Letters to the Editor
-
The checking of facts
Beyond a certain age, as the senior moments come more frequently, we all have to do it. What always trips us up, though, are the things which we're certain we don't need to look up. For that reason, my sympathies here are with Aych, although I also think that we shouldn't really mind being corrected beyond that initial ouch!
All in all, it's always better to be in the company of your peers, rather than cursing the darkness even in a book-lined garret. It's why I like coming here -- about the only place I know where a round table is always available on demand, even though it sometimes means that I do find myself in the presence of mine enemies.
-
@Frankly, my dear
But I'm not trying to pick on you. I just hate to see facts abused — even in a good cause.
I'm the same way but I did a similar thing with a highly educated fellow today, someone who is far better educated than myself and much more knowledgeable about a great many things. He attributed a quote, a statement, to someone other than the person who made it. We ain't none of us getting any younger.
-
@WT
Beyond a certain age, as the senior moments come more frequently
We should know. I corrected my friend by e-mail. He has a reputation to keep up.
-
I wonder how many know these days though
That Sherlock was the slower witted of the two Holmes brothers?
-
I wonder how many know these days though
That Sherlock used more cocaine than his brother?
:-)
-
My last thought for the day... honest.
As the twilight years of life approach.
A elder may stand at a cliff side edge.
A person may break into a new song.
A fool tries to decide. Spit or jump?
-
But which one wrote
The monograph on identifying cigarette ash?
-
As long as you have a handle on the concepts and the major facts
the attendant minor details are less critical.
Does it really give Martin van Creveld's opinion less weight because he got a date wrong, assuming it was van Creveld and not the reporter, Whitaker?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/nov/29/iraq.worlddispatch
In 2005, van Creveld made headlines when he said in an interview that the 2003 Invasion of Iraq was "the most foolish war since Emperor Augustus in 9 BC sent his legions into Germany and lost them", a reference to the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest, (which actually took place in AD 9). His analysis included harsh criticism of the Bush Administration, comparing the war to the Vietnam war. Moreover, he said that "Bush deserves to be impeached and, once he has been removed from office, put on trial." [8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_van_Creveld
-
The monograph on identifying cigarette ash?
Cigar ash.
Sherlock.
-
I remember
When I was 12, I was in bed for more than a week with the mumps -- oddly enough, my room at the time was actually in a garret, right under the roof peak, complete with a narrow dormer window. I read all of Conan Doyle during that period of half-delirium, begging my parents to bring me a new supply from the library as I chewed my way through the available supply.
At some point in my thirties, remembering how mesmerizing those stories had been, I tried re-reading them. God, what a disappointment! Was there ever a worse writer than Conan Doyle? I'm talking in the technical sense, of course -- like Philip K. Dick, he was far better at engaging the reader's imagination than he was avoiding a clunk in the middle of a sentence.
-
Jebbie
Here's the part that confused me:
it's too damned cold up here to go without a brassiere. That's what ruins sweaters.
How does it "ruin sweaters"?
What time's the barbecue start?
-
Probably quite a few people
Since the series by Laurie R. King featuring Mary Russel seems to have given both Sherlock and Mycroft a new lease on life. Aficionados of Heinlein, of which there seem to be a goodly number hereabouts, will doubtless be aware of it as well.
-
-- Aycharaych:
I think that we tend to be heedless of our privacy rights because we believe that all of these mechanisms are being put in place to protect us from Terrorists and Criminals, and if there are any abuses that have made the news, those abuses have been carried out against Politicians (who are only slightly higher up on the food chain than Terrorists and Criminals). We just can’t relate this to our own little lives. How could all of this possibly affect us?
Let me try another hypothetical, from my own experience. My dog was recently attacked by a pit bull that belongs to my neighbor. I reported the incident to Animal Control, and my neighbor got a citation and a fine. He now hates my guts with a passion, and told me so. He’s too intelligent to do anything rash or overtly criminal, so he blows off some steam, threatens to “get even,” and that’s that. But, this guy works for the government in Washington (actually, almost everyone in my neighborhood works for the government), and here’s where my hypothetical comes in:
Here’s a man with a grudge against his neighbor, a desire for revenge and access to some datasets that could cause untold mischief… There are some risks, and he would be violating his department’s code of ethics, but hey, the guys at the top have set the example, haven’t they?
This is purely hypothetical, and highly improbable, but there are hundreds of thousands of people working for the Homeland Security apparatus who have access to this data, and our government is doing its best to remove the safeguards that will protect us – not just from Dick Cheney – but from an uncountable number of “little Dicks” out there who, given the power without the constraints, will certainly use it to further their own little ends.
It would be interesting to ask those who live in totalitarian societies whom they fear most: the State – or their neighbors?
-
whatchamacalled (deleted)
If a US citizen happens to be picked up in this surveilance of an overseas target, the information gained on that person must be whatchamacalled (deleted).
Minimization? In spite of all the great resources we've had in explaining all of this on this forum, I still struggle with the terminology.