one of the possible futures of Man is being born.
There are strong barriers to cross race procreation. How long before
those barriers turn from social to biological ones? Strictly speaking,
the Down syndrome children are *already* a different species; a
different number of chromosomes which, if allowed to interbreed will
eventually lead to a totally different species, unable to procreate with
`normal` humans.
Exactly what space of possibilities in the Reality of biological beings
will they be exploring, quite literally only they know. To many people
they are indeed special, and that speciality might in te future reveal
in interesting ways if a population of them is allowed to form and
develop for itself.
Michael Ragland:
Here's some information about Down Syndrome:
"If a sperm or egg with an abnormal number of chromosomes merges with a
normal mate, the resulting fertilized egg will have an abnormal number
of chromosomes. In Down syndrome, 95% of all cases are caused by this
event: one cell has two 21st chromosomes instead of one, so the
resulting fertilized egg has three 21st chromosomes. Hence the
scientific name, trisomy 21. Recent research has shown that in these
cases, approximately 90% of the abnormal cells are the eggs. The cause
of the nondisjunction error isn't known, but there is definitely
connection with maternal age. Research is currently aimed at trying to
determine the cause and timing of the nondisjunction event.
Here's the karyotype of a
male with trisomy 21:
Three to four percent of all cases of trisomy 21 are due to Robertsonian
Translocation. In this case, two breaks occur in separate chromosomes,
usually the 14th and 21st chromosomes. There is rearrangement of the
genetic material so that some of the 14th chromosome is replaced by
extra 21st chromosome. So while the number of chromosomes remain normal,
there is a triplication of the 21st chromosome material. Some of these
children may only have triplication of part of the 21st chromosome
instead of the whole chromosome, which is called a partial trisomy 21.
Translocations resulting in trisomy 21 may be inherited, so it's
important to check the chromosomes of the parents in these cases to see
if either may be a "carrier."
The remainder of cases of trisomy 21 are due to mosaicism. These people
have a mixture of cell lines, some of which have a normal set of
chromosomes and others which have trisomy 21. In cellular mosaicism, the
mixture is seen in different cells of the same type. In tissue
mosaicism, one set of cells, such as all blood cells, may have normal
chromosomes, and another type, such as all skin cells, may have trisomy
21."
I'm not a medical doctor but my "guess" is if two individuals of the
opposite sex with Down Syndrome (trisomy 21 or partial trisomy 21) tried
to reproduce the resulting pregnancy would not be viable. If it was
viable it may not live long or be even more mentally retarded than its
parents. Therefore, the idea of those with Down Syndrome creating their
own "species" is absurd.
Another faulty idea is that those with Down Syndrome constitute a
"different species". There are many definitions of species but generally
it is a group of organisms that have a unique set of characteristics
(like body shape and behavior) that distinguishes them from other
organisms. If they reproduce, individuals within the same species can
produce fertile offspring. A person with Down Syndrome is a chromosomal
abnormality but they belong to the genus Homo and species Sapien. They
are not a frog or a dog. You'll see them at the shopping malls,
McDonald's, etc. You may notice they look abnormal and their behavior is
abnormal but they are a human being. If one possibly followed your
argument anybody with a genetic abnormality would possibly constitute a
different species. I have bipolar disorder and if its caused in part by
my genes does that mean I'm a different species? Or would you restrict
it to those so chromosomally/genetically/congenitally defective they
can't reproduce? In one technical sense those with conditions making it
unable for them to reproduce are not a species as one definition of
species is a classification of related organisms that can freely
interbreed to produce fertile offspring, and usually resemble each other
most closely. But they are still Homo Sapiens. But what if a young man
has a vasectomy and can never make a woman pregnant. Is he a species?
Fabrizio:
Even is Reason is the defining characteristic in the human species
doesn`t mean that it must remain so for the unforseeable future. Whole
populations can be interbreeding to select, from a social (mores,
prejudices) point of view, characteristics that emphatize not an
increase in intelligence but a decrease, an involution. Nowhere says or
is written that intelligence as we know it must remain in the definition
of the species. Though language very probably will remain a basic
characteristic of future humanities (too useful to ignore), different
roles for it may develop accordingly to other biological characteristics
and different humanities may grant it a bigger or lesser importance in
their everyday behaviour (there are societies that read an write little,
while others dedicate lots of resource to verbal and/or written
communication). DNA is a language that changes in subtle and almost
continuous way, give the enormous quatities of information that go in
the definition of an individual.
Michael Ragland:
I've addressed most of this above to Dr. Hayes. DNA is not a language
that changes in "continous" ways and the quantity of information that
goes into an individual is not enormous. Yes, there is much genetic
variation but underlying that variation is a "non-variant"
basis. DNA contains only so many bits of information. It is not as
"complex" as some thought it would be. There are still "mountains" of
information we don't know about our DNA but that does not mean it
changes in continous ways.
Fabrizio:
Unfortunately, this speciation process is such that it introduces
tensions in the human family. By its mere definition, the speciation
process can lead to wars and other social unrest among Nations. That we
be able to manage this divergent differences peacefully is one of the
most challenging aspects of the future of Man...
Michael Ragland:
I addressed this above to Dr. Hayes as well.
Below is a question on the issue of those who are developmentally
disabled having sex. As you can see many such individuals live in
structured group homes and they have a guardian/legal representative and
are prevented from having sex because they can't give informed consent.
This is a sticky area since there is the possibility of a stranger,
therapist, etc. sexually abusing them. Hence them not being able to give
informed consent seeks to protect them. On the other hand some who are
developmentally disabled may want to have sex with another person who is
developmentally disabled. It seems this situation should be handled on a
case by case basis and those developmentally disabled who are sexually
active or express a desire to be sexually active should be counseled to
use some form of birth control such as birth control pill or surgical
contraception. But it is a sensitive issue because of their presumed
inability to give informed consent and being at the mercy of higher
powers.
Question:
I am a residential counselor at a group home for developmentally
disabled adults. We have never had a sexuality policy or sex ed program.
