Asperger's Syndrome
A symptom of our weird, statist, collectivist times is that many who excel at math, science, and business are now being increasingly characterized as "having Asperger's Syndrome." (Cf. www.google.com for hundreds of references.) In one line, Asperger's Syndrome is said to be a variant of autism, a kind of "able to function in society" variant on autism. Bill Gates is described as having Asperger's. In the past few weeks, we hear that Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein were "probable Asperger's." Maybe a biochemical or DNA link to a real syndrome, besides brightness, will be found, but I suspect that a lot of people with the ability to concentrate are characterized as being some kind of second-rate Rainmans just because they don't watch "Oprah" and "Survivor" on t.v. I've never met Bill Gates, though I did meet some of his contemporaries (Gary Kildall, Steve Wozniak, and of course all the folks at Intel). He seems a little weird at times...but no more so than a lot of the folks I meet at Cypherpunks, Hackers, PenSFA, etc. My tentative conclusion is that calling someone successful a "case of Asperger's" is just another form of envy or trash-talking. (Or of the popular meme in the past 30 years where child actors are fed lines showing their putative precociousness as they psychoanalyze the adults around them.) --Tim May "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the Public Treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the Public Treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy always followed by dictatorship." --Alexander Fraser Tyler
Could be more sinister than that, an attempt to stigmatize thinkers as weird. Especially when you look at the phenomenon of the rise of ADD. When I was growing up, there was no such thing as ADD, and,indeed, I don't remember having kids in my school who exhibited those symtoms. There were dumb kids, of course, and daydreamers, but I don't recall the weirdly restless, buzzy kids you see so many of now. So what caused ADD -- something in the water, like flouride? Or some food additive, or some form of pollution? We know that there are a number of chemicals in the environment today that mimic various hormones which then cause imbalances in animals, or, for instance, aluminum suspected in alzhimers. Perhaps in the dumbing down of Americans -- and there is a true dumbdown, US kids consistently get lower scores than kids in other countries -- those who weren't exposed to the same nerve agents, say, need to be now demonized as the "odd ones", the "weirdos", "too smart for their own good", and definitely "too smart for *our* good" that the proles need to watch out for along with the other terrorists. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
On Wed, 7 May 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Could be more sinister than that, an attempt to stigmatize thinkers as weird. Especially when you look at the phenomenon of the rise of ADD. When I was growing up, there was no such thing as ADD, and,indeed, I don't remember having kids in my school who exhibited those symtoms. There were dumb kids, of course, and daydreamers, but I don't recall the weirdly restless, buzzy kids you see so many of now. So what caused ADD -- something in the water, like flouride? Or some food additive, or some form of pollution? We know that there are a number of
Sugar. That's all. Kids get really hyper when fed tons of soda, candy and chocolate. There's a good example of how to eliminate the problem right here in Wisconsin - the Appleton (or Oshkosh, but there abouts) school systems have gone to feeding kids bread, carrots and milk several times during the day, and have no behavioural problems. Getting the obvious to be seen in Madison is quite a chore!
chemicals in the environment today that mimic various hormones which then cause imbalances in animals, or, for instance, aluminum suspected in alzhimers. Perhaps in the dumbing down of Americans -- and there is a true dumbdown, US kids consistently get lower scores than kids in other countries -- those who weren't exposed to the same nerve agents, say, need to be now demonized as the "odd ones", the "weirdos", "too smart for their own good", and definitely "too smart for *our* good" that the proles need to watch out for along with the other terrorists.
It's more like the "publish or perish" syndrome. Some field of profs needs to create a new thing so they can keep getting funding for "research". Dumbing down of Americans has been going on for a long time. But I'm not sure that's real either. How long have the majority of people been going past 8th grade education? I don't think that was true 100 years ago. I don't think people are any dumber now than they have been over the past 10,000 years. We're giving primates cars and supprised they don't understand basic physics. We used to think DDT was great stuff. It took a while to learn otherwise. Maybe smarts comes from being "sick". But I kinda doubt it, it's more likely we're still on the learning curve and we need to get our environment right to optimize collective social intellegence. Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 07:48:29AM -0700, Mike Rosing wrote:
We used to think DDT was great stuff. It took a while to learn otherwise. Maybe smarts comes from being "sick". But I kinda doubt it, it's more likely we're still on the learning curve and we need to get our environment right to optimize collective social intellegence.
Speaking of DDT, I've always wondered what effect that had on my life, especially my nervous system. When I was a kid in South Carolina in the 50's, we used to ride our bikes behind the spray truck for blocks every time it came by. It was like being in a very, very thick fog. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
On Wed, 7 May 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Speaking of DDT, I've always wondered what effect that had on my life, especially my nervous system. When I was a kid in South Carolina in the 50's, we used to ride our bikes behind the spray truck for blocks every time it came by. It was like being in a very, very thick fog.
It was obviously harmful in the most severe of ways: you ended up as a demented cpunk :-) -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org
On Wednesday 07 May 2003 11:05, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Speaking of DDT, I've always wondered what effect that had on my life, especially my nervous system. When I was a kid in South Carolina in the 50's, we used to ride our bikes behind the spray truck for blocks every time it came by. It was like being in a very, very thick fog.
