Letters to the Editor
mattwa33186
Published Letters: 395 Editor's Choice: 41
-
Karen M
[Read the article: Are men spoiled rotten?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Its true that men who father children after the age of 40 have a higher chance of the child having autism or Asperger's Syndrome. It is also true that men who have Asperger's Syndrome or mild forms of autism tend to have their children later in life and yes, these conditions can be hereditary. So this is a chicken or the egg situation that can't be solved with mere statistics. Coercing men into giving up their desire to have children in the way you propose isn't just mean, it's deceitful and misleading. Hopefully, the LW isn't desperate enough to resort to this.
-
Sharp end of the stick
[Read the article: "The Bourne Ultimatum"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Haven't read all the comments here so forgive me if someone else brought this up, but you have completely misinterpreted the meaning of this phrase.
The sharp end of the stick is the end that gets bloody. The guys who get bloody are not the wielders of the stick, they answer to the wielders of the stick - pretty much the opposite of what you said.
-
It wouldn't matter
[Read the article: Will the real Colin Powell stand up?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Everyone has already made up their mind about the war, the administration, everything. Bush's legacy has already been written for the people who have had to live under his regime.
Richard Clark told all, was portrayed as a lunatic by Bush and his supporters, and disappeared. The administration managed to do this without tarnishing themselves in any way, which shows how scary they are and how stupid the American people have become.
Bob Woodward set the administration up in a manner worthy of the greatest of con men, pulled the rug out from under Bush, Cheney, Rove, and Rumsfeld, told us all exactly how we had been manipulated and lied to and continued to be manipulated and lied to, and nothing happened. Nothing. The media allowed one of their superstars to wither on the vine, marginalizing a man who gave them credibility they had stopped deserving decades before. The press coverage of the war grew even more pro-administration, to the point that we now have the New York Times publishing Pentagon press releases and calling it journalism. Incredible.
So now we have Powell. The mere mention of the possibility that he will speak out brings the character assasins out of the woodwork. By the time any book was published he would be known as a pedophile who personally murdered thousands of villagers in Viet Nam, doesn't pay his taxes, and drives in the HOV lane all by himself.
One thing all the Powell haters have posted is true - if he does this, if he tells all, it will be for himself and no one else. Not because of any flaws in the man's character, but because we have, as a nation, shown that we largely don't give a shit.
-
Dinosaur?
[Read the article: Now romancer]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You're shitting me, right?
Gibson's books aren't about technology, or politics. They are about the effects of technology and politics on people, and he does this better than anyone else ever has. I know people who hate science fiction but love William Gibson, just as I know people who hate books about war but devour anything by Glen Cook, because the technology is only there to provide context for the motivations, aspirations, and actions of people. And that's what makes Gibson (and Cook) so special - within genres that have historically been about the genre itself, they write about people.
He isn't Nostradamus, nor is he trying to be. But if you're so hung up on Gibson being a prognosticator, you're still wrong.
He didn't predict Bush, but he showed us characters who live in an America where the government doesn't give a shit about it's citizens - actively, aggressively, and with no pretense of caring at any level.
He didn't predict YouTube, but he did understand that the pervasive avalability of video would not only expose us to some fascinating art and further blur the line between reality and make-believe, but become a world-wide obsession.
He didn't predict the world we live in today, but he did show us a world where everything has become monetized, where no secret is safe from anyone who is determined to find it, and it turns out that pervasively available technology doesn't make everybody's lives better after all. Sound familiar?
And like it or not, and I think Gibson himself may not like it, but he did play a large role in creating the world we live in today. Without Neuromancer (and to a lesser extent Neal Stephenson's Snowcrash) there wouldn't be a Second Life - just because the technology today is decidedly second rate doesn't minimize the impact of his ideas - possibly wouldn't be an Internet as we know it. Engineers and entrepeneurs all get their ideas from somewhere, and the influence of Gibson on the creative forces in tech is impossible to overestimate.
Gibson doesn't predict the future, he helps create it.