Recently, a client with independent privelages perpetrated an incident
with another client. Now I have been given the task of researching and
proposing a "policy on sexuality" for the home. I have read articles
about various methods of sex education, but have found nothing regarding
policies for institutions/group homes/etcetera. Do you have any
suggestions? Most of the clients that live at this group home have
little to no knowledge of sexual intercourse. There appears to be some
interest in kissing/petting/relationships, but each client has a legal
guardian/conservator and marriage or sex is not an option for anyone at
this time as everyone has been declared uncapable of giving informed
consent. We also have one client who has come out as gay (he is the one
who perpetrated the incident). Any help you can give me or any direction
you could point me in would be very helpful. Thank you Answer:
by Susan Ludwig: (06/13/2004)
Thank you for writing about this very important subject. Good Policy is
fundamental to providing good sexuality education and for insuring that
the rights and the needs of each individual are respected. A good policy
takes into account the rights and needs of the individual. It needs to
reflect the legislation of the area in which the individual lives. It
needs to be written in a way that lets everyone know what his or her
responsibility is to ensure that the individual is able to access his or
her rights. There is a good example of policy available from The
Association for Community Living, Residentail Services at One Carando
Drive, Springfield, MA, 01104-3211 called Human Sexuality Handbook;
Guiding People Toward Positive Expressions of Sexuality. If you are
interested, I can help you get connected with an agency in Pennsylvania
who have developed a tool for determning consent. I am concerned about
you comment that your clients would enjoy being in relationships but
that their guardians have vetoed this. You need to check with your local
legislation to learn if another person is able to deny a person the
right to develop an intimate relationship if that person demonstrates
that he or she is capable of giving consent. Good luck with your work
and keep in touch! I would like to hear about your progress!
Reviewed by Sexual Health Editorial Team
"It's uncertain whether intelligence has any long term survival value.
Bacteria do quite well without it."
Stephen Hawking
Reply
Mexico Bronco: the beheadment of a government
All 10 messages in topic - view as tree
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Sep 13, 4:14 am show options
Newsgroups: talk.politics,dc.general,ny.general,sci.econ,la.general
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 13 Sep 2004 04:14:21 -0700
Local: Mon, Sep 13 2004 4:14 am
Subject: Mexico Bronco: the beheadment of a government
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Back in the days when Salinas was trying to lead Mexico to development
and actually managed not only to convince the USA and Canada to sign
the NAFTA but also to create an environment of confidence in the
future, the reactionary sectors of that most discriminating society
sensed the danger of losing privileges to a growing and prosperous
middle class thriving outside the usual channels of power of the
cacicazgos and the oligarchy of the 300 families and decided to stop
the salinist project. The result almost unnoticed was, first, the
assassination of Polo Uscanga, young attorney who was a strong
candidate to renovate the judiciary system; then, the assassination of
Ruiz Massieu, who was going to be almost certainly the head of
Congress, and finally the assassination of presidential candidate
Colosio, virtual winner of the future elections under the PRI regime.
It was expected of the next government to continue the progressive
development of a true market economy in Mexico and to follow the
salinist project into the future, with a more noticeable social
content. Yet a whole government was destroyed even before it ascended
to office. The result was the election of Dr Zedillo and the almost
immediate December Error which led to the dissapearance of 80 billion
dollars from the Mexican financial markets and the catastrophic
negative supply shock, the unexpected devaluation of the peso, anchor
of the whole model, which created the most (for many) deep depression
registered in that country. As a result not only the social costs
increased more than the spent political capital of the ruling party
could afford, but also allowed the old power relationships based on
poverty and ignorance to strengthen and instead of the expected
redistribution of wealth what was observed was an increase in wealth
concentration, particularly after the abuses in the banking and
financial systems that originated the chain of frauds that culminated
in the stock crash of 97. The PRI lost power and finally after 70
years a new party won the elections. Yet it is still uncertain whether
this cahnges will actually lead to greater development. Mexico missed
in a depression the years of the explosive growth of the internet and
the new e-Mexico initiative seems ineffective to bridge the gap. The
new government represents some of the most traditional sectors of
society, the Mexican extreme right, and though it is generally
considered positive for a country to have political diversity, in a
system used to el acarreo (all together), the torta and tamal
operations (mass bribes to support or deny support to candidates) and
the chronical ignorance of a people used to the cultura Televisa
(bread and circus), plus the concentration of the old PRI segments
and the also chronic frustration of the left leave doubts as to the
economic and politic future of that country. The emergence of
satellite parties, more interested in getting govermmental funds than
in representing the people, while at the same time bringing an
opportunity to politicians without future in the old regime, also
point to several pressures and tension that undoubtedly will make the
next elections even more important and future defining than the so
announced Cambio (change), which apparently til now has been unable to
produce real results, but seems more like a constant struggle to
convince the people that all goes well without providing the great
expectations that the Salinist regime brought about. It must be
brought to attention that the chiapanecan rebels are still active
though keeping a low level, and apparently other sectors have taken a
more activist stance. The next elections will prove to be the key to
the future of a country that has lost its political identity to pursue
a model internationally acclaimed but that not necessarily conforms to
the character and the level of instruction of the people. Fact is
police corruption and insecurity are increasing more than decreasing,
and the right has, though not readily obvious, a historical vocation
toward dictatorship measures. Will it become another 70 years party
rule? Will it revert to the fractured PRI to grab the occasion to
reaffirm itself in power even aggresively? Maybe a new, more
progressive party will be able to grow and lead the country to a new
redefinition of its goals and its position in a world where oil will
be increasingly less important and water more and more an issue? Or
will the left be able to reform itself in a world where socialism as
was knows is all but dead and new approaches to a social handling of
the economy are called for? Will al the states react with the sme
level of maturity? Or maybe the historical fractures will lead to a
new, unforseeable future? Time will tell...
Reply
zerge Sep 13, 9:41 pm show options
Newsgroups: talk.politics,dc.general,ny.general,sci.econ,la.general
From: z...@hotmail.com (zerge) - Find messages by this author
Date: 13 Sep 2004 21:41:17 -0700
Local: Mon, Sep 13 2004 9:41 pm
Subject: Re: Mexico Bronco: the beheadment of a government
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
This is a caricature of Mexico's recent history.
Allow me to comment on it, since I am Mexican and actually KNOW about
the economics and politics of my country:
> Back in the days when Salinas was trying to lead Mexico to development
> and actually managed not only to convince the USA and Canada to sign
> the NAFTA but also to create an environment of confidence in the
> future, the reactionary sectors of that most discriminating society
> sensed the danger of losing privileges to a growing and prosperous
> middle class thriving outside the usual channels of power of the
> cacicazgos and the oligarchy of the 300 families and decided to stop
> the salinist project. The result almost unnoticed was, first, the
> assassination of Polo Uscanga, young attorney who was a strong
> candidate to renovate the judiciary system; then, the assassination of
> Ruiz Massieu, who was going to be almost certainly the head of
> Congress, and finally the assassination of presidential candidate
> Colosio, virtual winner of the future elections under the PRI regime.
These assasinations where NOT part of a complex,
well-orchestrated complot, as depicted here. They where done within
the context of petty intra-party fighting for control. As an example,
Uscanga was assasinated in an attempt to control public transportation
in Mexico City.