You biked behind a truck spraying pesticides? Voluntarily? Of the two, cognitive difficulties and exposure to DDT, which is the cause and which the effect? -- Steve Furlong Computer Condottiere Have GNU, Will Travel Guns will get you through times of no duct tape better than duct tape will get you through times of no guns. -- Ron Kuby
On Wed, 7 May 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Speaking of DDT, I've always wondered what effect that had on my life, especially my nervous system. When I was a kid in South Carolina in the 50's, we used to ride our bikes behind the spray truck for blocks every time it came by. It was like being in a very, very thick fog.
Hard to say because you were only exposed a few times. If you don't have any genetic triggers, it may have no effect at all. Not to mention all the other chemicals you've been exposed to that might couteract any effect, and lack of exposure to accelerants. I've seen pictures of DDT fogs at beaches crowded with people. At the time, it was considered harmless to humans. It may actually be harmless to us, it's just not harmless to everything else. A world without mosquitoes would be pretty bleak given how many other things eat them. Better to wipe out the malaria and swat the mosquitos! Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 07:04:30PM -0700, Mike Rosing wrote:
On Wed, 7 May 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Speaking of DDT, I've always wondered what effect that had on my life, especially my nervous system. When I was a kid in South Carolina in the 50's, we used to ride our bikes behind the spray truck for blocks every time it came by. It was like being in a very, very thick fog.
Hard to say because you were only exposed a few times. If you don't have any genetic triggers, it may have no effect at all. Not to mention all the other chemicals you've been exposed to that might couteract any effect, and lack of exposure to accelerants. I've seen pictures of DDT fogs at beaches crowded with people. At the time, it was considered harmless to humans. It may actually be harmless to us, it's just not harmless to everything else.
Or OTOH, it could have done some strange things to entire generations of humans. Nerve agents being what they are, I wonder if there's ever been a serious neurological study?
A world without mosquitoes would be pretty bleak given how many other things eat them. Better to wipe out the malaria and swat the mosquitos!
Yes, having lived for a long time in northern MN where there has never been any spraying for bugs, and where they are far more numerous than in most of the US, I've never been all that bothered by mosquitoes. Black flies are worse, but for a shorter season. We also discovered that if you don't use scented soaps and shampoos, perfumes, etc, you aren't bothered nearly so much. We also didn't use repellent much at all, just a drop or two on the shirt collar and/or cap when they were really bad, and, if you were working in the garden in the evening, a bug headnet was great. It's also a matter of temperament, it was funny to notice how tourists would start flapping around, attracting a cloud of bugs, while you'd stand nearby unaffected, and using no repellent. I doubt the indigs were bothered all that much. Of course, malaria and yellow fever were a problem in the far south, but most of NA doesn't have that problem. West Nile virus is now spreading around, but a large scale study of dead birds on the East Coast determined that most were killed by ag chemicals, not the virus.
Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
-- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 07:48:29AM -0700, Mike Rosing wrote:
On Wed, 7 May 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Could be more sinister than that, an attempt to stigmatize thinkers as weird. Especially when you look at the phenomenon of the rise of ADD. When I was growing up, there was no such thing as ADD, and,indeed, I don't remember having kids in my school who exhibited those symtoms. There were dumb kids, of course, and daydreamers, but I don't recall the weirdly restless, buzzy kids you see so many of now. So what caused ADD -- something in the water, like flouride? Or some food additive, or some form of pollution? We know that there are a number of
Sugar. That's all. Kids get really hyper when fed tons of soda, candy and chocolate.
Certainly sugar has a large effect, chocolate, however, should be soothing.
There's a good example of how to eliminate the problem right here in Wisconsin - the Appleton (or Oshkosh, but there abouts)
definitely not Oshkosh, such inovation would never be allowed by city officials. People here are too dumb to ever come up with such an idea anyway, it would have to become the norm everywhere else for a few years before it would be adopted here. When we were working with the local gov't community garden committee, and suggested that they quit applying chemical fertilzers and pesticides to the garden areas, noting that the Madison community gardens had gone organic 30 years ago, one of them stated "Oh, but that's Madison." Finally got them to stop the chemicals, but they still insist on coming in every Spring with heavy equipment to plow up all the plots, and, given the wet clay soil there, can't do that until very late, so people aren't allowed into their plots until May 25 -- in an area where you want to plant potatoes and peas mid April. Our suggestions that people just be allowed to do it themselves with tillers or by hand as they do elsewhere came to naught -- "But we've always done it that way."
school systems have gone to feeding kids bread, carrots and milk several times during the day, and have no behavioural problems. Getting the obvious to be seen in Madison is quite a chore!
(snip) -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
On Thursday, May 8, 2003, at 07:21 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
When we were working with the local gov't community garden committee, and suggested that they quit applying chemical fertilzers and pesticides to the garden areas, noting that the Madison community gardens had gone organic 30 years ago, one of them stated "Oh, but that's Madison." Finally got them to stop the chemicals, but they still insist on coming in every Spring with heavy equipment to plow up all the plots, and, given the wet clay soil there, can't do that until very late, so people aren't allowed into their plots until May 25 -- in an area where you want to plant potatoes and peas mid April. Our suggestions that people just be allowed to do it themselves with tillers or by hand as they do elsewhere came to naught -- "But we've always done it that way."