> It was expected of the next government to continue the progressive
> development of a true market economy in Mexico and to follow the
> salinist project into the future, with a more noticeable social
> content. Yet a whole government was destroyed even before it ascended
> to office. The result was the election of Dr Zedillo and the almost
> immediate December Error which led to the dissapearance of 80 billion
> dollars from the Mexican financial markets and the catastrophic
> negative supply shock, the unexpected devaluation of the peso, anchor
> of the whole model, which created the most (for many) deep depression
> registered in that country.
Unexpected? We could see it coming from MILES. After the assasination
of Colosio and the Zapatista revolt, investors got nervous and started
to take their money out of Mexico as fast as they could. It was quite
the financial stampede. Salinas could not afford to leave his
presidency in the middle of a peso devaluation, so he decided to
defend it with our reserves. He thought he had enough dollars to pull
it off. He miscalculated. Reserves runned out, and the peso, instead
of going through a slow devaluation, collapsed in a few weeks. This is
the Sesame Street version of events that lead to the crisis of 1995. A
STUPID miscalculation.
As a result not only the social costs
> increased more than the spent political capital of the ruling party
> could afford, but also allowed the old power relationships based on
> poverty and ignorance to strengthen and instead of the expected
> redistribution of wealth what was observed was an increase in wealth
> concentration, particularly after the abuses in the banking and
> financial systems that originated the chain of frauds that culminated
> in the stock crash of 97. The PRI lost power and finally after 70
> years a new party won the elections. Yet it is still uncertain whether
> this cahnges will actually lead to greater development.
It already HAS led to greater development. Fox's government has
brought unprecedented macroeconomic stability. And as any economist
worth his/her salt, the foundation for economic development is
macroeconomic stability: low inflation, stable exchange rate, low
interest rates, low government deficit. Fox has achieved all this
through fiscal discipline. Most Mexicans (AND Americans) do not
perceive the HUGE benefit for the population that low inflation
represents. The purchasing power of our wages has remained stable and
reasonably high for a long time now that our inflation is about 4% per
year, compared to 150% back in the 80s.
Also, there is a silent revolution going on in the construction
industry in Mexico. Low interest rates have sparked an explosion in
construction credits. In the last four years, over one million
families have received government backed loans to buy or build their
houses. Again, any economist knows that the base for a wealthy middle
class is land and house ownership, which leads to mortages, thus more
consumption and entrepreneurship.
There is also a silent revolution in retail. Walmart alone has 667
stores in Mexico and growing. Mexican consumers have a wide selection
of affordable products thanks to Walmart, Carrefour, Comercial
Mexicana, Gigante, Aurrera, and all the other large retailers, not to
mention hundreds of thousands of jobs thanks to them.
There are many other examples in other industries.
Mexico missed
> in a depression the years of the explosive growth of the internet and
> the new e-Mexico initiative seems ineffective to bridge the gap.
Explosive growth of the internet? That was paper money last time I
checked. And if you ACTUALLY investigate the causes of the phenomenal
increase in American productivity in that period, you will discover,
to your surprise, that it was fueled by retail wholesalers, pressured
by Walmart's competition. Yes, you read me right. Go do your homework
and find out.
e-Mexico? What's THAT? Oh! you mean the PUBLICITY STUNT that Fox
organized! :)
Most Mexicans have never heard of it. I haven't heard much either, and
I read a lot. It's bs. You can safely ignore it.
The
> new government represents some of the most traditional sectors of
> society, the Mexican extreme right, and though it is generally
> considered positive for a country to have political diversity, in a
> system used to el acarreo (all together), the torta and tamal
> operations (mass bribes to support or deny support to candidates) and
> the chronical ignorance of a people used to the cultura Televisa
> (bread and circus),
This Televisa thing is pretty much over. Now it faces fierce
competition fron TV Azteca, plus cable and sat penetration is ever
increasing. Not to mention internet.
plus the concentration of the old PRI segments
> and the also chronic frustration of the left leave doubts as to the
> economic and politic future of that country. The emergence of
> satellite parties, more interested in getting govermmental funds than
> in representing the people, while at the same time bringing an
> opportunity to politicians without future in the old regime, also
Small parties are inconsecuential. Convergencia, PT, and Verde
Ecologista are very minor forces. Other small parties come an go
pretty fast, like Mexico Posible y PSN (or whatever they where
called). New legislation is being pushed in Congress to raise the bar
on creating new parties.
> point to several pressures and tension that undoubtedly will make the
> next elections even more important and future defining than the so
> announced Cambio (change), which apparently til now has been unable to
> produce real results, but seems more like a constant struggle to
> convince the people that all goes well without providing the great
> expectations that the Salinist regime brought about.
Mexico has been at true democracy for 4 years only. It takes much
longer to bake a true republic. So cut us some slack ok? Did the US
come out of the oven all ready to work awesomely as a country? No it
did not, it went through a maturing period, and it is STILL not
perfect, even though it is a 228 year old democracy.
It must be
> brought to attention that the chiapanecan rebels are still active
> though keeping a low level, and apparently other sectors have taken a
> more activist stance.
Good! We WANT them to take an activist stance! Welcome! Just don't
bring along the AK-47s or you'll get your ass kicked by American-made
huey choppers.
The next elections will prove to be the key to
> the future of a country that has lost its political identity to pursue
> a model internationally acclaimed but that not necessarily conforms to
> the character and the level of instruction of the people. Fact is
> police corruption and insecurity are increasing more than decreasing,
> and the right has, though not readily obvious, a historical vocation
> toward dictatorship measures.
Dictatorial right?? In Mexico?? LOL. :)
That's all I have to say.
Will it become another 70 years party
> rule?
It cannot. We have build a very strong Federal Electorate Institue
(IFE), which is internationally recognized as very effective in
organinzing clean elections. I am willing to bet that now Mexico's
federal elections are more clean AND fair than US elections. (Chads,
anyone?)
Will it revert to the fractured PRI to grab the occasion to
> reaffirm itself in power even aggresively? Maybe a new, more
> progressive party will be able to grow and lead the country to a new
> redefinition of its goals and its position in a world where oil will
> be increasingly less important and water more and more an issue? Or
> will the left be able to reform itself in a world where socialism as
> was knows is all but dead and new approaches to a social handling of
> the economy are called for? Will al the states react with the sme
> level of maturity? Or maybe the historical fractures will lead to a
> new, unforseeable future? Time will tell...
The person who wrote this posting has partial knowledge about the
internal workings of my country. And as we all know, partial knowledge
is more dangerous than no knowledge, because it creates the illusion
of REAL knowledge. And it's only that: an illusion.