This is a minor, but illustrative, example of why the problem is best fixed by property rights, not collectivism. (Funny, the word "collectivism" rarely pops up here. We ought to use it more, as it better describes a bunch of things we often call socialism.) On your own property, in your own garden, one doesn't have to argue with committees and government officials and city councils about spraying or when one can start working the soil. This is the commons problem cropping up again in this common garden. Me, I have my own garden plot on my own land. And even if I didn't own land, working out a deal with someone who _did_ have land would be preferable to working in a so-called "community garden." (We have a few here in Santa Cruz. Bums and winos make a token effort to stand around and rake. Mostly it's an excuse for community money to be handed out to the "farmers." I've also walked past the weed-choked community garden in Berkeley, on the site of "People's Park," IIRC. Skanks and bums. New slogan for these urban community gardens: "Hoes fo da hoes! --Tim May, Citizen-unit of of the once free United States " The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. "--Thomas Jefferson, 1787
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 09:17:18AM -0700, Tim May wrote:
This is a minor, but illustrative, example of why the problem is best fixed by property rights, not collectivism.
Yup, for sure, but community gardens are a nice answer for city dwellers. We own property in the city, but the house takes up 90% of the land, no room for any real garden other than shrubs and flowers. We have no lawn to mow. We also have 40 acres, half fields/half woods, in MN, but can't live there right now.
(Funny, the word "collectivism" rarely pops up here. We ought to use it more, as it better describes a bunch of things we often call socialism.)
On your own property, in your own garden, one doesn't have to argue with committees and government officials and city councils about spraying or when one can start working the soil.
This is the commons problem cropping up again in this common garden.
Me, I have my own garden plot on my own land. And even if I didn't own land, working out a deal with someone who _did_ have land would be preferable to working in a so-called "community garden."
Yes, that's what we've done this year.
(We have a few here in Santa Cruz. Bums and winos make a token effort to stand around and rake. Mostly it's an excuse for community money to be handed out to the "farmers." I've also walked past the weed-choked community garden in Berkeley, on the site of "People's Park," IIRC. Skanks and bums. New slogan for these urban community gardens: "Hoes fo da hoes!
Hmm, I've never seen that sort of a problem with community gardens anywhere. The vast majority of the people work pretty hard on their plots. And also there's no reason for tax dollars going into it, especially most places where they don't plow, etc. In fact, it should be fee-generating. Each plot costs $20 @ year here to rent. Why would community money be handed out to the gardeners? -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 01:04:50PM -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Hmm, I've never seen that sort of a problem with community gardens anywhere. The vast majority of the people work pretty hard on their plots.
From my window where I'm typing this, I can see (or could see if it were light out) one of Adams Morgans' once-lauded "community gardens." It might have been a big deal in the 1970s, but now it's just a rocky slope with a few scraggly corn stalks growing on it. I've never seen a gardener actually garden there in the seven years I've lived in the neighborhood.
-Declan
There are waiting lists to get a plot in the many community gardens here in Eugene. -----Original Message----- From: owner-cypherpunks@lne.com [mailto:owner-cypherpunks@lne.com]On Behalf Of Declan McCullagh Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 8:55 PM To: Harmon Seaver; cypherpunks@lne.com Subject: Re: Collectivism in "community gardens" On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 01:04:50PM -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Hmm, I've never seen that sort of a problem with community gardens anywhere. The vast majority of the people work pretty hard on their plots.
From my window where I'm typing this, I can see (or could see if it were light out) one of Adams Morgans' once-lauded "community gardens." It might have been a big deal in the 1970s, but now it's just a rocky slope with a few scraggly corn stalks growing on it. I've never seen a gardener actually garden there in the seven years I've lived in the neighborhood.
-Declan
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 11:55:06PM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 01:04:50PM -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Hmm, I've never seen that sort of a problem with community gardens anywhere. The vast majority of the people work pretty hard on their plots.
From my window where I'm typing this, I can see (or could see if it were light out) one of Adams Morgans' once-lauded "community gardens." It might have been a big deal in the 1970s, but now it's just a rocky slope with a few scraggly corn stalks growing on it. I've never seen a gardener actually garden there in the seven years I've lived in the neighborhood.
Sounds like you live in one of those neighborhoods which underwent gentrification, or otherwise got yuppiefied, and the new residents are of the sort who don't get their hands dirty, eh? Or at least not with real dirt. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
On Friday, May 9, 2003, at 05:59 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 11:55:06PM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 01:04:50PM -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Hmm, I've never seen that sort of a problem with community gardens anywhere. The vast majority of the people work pretty hard on their plots.
From my window where I'm typing this, I can see (or could see if it were light out) one of Adams Morgans' once-lauded "community gardens." It might have been a big deal in the 1970s, but now it's just a rocky slope with a few scraggly corn stalks growing on it. I've never seen a gardener actually garden there in the seven years I've lived in the neighborhood.
Sounds like you live in one of those neighborhoods which underwent gentrification, or otherwise got yuppiefied, and the new residents are of the sort who don't get their hands dirty, eh? Or at least not with real dirt.
I said I saw the same thing in Berkeley and Santa Cruz. Both are said to be "progressive" communities, but in both places the so-called community garden areas are essentially for hoboes and deadbeats to scratch at. Why would a "clean and sober" person (I'll call them this instead of "gentrified") want to go dig in the dirt where the dogs have crapped, where the addicts have shot up, and where their best tomatoes and zuchinis and whatnot get filched by the bums and addicts? Real people find garden space to plant in. My general point remains: why "argue" with the city government about when you can access your communal, collective property, or what you can spray on it, or which vegetables are said to be "conflict vegetables" (seeds from some zone the U.N. has declared un-P.C.) (*), when you can simply find a 5 x 9 plot of land, or lease it, and not have to ask permission? (I'm joking about "conflict vegetables." But ever since all the various PC television shows and movies started nattering about "conflict diamonds," I have realized this is just another PC scam. If I buy diamonds from Zaire I don't give a hoot in hell that they were bought from "capitalist roaders" or whomever the U.N. has declared to be politically incorrect. Seeing a James Bond movie centered around "conflict diamonds" made me ill.) --Tim May
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 08:00:46PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
Why would a "clean and sober" person (I'll call them this instead of "gentrified") want to go dig in the dirt where the dogs have crapped, where the addicts have shot up, and where their best tomatoes and zuchinis and whatnot get filched by the bums and addicts?
Yep. The decrepit "community garden" that I can see from my window is next to a shady area with park benches and picnic tables. That corner would be pleasant except for the constant homeless presence. In the spring and the fall, there are guaranteed to be homeless people sleeping on the benches. For whatever reason, in the summer they seem to sleep about 50' downslope toward Rock Creek Park, and in the winter they must find a warmer downtown grate to sleep on; I don't know. This despite the fact that the park is supposed to be closed at 10-11 pm or so. There's also a basketball court in the park, which during the summer time is a magnet for the youth from the less-gentrified area a few blocks away. The sound of a basketball bouncing and the assorted whooping and yelling carries pretty far on a quiet summer night at 2 am. Again, so much for posted closing time. There's also a soccer field, which because it's raining hard right now is a muddy swamp that will take a week to drain. Thanks to modern municipal efficiency, the grass has never been replanted and so it's mostly dirt, unfit for a real soccer game. And this is just at the beginning of the summer sports season too, so it'll just get worse. In the mornings, the park is used as an offleash dog run by local militant dog owners, with the predictable watch-where-you-step results. This despite supposedly strict rules against having dogs off leash in the city. The park is a convenient short cut from people living on Rep. Gary Condit's old street and walking to the Metro to go to work in the morning -- which overlaps with Dog Exercise Time. So dogs inevitably run after and bark at the people trying to get to work, which normally isn't a big deal, but you have some people who are really afraid of dogs or you have a small person and a really big dog, with the inevitable shouting matches and hard feelings arising between pedestrians and dog owners who can't or won't control their pets. I've only seen the police drive by the park once during DET, which prompted the dog owners to quickly leash their pets and then unleash them about 10 minutes after the drive by was complete. Anyway, I suspect these problems are hardly unique to this bit of our nation's capital. To go back to the community garden discussion point, yes, who would want to raise veggies in your "plot" when the area is already spoken for by dogs looking for a place to take a dump, soccer players stomping through your plants trying to find their ball, and homeless men looking for a midnight snack? -Declan
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 08:00:46PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
I said I saw the same thing in Berkeley and Santa Cruz. Both are said to be "progressive" communities, but in both places the so-called community garden areas are essentially for hoboes and deadbeats to scratch at.
Why would a "clean and sober" person (I'll call them this instead of "gentrified") want to go dig in the dirt where the dogs have crapped, where the addicts have shot up, and where their best tomatoes and zuchinis and whatnot get filched by the bums and addicts?
Sounds like a very poorly administered community garden. The only big city gardens I've seen were in Portland, OR, and they were fenced and gated and locked at night. The gardens themselves looked very productive and well tended. As are all the ones I've ever seen in smaller communities. And as are the ones in NYC that Tyler's reported on. For a short while I was on a list of community garden administrators, I can post the address if you like, perhaps you could get feedback on these particular gardens being the way they are. From that traffic on that list, what you are seeing is not at all the norm.
Real people find garden space to plant in.
My general point remains: why "argue" with the city government about when you can access your communal, collective property, or what you can spray on it, or which vegetables are said to be "conflict vegetables" (seeds from some zone the U.N. has declared un-P.C.) (*), when you can simply find a 5 x 9 plot of land, or lease it, and not have to ask permission?