Now. Would you care to opine on the internal political working of,
say, Turkey? :)
Reply
zerge Sep 14, 7:17 am show options
Newsgroups: talk.politics,dc.general,ny.general,sci.econ,la.general
From: z...@hotmail.com (zerge) - Find messages by this author
Date: 14 Sep 2004 07:17:36 -0700
Local: Tues, Sep 14 2004 7:17 am
Subject: Re: Mexico Bronco: the beheadment of a government
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> Back in the days when Salinas was trying to lead Mexico to development
> and actually managed not only to convince the USA and Canada to sign
> the NAFTA but also to create an environment of confidence in the
> future, the reactionary sectors of that most discriminating society
> sensed the danger of losing privileges to a growing and prosperous
> middle class thriving outside the usual channels of power of the
> cacicazgos and the oligarchy of the 300 families and decided to stop
> the salinist project. The result almost unnoticed was, first, the
> assassination of Polo Uscanga, young attorney who was a strong
> candidate to renovate the judiciary system; then, the assassination of
> Ruiz Massieu, who was going to be almost certainly the head of
> Congress, and finally the assassination of presidential candidate
> Colosio, virtual winner of the future elections under the PRI regime.
> It was expected of the next government to continue the progressive
> development of a true market economy in Mexico and to follow the
> salinist project into the future, with a more noticeable social
> content. Yet a whole government was destroyed even before it ascended
> to office. The result was the election of Dr Zedillo and the almost
> immediate December Error which led to the dissapearance of 80 billion
> dollars from the Mexican financial markets and the catastrophic
> negative supply shock, the unexpected devaluation of the peso, anchor
> of the whole model, which created the most (for many) deep depression
> registered in that country. As a result not only the social costs
> increased more than the spent political capital of the ruling party
> could afford, but also allowed the old power relationships based on
> poverty and ignorance to strengthen and instead of the expected
> redistribution of wealth what was observed was an increase in wealth
> concentration, particularly after the abuses in the banking and
> financial systems that originated the chain of frauds that culminated
> in the stock crash of 97. The PRI lost power and finally after 70
> years a new party won the elections. Yet it is still uncertain whether
> this cahnges will actually lead to greater development. Mexico missed
> in a depression the years of the explosive growth of the internet and
> the new e-Mexico initiative seems ineffective to bridge the gap. The
> new government represents some of the most traditional sectors of
> society, the Mexican extreme right, and though it is generally
> considered positive for a country to have political diversity, in a
> system used to el acarreo (all together), the torta and tamal
> operations (mass bribes to support or deny support to candidates) and
> the chronical ignorance of a people used to the cultura Televisa
> (bread and circus), plus the concentration of the old PRI segments
> and the also chronic frustration of the left leave doubts as to the
> economic and politic future of that country. The emergence of
> satellite parties, more interested in getting govermmental funds than
> in representing the people, while at the same time bringing an
> opportunity to politicians without future in the old regime, also
> point to several pressures and tension that undoubtedly will make the
> next elections even more important and future defining than the so
> announced Cambio (change), which apparently til now has been unable to
> produce real results, but seems more like a constant struggle to
> convince the people that all goes well without providing the great
> expectations that the Salinist regime brought about. It must be
> brought to attention that the chiapanecan rebels are still active
> though keeping a low level, and apparently other sectors have taken a
> more activist stance. The next elections will prove to be the key to
> the future of a country that has lost its political identity to pursue
> a model internationally acclaimed but that not necessarily conforms to
> the character and the level of instruction of the people. Fact is
> police corruption and insecurity are increasing more than decreasing,
Forgot to mention. We do NOT have police in Mexico. Those guys with
the uniforms are just criminals PRETENDING to be cops.
And no, I don't think it is increasing. I think it is already at the
max. An "increase" would mean it was better yesterday, and I don't see
that. It has been really bad for a LONG time. Since the dirty war back
in the 70s probably.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> and the right has, though not readily obvious, a historical vocation
> toward dictatorship measures. Will it become another 70 years party
> rule? Will it revert to the fractured PRI to grab the occasion to
> reaffirm itself in power even aggresively? Maybe a new, more
> progressive party will be able to grow and lead the country to a new
> redefinition of its goals and its position in a world where oil will
> be increasingly less important and water more and more an issue? Or
> will the left be able to reform itself in a world where socialism as
> was knows is all but dead and new approaches to a social handling of
> the economy are called for? Will al the states react with the sme
> level of maturity? Or maybe the historical fractures will lead to a
> new, unforseeable future? Time will tell...
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Sep 14, 11:37 pm show options
Newsgroups: talk.politics,dc.general,ny.general,sci.econ,la.general
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 14 Sep 2004 23:37:19 -0700
Local: Tues, Sep 14 2004 11:37 pm
Subject: Re: Mexico Bronco: the beheadment of a government
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
z...@hotmail.com (zerge) wrote in message ...
> This is a caricature of Mexico's recent history.
> Allow me to comment on it, since I am Mexican and actually KNOW about
> the economics and politics of my country:
It might be a simplification, down to essences, but not a
caricaturization. And I was there at the time.
> > Back in the days when Salinas was trying to lead Mexico to development
(snip)
> > Congress, and finally the assassination of presidential candidate
> > Colosio, virtual winner of the future elections under the PRI regime.
> These assasinations where NOT part of a complex,
> well-orchestrated complot, as depicted here. They where done within
> the context of petty intra-party fighting for control. As an example,
> Uscanga was assasinated in an attempt to control public transportation
> in Mexico City.
Fact is the salinist model was broken in the next government, and a
particular motive doesn`t mean it didn`t have repercusions in the
bigger picture. Had he not been assassinated, that particular group
would have had more weight. Events can be played to advantage, but how
can we be sure it was not a mere (in the eyes of the killers) move in
a larger scheme?
> > It was expected of the next government to continue the progressive
> > development of a true market economy in Mexico and to follow the
(snip)
> > of the whole model, which created the most (for many) deep depression
> > registered in that country.
> Unexpected? We could see it coming from MILES.
At the time only the commercial balance of payments was in yellow and
eerythinh pointed to an easy financing.
> After the assasination
> of Colosio and the Zapatista revolt, investors got nervous and started
> to take their money out of Mexico as fast as they could. It was quite
Why then they didn`t run *immediately* after the Colosio assassination
or the zapatistas? More than a year passed, enough to take out all
investments (volatile funds were those, weren`t they?)
> the financial stampede. Salinas could not afford to leave his
> presidency in the middle of a peso devaluation, so he decided to
> defend it with our reserves.
Why? He was leaving, and Zedillo was already elected. Other presidents
assumed the weight of their devaluations.
>He thought he had enough dollars to pull
> it off. He miscalculated. Reserves runned out, and the peso, instead
> of going through a slow devaluation, collapsed in a few weeks. This is
> the Sesame Street version of events that lead to the crisis of 1995. A
> STUPID miscalculation.
As
far as I remember there were enough reserves at the time and it
shows in the books of Banco de Mexico. Also, the 20 billions Cinton
helped with could have been borrowed *before* the devaluation. And the
_error_ was announcing that the slow depreciation of the peso (the
slide, el desliz), which was bringing certainty to the system, was
going to change unexpectedly. Actual events minute by minute are only
known to the true insiders.