5x9? Why the hell would I bother with a 5x9 plot? The plots in the local gardens here are 20x40 and I had two of them, and even that isn't really at all sufficient. We used to have one garden of 100'x100' down by the house, then another 50x80 up above the house mainly for potatoes and berries, things the deer wouldn't eat, plus my wife's flower gardens. The problem with finding other garden plots around here would be that most of the land is either being farmed or subdivided and built on. Even if you were able to find a small corner of a farm field to lease, it would be heavily chemicalized. Actually, some of the local Hmongs have joined together and bought farmland so they can have bigger gardens. 5x9 -- geez, I garden more space than that on my porch roof in containers. Anyway, I think the community garden concept is a pretty good one. It gives city people a chance to grow play in the dirt, and also an opportunity to meet and talk to people who like gardening, see how they do things, etc. It's been really interesting seeing how the Hmongs do stuff, and fun trying to communicate with some of the older ones. And in fact it was my wife working with some of the Hmongs who got the administrators to stop using chemicals on the plots - since the vast majority of gardeners *are* Hmong, the powers that be finally gave in when the Hmongs said they wanted to garden in their traditional way. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
On Saturday, May 10, 2003, at 08:32 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 08:00:46PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
I said I saw the same thing in Berkeley and Santa Cruz. Both are said to be "progressive" communities, but in both places the so-called community garden areas are essentially for hoboes and deadbeats to scratch at.
Why would a "clean and sober" person (I'll call them this instead of "gentrified") want to go dig in the dirt where the dogs have crapped, where the addicts have shot up, and where their best tomatoes and zuchinis and whatnot get filched by the bums and addicts?
Sounds like a very poorly administered community garden. The only big city gardens I've seen were in Portland, OR, and they were fenced and gated and locked at night. The gardens themselves looked very productive and well tended. As are all the ones I've ever seen in smaller communities. And as are the ones in NYC that Tyler's reported on. For a short while I was on a list of community garden administrators, I can post the address if you like, perhaps you could get feedback on these particular gardens being the way they are. From that traffic on that list, what you are seeing is not at all the norm.
Declan described the same thing I see. And my brother in LA is a traffic engineer, one responsibilty being traffic issues in and around such "homeless gardens." He reports even worse situations. You still have not explained why government-operated gardens are a good idea. Believe me, there is plenty of land in America, even in cities. And markets solve the problems you described (arguing with city planners about fertilizers and times of operation).
5x9? Why the hell would I bother with a 5x9 plot? The plots in the local gardens here are 20x40 and I had two of them, and even that isn't really at all sufficient. We used to have one garden of 100'x100' down by the house, then another 50x80 up above the house mainly for potatoes and berries, things the deer wouldn't eat, plus my wife's flower gardens.
I gave an example of a garden plot and you argue for statism on the grounds that my example is too small. A 5 x 9 raised bed plot is much larger than most people can handle as a hobb, while doing other things in their life. If they need large amounts of space, even more justification for doing things noncommunally. (My sister sublet her couple of acres just north of Sacramento to a Hmong family. Sure enough, several members of an extended family worked their gardens many hours a week. This is not "hobby" or "incidental" gardening, this is food production for sale at farmer's markets. Which is fine, but it is not the job of a city to buy land to let food producers farm it. It's also not the job of a city to acquire land for hobby producers, either, lest there be any doubt.) You were the one complaining that you had to argue with the communal czars about fertilizer usage and hours of operation. This is like arguing with a "community television board" about which channels are acceptable and which are not, and what the hours of operation should be, when the obvious and cypherpunkish solution is to bypass the community board and and get a satellite dish with Playboy, CNN, Spice, ESPN, and 200 other channels. Or to acquire your own land, or go in with others, where you can set your own policy on fertilizers and operating times. You remind me of the small-town busybodies who attend city council meetings and argue endlessly about what software should be on the "community" computers, when of course the answer is obvious: "none, because it is not the job of government to provide "community access" to computers." --Tim May "Extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice."--Barry Goldwater
On Sat, May 10, 2003 at 10:32:03PM -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Sounds like a very poorly administered community garden. The only big city gardens I've seen were in Portland, OR, and they were fenced and gated and locked at night. The gardens themselves looked very productive and well tended. As are all the ones I've ever seen
I don't claim that all community gardens are decrepit, of course. If a city chooses to spend enough money on high fences, security guards, and locks on gates, they can pull it off. The gardener-activists have every incentive to lobby for that because of the standard public choice reasons: distributed costs and centralized benefits -- hundreds of thousands or millions of people have their taxes raised by perhaps a dollar, even though only a few dozen or a few hundred at most people benefit from the garden. And when that happens, because the small number of gardeners are getting the garden plot at below market cost, they do have an incentive to take advantage of it. Getting the government involved interferes with the price signals that a market approach would have. Because it's not their money, governments tend to funnel money into politically-connected friends -- the fence-building contractor will turn out to be the mayor's brother-in-law's son. Once the garden is established, though, the municipality does not have the same incentive to take care of it as a private property owner does. The same with my muddy, dirt soccer field that's become an illegal dog run (I can see three dogs there right now). Also, as the political supporters of the garden move out of the city or retire from activism, or their friends in government move on to cushy private sector jobs, the garden tends to receive fewer resources. Politicians prefer to campaign on bold platforms like "creating more community gardens" as opposed to "maintaining status quo." At the very least, it's reasonable to weigh the costs against the benefits of community gardens. Where I grew up, my family had an acre of land, more than enough for a garden, but for whatever reason one year we used a community garden that was set up by a local large manufacturing company on its own land. Worked out well, and was a nice gesture. -Declan
Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Sat, May 10, 2003 at 10:32:03PM -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Sounds like a very poorly administered community garden. The only big city gardens I've seen were in Portland, OR, and they were fenced and gated and locked at night. The gardens themselves looked very productive and well tended. As are all the ones I've ever seen
I don't claim that all community gardens are decrepit, of course. If a city chooses to spend enough money on high fences, security guards, and locks on gates, they can pull it off.