> > As a result not only the social costs
> > increased more than the spent political capital of the ruling party
> (snip)
> It already HAS led to greater development. Fox's government has
> brought unprecedented macroeconomic stability. And as any economist
> worth his/her salt, the foundation for economic development is
> macroeconomic stability: low inflation, stable exchange rate, low
> interest rates, low government deficit. Fox has achieved all this
> through fiscal discipline. Most Mexicans (AND Americans) do not
> perceive the HUGE benefit for the population that low inflation
> represents. The purchasing power of our wages has remained stable and
> reasonably high for a long time now that our inflation is about 4% per
> year, compared to 150% back in the 80s.
Stable inflation was achieved long time before Fox. He may be managing
to keep it stable and low, but he is not the *cause* of that low
inflation. Fiscal discipline was achieved before too, and real wages
are at about the same level they were in the 30`s.
> Also, there is a silent revolution going on in the construction
> industry in Mexico. Low interest rates have sparked an explosion in
> construction credits. In the last four years, over one million
> families have received government backed loans to buy or build their
> houses. Again, any economist knows that the base for a wealthy middle
> class is land and house ownership, which leads to mortages, thus more
> consumption and entrepreneurship.
> There is also a silent revolution in retail. Walmart alone has 667
> stores in Mexico and growing. Mexican consumers have a wide selection
> of affordable products thanks to Walmart, Carrefour, Comercial
> Mexicana, Gigante, Aurrera, and all the other large retailers, not to
> mention hundreds of thousands of jobs thanks to them.
> There are many other examples in other industries.
Granted, but those are still low wage jobs with high turnover rates.
As for developmennt, I believe I am aware that Mexico lacks alimentary
independence.
> Mexico missed
> > in a depression the years of the explosive growth of the internet and
> > the new e-Mexico initiative seems ineffective to bridge the gap.
> Explosive growth of the internet? That was paper money last time I
> checked. And if you ACTUALLY investigate the causes of the phenomenal
> increase in American productivity in that period, you will discover,
> to your surprise, that it was fueled by retail wholesalers, pressured
> by Walmart's competition. Yes, you read me right. Go do your homework
> and find out.
Internet is more than dot com companies, is the availability of
knowledge and low cost communications, plus all the advantages of
computing. As for productivity I believe it comes more from better
processes and technology tan by pressures from a single firm in a
national economy.
> e-Mexico? What's THAT? Oh! you mean the PUBLICITY STUNT that Fox
> organized! :)
> Most Mexicans have never heard of it. I haven't heard much either, and
> I read a lot. It's bs. You can safely ignore it.
Precisely! Advertising campaings are for companies, not for
governments to cover the holes. Distributed computing is much more
than chats and Flash sites.
> The
> > new government represents some of the most traditional sectors of
> > society, the Mexican extreme right, and though it is generally
> > considered positive for a country to have political diversity, in a
> > system used to el acarreo (all together), the torta and tamal
> > operations (mass bribes to support or deny support to candidates) and
> > the chronical ignorance of a people used to the cultura Televisa
> > (bread and circus),
> This Televisa thing is pretty much over. Now it faces fierce
> competition fron TV Azteca, plus cable and sat penetration is ever
> increasing. Not to mention internet.
Doctor Chunga belongs to TV Azteca? Or those puppets I don`t remember
their name? The fact that there is competition doesn`t mean that the
base field has changed. Now they have another team playing in the same
league. 8)
> plus the concentration of the old PRI segments
> > and the also chronic frustration of the left leave doubts as to the
> > economic and politic future of that country. The emergence of
> > satellite parties, more interested in getting govermmental funds than
> > in representing the people, while at the same time bringing an
> > opportunity to politicians without future in the old regime, also
> Small parties are inconsecuential. Convergencia, PT, and Verde
> Ecologista are very minor forces. Other small parties come an go
> pretty fast, like Mexico Posible y PSN (or whatever they where
> called). New legislation is being pushed in Congress to raise the bar
> on creating new parties.
From my point of view small parties have potential to grow (always),
but mainly work to divest forces of change within the big
parties.
> > point to several pressures and tension that undoubtedly will make the
> > next elections even more important and future defining than the so
> > announced Cambio (change), which apparently til now has been unable to
> > produce real results, but seems more like a constant struggle to
> > convince the people that all goes well without providing the great
> > expectations that the Salinist regime brought about.
> Mexico has been at true democracy for 4 years only.
But it has been a country since 1821!
>It takes much
> longer to bake a true republic.
At least since what was that, 1857? 1917?
>So cut us some slack ok? Did the US
> come out of the oven all ready to work awesomely as a country? No it
> did not, it went through a maturing period, and it is STILL not
> perfect, even though it is a 228 year old democracy.
Define perfect democracy, perfect country. America was already a
working democracy during Lincoln, and has been so at least since the
Secession war was over. (The secession war defined the future of USA
as a technological powe rather than an agricultural one. I believe
this is one of Toffler thesis and it may be that *such* decisions are
just too big to be resolved in a voting system. Just an idea.).
> It must be
> > brought to attention that the chiapanecan rebels are still active
> > though keeping a low level, and apparently other sectors have taken a
> > more activist stance.
> Good! We WANT them to take an activist stance! Welcome! Just don't
> bring along the AK-47s or you'll get your ass kicked by American-made
> huey choppers.
Missed the references. Aren`t weapons denied to the pueblo?
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> The next elections will prove to be the key to
> > the future of a country that has lost its political identity to pursue
> > a model internationally acclaimed but that not necessarily conforms to
> > the character and the level of instruction of the people. Fact is
> > police corruption and insecurity are increasing more than decreasing,
> > and the right has, though not
...
read more »
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Sep 14, 11:41 pm show options
Newsgroups: talk.politics,dc.general,ny.general,sci.econ,la.general
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 14 Sep 2004 23:41:17 -0700
Local: Tues, Sep 14 2004 11:41 pm
Subject: Re: Mexico Bronco: the beheadment of a government
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
z...@hotmail.com (zerge) wrote in message ...
> fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> > Back in the days when Salinas was trying to lead Mexico to development
(snip
)
> Forgot to mention. We do NOT have police in Mexico. Those guys with
> the uniforms are just criminals PRETENDING to be cops.
I didn`t know your country was so keen of the fact. What are you doing
to solve the problem?
> And no, I don't think it is increasing. I think it is already at the
> max. An "increase" would mean it was better yesterday, and I don't see
> that. It has been really bad for a LONG time. Since the dirty war back
> in the 70s probably.
Maybe, a little more and it will be outright war, at least according
to some radio commentators.
Reply
zerge Sep 24, 7:52 am show options
Newsgroups: talk.politics,dc.general,ny.general,sci.econ,la.general
From: z...@hotmail.com (zerge) - Find messages by this author
Date: 24 Sep 2004 07:52:55 -0700
Local: Fri, Sep 24 2004 7:52 am
Subject: Re: Mexico Bronco: the beheadment of a government
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> z...@hotmail.com (zerge) wrote in message ...
> > fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> > > Back in the days when Salinas was trying to lead Mexico to development
> (snip)
> > Forgot to mention. We do NOT have police in Mexico. Those guys with
> > the uniforms are just criminals PRETENDING to be cops.
> I didn`t know your country was so keen of the fact. What are you doing
> to solve the problem?
Changing laws. Professionalizing the police force. I'm exaggerating
when I say we have no police, of course. We do have SOME decent
elements. But it will take decades to bring the police force up to par
after such a long neglect.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> > And no, I don't think it is increasing. I think it is already at the
> > max. An "increase" would mean it was better yesterday, and I don't see
> > that. It has been really bad for a LONG time. Since the dirty war back
> > in the 70s probably.
> Maybe, a little more and it will be outright war, at least according
> to some radio commentators.
Reply
zerge Sep 24, 8:15 am show options
Newsgroups: talk.politics,dc.general,ny.general,sci.econ,la.general
From: z...@hotmail.com (zerge) - Find messages by this author
Date: 24 Sep 2004 08:15:04 -0700
Local: Fri, Sep 24 2004 8:15 am
Subject: Re: Mexico Bronco: the beheadment of a government
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> z...@hotmail.com (zerge) wrote in message ...
> > This is a caricature of Mexico's recent history.
> > Allow me to comment on it, since I am Mexican and actually KNOW about
> > the economics and politics of my country:
> It might be a simplification, down to essences, but not a
> caricaturization. And I was there at the time.
> > > Back in the days when Salinas was trying to lead Mexico to development
> (snip)
> > > Congress, and finally the assassination of presidential candidate
> > > Colosio, virtual winner of the future elections under the PRI regime.
> > These assasinations where NOT part of a complex,
> > well-orchestrated complot, as depicted here. They where done within
> > the context of petty intra-party fighting for control. As an example,
> > Uscanga was assasinated in an attempt to control public transportation
> > in Mexico City.
> Fact is the salinist model was broken in the next government, and a
> particular motive doesn`t mean it didn`t have repercusions in the
> bigger picture. Had he not been assassinated, that particular group
> would have had more weight. Events can be played to advantage, but how
> can we be sure it was not a mere (in the eyes of the killers) move in
> a larger scheme?
Could be. But remember Occam's Razor.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> > > It was expected of the next government to continue the progressive
> > > development of a true market economy in Mexico and to follow the
> (snip)
> > > of the whole model, which created the most (for many) deep depression
> > > registered in that country.
> > Unexpected? We could see it coming from MILES.
> At the time only the commercial balance of payments was in yellow and
> eerythinh pointed to an easy financing.
> > After the assasination
> > of Colosio and the Zapatista revolt, investors got nervous and started
> > to take their money out of Mexico as fast as they could. It was quite
> Why then they didn`t run *immediately* after the Colosio assassination
> or the zapatistas? More than a year passed, enough to take out all
> investments (volatile funds were those, weren`t they?)
It wasn't an instant panic. You know it was much more complex than
that.
> > the financial stampede. Salinas could not afford to leave his
> > presidency in the middle of a peso devaluation, so he decided to
> > defend it with our reserves.
> Why? He was leaving, and Zedillo was already elected. Other presidents
> assumed the weight of their devaluations.
1) Salinas is a PRI party man. He wanted the PRI to keep ruling.
2) Salinas was candidate to head the WTO; he needed the prestige. (At
the end he did not get the post of course).
> >He thought he had enough dollars to pull
> > it off. He miscalculated. Reserves runned out, and the peso, instead
> > of going through a slow devaluation, collapsed in a few weeks. This is
> > the Sesame Street version of events that lead to the crisis of 1995. A
> > STUPID miscalculation.
> As far as I remember there were enough reserves at the time and it
> shows in the books of Banco de Mexico. Also, the 20 billions Cinton
> helped with could have been borrowed *before* the devaluation. And the
> _error_ was announcing that the slow depreciation of the peso (the
> slide, el desliz), which was bringing certainty to the system, was
> going to change unexpectedly. Actual events minute by minute are only
> known to the true insiders.
Borrow before? 20/20 hindsight, right? :) But yes, the error WAS
indeed that they signaled the market that depreciation was coming.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> > > As a result not only the social costs
> > > increased more than the spent political capital of the ruling party
> > (snip)
> > It already HAS led to greater development. Fox's government has
> > brought unprecedented macroeconomic stability. And as any economist
> > worth his/her salt, the foundation for economic development is
> > macroeconomic stability: low inflation, stable exchange rate, low
> > interest rates, low government deficit. Fox has achieved all this
> > through fiscal discipline. Most Mexicans (AND Americans) do not
> > perceive the HUGE benefit for the population that low inflation
> > represents. The purchasing power of our wages has remained stable and
> > reasonably high for a long time now that our inflation is about 4% per
> > year, compared to 150% back in the 80s.
> Stable inflation was achieved long time before Fox. He may be managing
> to keep it stable and low, but he is not the *cause* of that low
> inflation. Fiscal discipline was achieved before too, and real wages
> are at about the same level they were in the 30`s.
Maintaining fiscal and monetary discipline IS an achievement. You know
how easy it is not to. Just look at your country.
Real wages are at the same level they wer in the 30s? Is that so? Care
to post statistics and sources?
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> > Also, there is a silent revolution going on in the construction
> > industry in Mexico. Low interest rates have sparked an explosion in
> > construction credits. In the last four years, over one million
> > families have received government backed loans to buy or build their
> > houses. Again, any economist knows that the base for a wealthy middle
> > class is land and house ownership, which leads to mortages, thus more
> > consumption and entrepreneurship.
> > There is also a silent revolution in retail. Walmart alone has 667
> > stores in Mexico and growing. Mexican consumers have a wide selection
> > of affordable products thanks to Walmart, Carrefour, Comercial
> > Mexicana, Gigante, Aurrera, and all the other large retailers, not to
> > mention hundreds of thousands of jobs thanks to them.
> > There are many other examples in other industries.
> Granted, but those are still low wage jobs with high turnover rates.
> As for developmennt, I believe I am aware that Mexico lacks alimentary
> independence.
I wasn't talking about the jobs created. I was talking about the
benefits of great selection and low prices for consumers. I don't know
if you where in Mexico before NAFTA and before GATT, but Mexico's
stores had a Stalinist air to them: little selection, few products,
and expensive.