It depends a lot on the size of the city, of course. For most smaller cities, none of that is needed. In the smaller cities around here, for example (50K-100K) the gardens are on the outskirts and there are no fences, etc. And the fees *should* be adequate to cover any admin costs. The Oshkosh community garden, for instance, is located on the grounds of the county work-farm, the plowing (which isn't needed, and, in fact, is counter-productive) and other minimal maintenance is done by prisoners.
The gardener-activists have every incentive to lobby for that because of the standard public choice reasons: distributed costs and centralized benefits -- hundreds of thousands or millions of people have their taxes raised by perhaps a dollar, even though only a few dozen or a few hundred at most people benefit from the garden.
I think as Tyler has pointed out in NYC, it is the local people who do this themselves, it's not the gov't.
And when that happens, because the small number of gardeners are getting the garden plot at below market cost, they do have an incentive to take advantage of it. Getting the government involved interferes with the price signals that a market approach would have. Because it's not their money, governments tend to funnel money into politically-connected friends -- the fence-building contractor will turn out to be the mayor's brother-in-law's son.
Yes, but it doesn't have to be this way.
Once the garden is established, though, the municipality does not have the same incentive to take care of it as a private property owner does. The same with my muddy, dirt soccer field that's become an illegal dog run (I can see three dogs there right now). Also, as the political supporters of the garden move out of the city or retire from activism, or their friends in government move on to cushy private sector jobs, the garden tends to receive fewer resources. Politicians prefer to campaign on bold platforms like "creating more community gardens" as opposed to "maintaining status quo."
At the very least, it's reasonable to weigh the costs against the benefits of community gardens. Where I grew up, my family had an acre of land, more than enough for a garden, but for whatever reason one year we used a community garden that was set up by a local large manufacturing company on its own land. Worked out well, and was a nice gesture.
Yes, there are many ways these can be set up, there's no reason it has to cost tax monies. OTOH, public parks and gardens are one of the few things that gov't does that is worthwhile, along with libraries and museums. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Tim wrote:
(We have a few here in Santa Cruz. Bums and winos make a token effort to stand around and rake. Mostly it's an excuse for community money to be handed out to the "farmers." I've also walked past the weed-choked community garden in Berkeley, on the site of "People's Park," IIRC. Skanks and bums. New slogan for these urban community gardens: "Hoes fo da hoes!
Here, in a city that shall remain unnamed, we have constant war between the community gardeners and the city's homeless population. The gardeners roust the homeless people in the morning by turning hoses on them. They then try to wash away the urine, feces, hypodermic needles, and used condoms. The homeless, meanwhile, find out where the gardeners live, and place spit and other less mentionable homeless-generated organic substances on their doorknobs and steps. It's always amusing when some little old lady surprises a crack ho performing oral sex on a customer in the middle of her plot. Yet, very little is done about the problem, because that would be discrimination against a whole slew of people we are told are disadvantaged. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
The community gardens near where my folks live are an excellent example of socialism. Gardners spend hours all spring and summer tending their plants, hauling water in old milk jugs, weeding and fertilizing, just have the "fruits" of their labor stolen by freeloaders or smashed by vandals. And the saddest lesson is the fact that the garderners come back year after year. -- Neil Johnson http://www.njohnsn.com PGP key available on request.
And how does this constitute socialism? I guess it depends on the neighborhood, but there certainly doesn't seem to be any of that sort of thing here. Most of the gardeners here are Hmong, and I'd imagine that if such started occuring, people would start doing guard duty. OTOH here, we've had kids torturing animals at the zoo and recently some decided to hack down a lot of the young trees in the main park. At any rate, vandalism and theft certainly isn't socialism, unless it's being done by the government. On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 10:19:54AM -0500, Neil Johnson wrote:
The community gardens near where my folks live are an excellent example of socialism.
Gardners spend hours all spring and summer tending their plants, hauling water in old milk jugs, weeding and fertilizing, just have the "fruits" of their labor stolen by freeloaders or smashed by vandals.
And the saddest lesson is the fact that the garderners come back year after year.
They should come back every year, but they should also learn to inject a little nicotine or other poison in a few of the veggies for those who steal. An old farmer taught me a good trick when I had some firewood ripped off. He said to take a few pieces of firewood and drill a big hole in them, put in a quarter stick of dynamite with caps attached in each, then seal the hole with woodputty and rub some dirt on it while still sticky to hide the hole. Leave on outside of pile where theives will grab it first. Turns those cast iron stoves into grenades. 8-) -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
-- On 8 May 2003 at 21:18, Harmon Seaver wrote:
At any rate, vandalism and theft certainly isn't socialism, unless it's being done by the government.
Private property is defended by private individuals, state property merely by the state. So state property frequently gets trashed. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG g6VqTPkESZu00R7Kv4eRs/189cVaQf5x+b2iESS/ 4X7gYKXhkSAvNmy1CFBe5Oq6eLr4mG1fu6uu5ffty
At 10:19 AM 05/08/2003 -0500, Neil Johnson wrote:
The community gardens near where my folks live are an excellent example of socialism.
Gardners spend hours all spring and summer tending their plants, hauling water in old milk jugs, weeding and fertilizing, just have the "fruits" of their labor stolen by freeloaders or smashed by vandals.
And the saddest lesson is the fact that the garderners come back year after year.
Gardening is emotionally rewarding in its own right, as well as getting you food. Lots of people also grow flowers they don't eat... Back when I lived in New Jersey, the Bell Labs plant where I worked had a garden area out back that employees could use, and it was somewhat popular with apartment dwellers who worked there. Given the quasi-rural area and the local population, there wasn't much theft problem, but there was some; a friend of mine said his technique for avoiding theft was to grow kohlrabi "for some reason nobody ever steals it :-)". Occasionally other people used other parts of the back pasture to grow dope, and I've never heard it confirmed or denied whether the official building maintenance policy was to smoke any that they confiscated.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 At 9:17 AM -0700 5/8/03, Tim May wrote:
Funny, the word "collectivism" rarely pops up here.
I prefer "communism", myself, anymore. It's more descriptive of the
behavior, it's etymologically true, and it gets people's attention.
Someday, maybe, in an attempt to "reclaim" the language, I should
bash out a crypto-communist (in the Myra Breckenridge sense...) to
plain old American English glossary, viz:
Communist English
- -------- ---------
"Capitalism" Economics
"Socialist" Communist
"Progressive" Communist
"Liberal" (modern usage) Communist
"Social" <anything> Communist <anything>
<anything> |"Democrat" | <anything> Communist
"Libertarian" Liberal (original usage)
"Reactionary" Liberal (original usage)
"Fascist" Liberal (original usage)
"Republican" Liberal (original usage)
...and so on...
Cheers,
RAH
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBPrsa38PxH8jf3ohaEQJeEgCg1YZIn2OIQftNMHT0fxpB1WLtUIAAoLGO
YjZog0wepCukMoIyjpHDMPyW
=b5N2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga
On Wednesday, May 7, 2003, at 06:42 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Could be more sinister than that, an attempt to stigmatize thinkers as weird. Especially when you look at the phenomenon of the rise of ADD. When I was growing up, there was no such thing as ADD, and,indeed, I don't remember having kids in my school who exhibited those symtoms. There were dumb kids, of course, and daydreamers, but I don't recall the weirdly restless, buzzy kids you see so many of now.
Same here. We pretty much stayed in our seats. None of the spontaneous wandering around the room I have seen in video footage of today's kids. Sure, some kids were more active than others, but nothing like what I hear about and see today.
So what caused ADD -- something in the water, like flouride?
But they were polluting our essence back in the 1950s, when water fluoridation and fluoride toothpaste became common.
Or some food additive, or some form of pollution? We know that there are a number of chemicals in the environment today that mimic various hormones which then cause imbalances in animals, or, for instance, aluminum suspected in alzhimers.
Aluminum frying pans? Teflon? Or, more likely: endless gallons of sugar water. When I was a kid, a 6-ounce bottle of Coca Cola was a special treat. (Though I recall we drank a fair amount of Kool-Aid. And Fizzies, before they were banned.) Today's kids tank up on Big Gulps and Supersize It! 32-ounce portions. Even soda vending machines in the schools, and soft drinks served with lunch. Likewise, a lot more fast food today. Where once it was a treat to go to a burger place, now they dot the landscape and many kids eat at them nearly every day. And lack of discipline is probably a big factor. If teachers simply told the kids to sit down and stop fidgeting, as they did with us, maybe there would be fewer of these alleged ADHD cases. But the single most likely reason for the rise in alleged ADHD cases is the pharmaceutical industry. And job security for the "psychiatric staff" at K12 schools. Where once there was a nurse bandaging cuts and scrapes, now there's a staff of psychobabblers and sexuality counselors. --Tim May ""Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined." --Patrick Henry
On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 08:31:08AM -0700, Tim May wrote:
On Wednesday, May 7, 2003, at 06:42 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Could be more sinister than that, an attempt to stigmatize thinkers as weird. Especially when you look at the phenomenon of the rise of ADD. When I was growing up, there was no such thing as ADD, and,indeed, I don't remember having kids in my school who exhibited those symtoms. There were dumb kids, of course, and daydreamers, but I don't recall the weirdly restless, buzzy kids you see so many of now.
Same here. We pretty much stayed in our seats. None of the spontaneous wandering around the room I have seen in video footage of today's kids. Sure, some kids were more active than others, but nothing like what I hear about and see today.
So what caused ADD -- something in the water, like flouride?
But they were polluting our essence back in the 1950s, when water fluoridation and fluoride toothpaste became common.