Now you can see "poor" people who nevertheless owns a nice living
room, 21'' TV, fridge, stove, DVD, and computer, all thanks to the
store credits that company like Elektra give people.
As to alimentary independence, well, I MYSELF lack alimentary
idependence as an individual. Oh, I could grow stuff in my backyard
and own chicken and a couple of pigs, I guess. But instead of doing
that, I work as a consultant, make money out of that, and then buy
food from those who are GOOD at growing it. Sounds familiar?
Comparative advantage?
Some theories out there say that countries need NOT have alimentary
independence. I'll be honest, I haven't studied the subject in depth,
so I'm not quite sure. But it kinda makes sense.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> > Mexico missed
> > > in a depression the years of the explosive growth of the internet and
> > > the new e-Mexico initiative seems ineffective to bridge the gap.
> > Explosive growth of the internet? That was paper money last time I
> > checked. And if you ACTUALLY investigate the causes of the phenomenal
> > increase in American productivity in that period, you will discover,
> > to your surprise, that it was fueled by retail wholesalers, pressured
> > by Walmart's competition. Yes, you read me right. Go do your homework
> > and find out.
> Internet is more than dot com companies, is the availability of
> knowledge and low cost communications, plus all the advantages of
> computing. As for productivity I believe it comes more from better
> processes and technology tan by pressures from a single firm in a
> national economy.
> > e-Mexico? What's THAT? Oh! you mean the PUBLICITY STUNT that Fox
> > organized! :)
> > Most Mexicans have never heard of it. I haven't heard much either, and
> > I read a lot. It's bs. You can safely ignore it.
> Precisely! Advertising campaings are for companies, not for
> governments to cover the holes. Distributed computing is much more
> than chats and Flash sites.
Agreed! :)
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> > The
> > > new government represents some of the most traditional sectors of
> > > society, the Mexican extreme right, and though it is generally
> > > considered positive for a country to have political diversity, in a
> > > system used to el acarreo (all together), the torta and tamal
> > > operations (mass bribes to support or deny support to candidates) and
> > > the chronical ignorance of a people used to the cultura Televisa
> > > (bread and circus),
> > This Televisa thing is pretty much over. Now it faces fierce
> > competition fron TV Azteca, plus cable and sat penetration is ever
> > increasing. Not to mention internet.
> Doctor Chunga belongs to TV Azteca? Or those puppets I don`t remember
> their name? The fact that there is competition doesn`t mean that the
> base field has changed. Now they have another team playing in the same
> league. 8)
Satellite TV is ever increasing its penetration. Now for a few hundred
pesos a month you get cable or satellite. Now you have 100s channels
to choose from. Sure, Televisa and TV Azteca dominate. But they no
longer control the NEWS, which was in the past their power. Plus the
print media and radio are very independent and outspoken. And you have
the internet too.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> > plus the concentration of the old PRI segments
> > > and the also chronic frustration of the left leave doubts as to the
> > > economic and politic future of that country. The emergence of
> > > satellite parties, more interested in getting govermmental funds than
> > > in representing the people, while at the same time bringing an
> > > opportunity to politicians without future in the old
...
read more »
Reply
zerge Sep 25, 6:59 am show options
Newsgroups: talk.politics,dc.general,ny.general,sci.econ,la.general
From: z...@hotmail.com (zerge) - Find messages by this author
Date: 25 Sep 2004 06:59:09 -0700
Local: Sat, Sep 25 2004 6:59 am
Subject: Re: Mexico Bronco: the beheadment of a government
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
z...@hotmail.com (zerge) wrote in message news:...
> fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> > z...@hotmail.com (zerge) wrote in message ...
> > > This is a caricature of Mexico's recent history.
> > > Allow me to comment on it, since I am Mexican and actually KNOW about
> > > the economics and politics of my country:
> > It might be a simplification, down to essences, but not a
> > caricaturization. And I was there at the time.
> > > > Back in the days when Salinas was trying to lead Mexico to development
> (snip)
> > > > Congress, and finally the assassination of presidential candidate
> > > > Colosio, virtual winner of the future elections under the PRI regime.
> > > These assasinations where NOT part of a complex,
> > > well-orchestrated complot, as depicted here. They where done within
> > > the context of petty intra-party fighting for control. As an example,
> > > Uscanga was assasinated in an attempt to control public transportation
> > > in Mexico City.
> > Fact is the salinist model was broken in the next government, and a
> > particular motive doesn`t mean it didn`t have repercusions in the
> > bigger picture. Had he not been assassinated, that particular group
> > would have had more weight. Events can be played to advantage, but how
> > can we be sure it was not a mere (in the eyes of the killers) move in
> > a larger scheme?
> Could be. But remember Occam's Razor.
> > > > It was expected of the next government to continue the progressive
> > > > development of a true market economy in Mexico and to follow the
> (snip)
> > > > of the whole model, which created the most (for many) deep depression
> > > > registered in that country.
> > > Unexpected? We could see it coming from MILES.
> > At the time only the commercial balance of payments was in yellow and
> > eerythinh pointed to an easy financing.
> > > After the assasination
> > > of Colosio and the Zapatista revolt, investors got nervous and started
> > > to take their money out of Mexico as fast as they could. It was quite
> > Why then they didn`t run *immediately* after the Colosio assassination
> > or the zapatistas? More than a year passed, enough to take out all
> > investments (volatile funds were those, weren`t they?)
> It wasn't an instant panic. You know it was much more complex than
> that.
> > > the financial stampede. Salinas could not afford to leave his
> > > presidency in the middle of a peso devaluation, so he decided to
> > > defend it with our reserves.
> > Why? He was leaving, and Zedillo was already elected. Other presidents
> > assumed the weight of their devaluations.
> 1) Salinas is a PRI party man. He wanted the PRI to keep ruling.
> 2) Salinas was candidate to head the WTO; he needed the prestige. (At
> the end he did not get the post of course).
> > >He thought he had enough dollars to pull
> > > it off. He miscalculated. Reserves runned out, and the peso, instead
> > > of going through a slow devaluation, collapsed in a few weeks. This is
> > > the Sesame Street version of events that lead to the crisis of 1995. A
> > > STUPID miscalculation.
> > As far as I remember there were enough reserves at the time and it
> > shows in the books of Banco de Mexico. Also, the 20 billions Cinton
> > helped with could have been borrowed *before* the devaluation. And the
> > _error_ was announcing that the slow depreciation of the peso (the
> > slide, el desliz), which was bringing certainty to the system, was
> > going to change unexpectedly. Actual events minute by minute are only
> > known to the true insiders.
> Borrow before? 20/20 hindsight, right? :) But yes, the error WAS
> indeed that they signaled the market that depreciation was coming.