True, well, almost -- there was a lot of resistence and various areas delayed until well into the 60's-70's. And some perhaps never did. At any rate, I don't think I was ever exposed to fluoride until an adult.
Or some food additive, or some form of pollution? We know that there are a number of chemicals in the environment today that mimic various hormones which then cause imbalances in animals, or, for instance, aluminum suspected in alzhimers.
Aluminum frying pans? Teflon?
Aluminum pans are a serious no-no, regardless whether they defintely cause alzhimers or not. Once I tried the "take a dark, well-oxidized cooking pan, cook some tomatoes in it" test, I never cooked with Al again. Just read about the new findings of good old teflon migration. Freaky.
Or, more likely: endless gallons of sugar water. When I was a kid, a 6-ounce bottle of Coca Cola was a special treat. (Though I recall we drank a fair amount of Kool-Aid. And Fizzies, before they were banned.) Today's kids tank up on Big Gulps and Supersize It! 32-ounce portions. Even soda vending machines in the schools, and soft drinks served with lunch.
Well, yes, I'm sure the inordinate amounts of sugar has an serious effect. Not to mention all the other weird little additives in candy and pop that humans never evolved with.
Likewise, a lot more fast food today. Where once it was a treat to go to a burger place, now they dot the landscape and many kids eat at them nearly every day.
And lack of discipline is probably a big factor. If teachers simply told the kids to sit down and stop fidgeting, as they did with us, maybe there would be fewer of these alleged ADHD cases.
Yup, for sure. I like kids but I'd never want to teach K-12 these days, most kids seem to have no discipline whatsoever, and I don't have that much patience.
But the single most likely reason for the rise in alleged ADHD cases is the pharmaceutical industry. And job security for the "psychiatric staff" at K12 schools. Where once there was a nurse bandaging cuts and scrapes, now there's a staff of psychobabblers and sexuality counselors.
Well, that's sort of what I was getting at. ADHD becomes the norm and the normal kid becomes the weirdo. I remember getting so involved in reading that I'd sometimes not hear the bell and still be sitting there when the class got up and left. Nowadays that sort of behavior would likely get you a visit to the principals office and a piss test. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
I've never met BillG, however, I do have an anecdote to share. I was at some MSFT bells and whistles demo a long while ago - before even WIn95 came out. Bill came out on stage, did some short intro, and went off stage, some mimes came on stage, did their dance. Now, meanwhile I heard lots of shouting from the right side of the stage (I was in the front rows on the right) and after the mimes went away, out came BillG with now messed up hair. Apparently he took offense at his hair dressers. Admitedly this has little to do with your message, on the surface, but to me it does indicate that he's far less tolerant than most people of whatever it is that pisses him off, and isn't opposed to show it. Various books on BillG take this view of him a well. Perhaps BillG doesn't alow others to interrupt or disrupt his concentration? Or perhaps he's just plain old anti-social? I don't see this as a disease that we'd need a new drug for. If anything, the public's being dumbed down and exposed to repeated bullshit in the form of advertising every few minutes, cheap TV programming, etc. I'm not saying that this causes a real disease, but it takes away from one's ability to concentrate for long periods of time.
From my own personal experience I find that most humans can deal with about an hour and a half to two hours of information when learning before tuning out. Some much less. But things like commercial interruptions, and the annoying pop-up mini-ads at the bottom of the TV screen are hurting the ability of the viewer to concentrate.
Perhaps the long term effects of this is that people are being dumbed down and losing their ability to concentrate - thus ADD like symptoms might be appearing from this. (I don't know - I don't play a neurosurgeon on TV either. It's just my guess of what I see.) IMHO - things like video games enhance this ability - you have to concentrate on the game to win - and if the game can go on for a long time, I suspect the excercise in stretching the time spent will help you be able to concentrate for longer periods of time. Perhaps being intelligent or being able to focus on a topic for a long time makes Joe Mediocre Psychoanalyst uncomfortable, so he invents Asperger's Syndrome to cope? ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :25Kliters anthrax, 38K liters botulinum toxin, 500 tons of /|\ \|/ :sarin, mustard and VX gas, mobile bio-weapons labs, nukular /\|/\ <--*-->:weapons.. Reasons for war on Iraq - GWB 2003-01-28 speech. \/|\/ /|\ :Found to date: 0. Cost of war: $800,000,000,000 USD. \|/ + v + : The look on Sadam's face - priceless! --------_sunder_@_sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ On Tue, 6 May 2003, Tim May wrote:
A symptom of our weird, statist, collectivist times is that many who excel at math, science, and business are now being increasingly characterized as "having Asperger's Syndrome." (Cf. www.google.com for hundreds of references.)
In one line, Asperger's Syndrome is said to be a variant of autism, a kind of "able to function in society" variant on autism.
Bill Gates is described as having Asperger's. In the past few weeks, we hear that Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein were "probable Asperger's."
participants (13)
-
Andy Lopata -
Bill Stewart -
Declan McCullagh -
Eric Cordian -
Harmon Seaver -
J.A. Terranson -
James A. Donald -
Mike Rosing -
Neil Johnson -
R. A. Hettinga -
Steve Furlong -
Sunder -
Tim May