Devaluation, I mean :)
Reply
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Sep 27, 2:01 am show options
Newsgroups: talk.politics,dc.general,ny.general,sci.econ,la.general
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 27 Sep 2004 02:01:08 -0700
Local: Mon, Sep 27 2004 2:01 am
Subject: Re: Mexico Bronco: the beheadment of a government
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
> > > Forgot to mention. We do NOT have police in Mexico. Those guys with
> > > the uniforms are just criminals PRETENDING to be cops.
> > I didn`t know your country was so keen of the fact. What are you doing
> > to solve the problem?
> Changing laws. Professionalizing the police force. I'm exaggerating
> when I say we have no police, of course. We do have SOME decent
> elements. But it will take decades to bring the police force up to par
> after such a long neglect.
You were *not* exaggerating, you were being sarcastic. SOME decent
elements is NO police at all. SOME corrupt elements IS normality.
Shouldn`t take decades, `just` a matter of calling the Army,
dissolving the police and create a new police from scratch. I have
NEVER experienced JUSTICE in your country; in fact, NEVER AT ALL,
since your people has followed me to MY country and keep abusing,
criming against me. It is not paranoid (now I recognized you from the
other thread...), it is fact. Problem is that corruption spreads; it
has a spill over effect... And instead of being decently treated as a
composer, I was made a pauper...
Reply
zerge Sep 27, 9:55 am show options
Newsgroups: talk.politics,dc.general,ny.general,sci.econ,la.general
From: z...@hotmail.com (zerge) - Find messages by this author
Date: 27 Sep 2004 09:55:36 -0700
Local: Mon, Sep 27 2004 9:55 am
Subject: Re: Mexico Bronco: the beheadment of a government
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> > > > Forgot to mention. We do NOT have police in Mexico. Those guys with
> > > > the uniforms are just criminals PRETENDING to be cops.
> > > I didn`t know your country was so keen of the fact. What are you doing
> > > to solve the problem?
> > Changing laws. Professionalizing the police force. I'm exaggerating
> > when I say we have no police, of course. We do have SOME decent
> > elements. But it will take decades to bring the police force up to par
> > after such a long neglect.
> You were *not* exaggerating, you were being sarcastic. SOME decent
> elements is NO police at all. SOME corrupt elements IS normality.
> Shouldn`t take decades, `just` a matter of calling the Army,
> dissolving the police and create a new police from scratch. I have
> NEVER experienced JUSTICE in your country; in fact, NEVER AT ALL,
> since your people has followed me to MY country and keep abusing,
> criming against me. It is not paranoid (now I recognized you from the
> other thread...), it is fact. Problem is that corruption spreads; it
> has a spill over effect... And instead of being decently treated as a
> composer, I was made a pauper...
Look, I won't discuss anymore your personal problems. But I'll be
happy to discuss your economics and politics postings, which I find
unusually fair. I mean you do have your bias, but I have always
maintained we ALL are biased, and cannot avoid it. I have my bias too.
As to the army in the police thing. It was KINDA done with the
creation of the Policia Federal Preventiva (PFP). The PFP was created
using army elements, and it has a military hierarchy and discipline.
The results have been so far more or less positive. The PFP is much
more effective and less corrupt that the normal metro police, but it
is still a sort of pilot test, and they have few elements (less than
2,000). The long term plan is to integrate ALL police corps into the
PFP, and have one single national police force, kind of like the
Carabineri in Italy, or the Guardia Civil in Spain.
Also, Major Guiliani was in Mexico City about a year ago with his
consulting firm, and left several recommendations that have been
followed, such as zero tolerance, surveillance cameras, and the
neighborhood cop. The results have been mixed so far, but I guess some
progress has been made.
Yes, the judicial system in Mexico is broken. We use no juries nor
verbal trials, even though our Constitution allow (but not force)
them. You can imagine how easily it is to buy a judge. No jury, no
problem! That is changing. Some states just recently started to use
verbal trials. That makes the proceeding much more transparent that
our current ton-of-paper system. Family and friends can hear the
proceeding, so it's much harder to hide "facts" instide one thousand
page documents. There is talk of using juries also.
Also, some years ago a thing called Consejo de la Judicatura was
installed, which keeps tabs on what judges do, and punish their
wrongdoing (IF they catch them, that is).
So, in general I feel positive about the prospect of having a REAL
judicial branch one of these days. But it is hard, slow work. I'm not
holding my breath.
Reply
The case for and against genius, a formula
Only 1 message in topic
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 14, 10:41 am show options
Newsgroups: sci.math
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 14 Oct 2004 10:41:25 -0700
Local: Thurs, Oct 14 2004 10:41 am
Subject: The case for and against genius, a formula
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) wrote in message ...
> "robert j. kolker" wrote in message ...
> > Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
> > > We can envision each generation as a hyperplane in the space of human
> > > possibility where there is (at some moments in time, with certain
> > > frequency) a high peak, global macimum, followed by other minor peaks
> > > and a continuum varying about an average, (for the intelligence
> > > measure, whatever it is taken).
> > Hyperplanes in affine space are flat.
> > Bob Kolker
What kind of plane would give a single, very steep, puntual maximum in
only
one dimension while having an average value in that dimension? The
space is infinite-dimensional, discrete and dense.
See the thread of the same name under my name.
ghamac.org
ghamac.org/miniface.jpg
ghamac.org/documenti/rondop.mid
ghamac.org/guitar/isabelsdeath.mp3
My music, my children, listen them complete, beginnings are difficult
like giving birth to a child.
Save lives! Proof of Leprechans! Actuarial tables!
Only 1 message in topic
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore Oct 15, 3:30 pm show options
Newsgroups: utexas.general,dc.general,ny.general,tx.general,seattle.general
From: fbonsign...@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J. Bonsignore) - Find messages by this author
Date: 15 Oct 2004 15:30:41 -0700
Local: Fri, Oct 15 2004 3:30 pm
Subject: Re: Save lives! Proof of Leprechans! Actuarial tables!
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Tiny Human Ferret wrote in message ...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
> > There must be no *sudden jumps* in the propensities to accidents,
> > suicides, killings, etc. If there is a probability distribution for
> > this events, its changes must be correlated to population growth but
> > the basic distribution MUST NOT change, (save for a small bias that
> > reflects the effect of too many people).
> > For any particular group the number and rate of "accidents" must be in
> > accord to the actuarial rates. BUT THE TABLES CAN BE CHANGED! Do tere
> > must be no sudden change. This can be verified woth old tables. And if
> > old tables dissapear or are hidden or changed, that in itself is proof
> > that there is *something happening*.
> > By whom? Most probably the army and the federal police corps, plus
> > secret societies and maybe the secret services...
> There is no Cabal.
> Fnord,
Why? If there is no why, there's no reply... Excuse me, IDIOT.
<(8/)>
Reply