Posts by Lucy Stewart
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The problem is, I think, that BSG is being represented as being "kool" and, by default, not havig knowledge of the program puts us in the unkool catagory and, by implication, sugests we can't grasp the "Bigger Picture". That is just so many kinds of wrong.
Would this be the wrong point in the thread to admit I've never watched BSG?
-
Incidentally, one favourite factioid is that Osama bin Laden is a huge fan of Asimov
See, I told you it was destroying civilisation.
And I totally hear you, Rich; I find it *absolutely fascinating* how whenever a spec-fic work is acknowledged as a work of literature, it undergoes a mysterious transformation into "normal" literature (whatever that is). It's like a very special Venn diagram where everyone agrees to ignore the overlap.
Oh, and Paul: my totally anecdotal evidence is that a very large percentage of my branch of Young Labour are "geeky" in the way we've been discussing. Therefore, liking sci-fi/fantasy *causes* one to be politically involved. QED.
(Silly? Yes. But no more so than your assertion that liking it drives people away.)
-
Because people seem to think the spaceship stories are terribly important, because discussion of events in fictional stories has replaced discussion of events in real life.
Okay, fine, I give up, sci-fi is going to cause the death of civilisation.
But seriously - replaced? I don't know what world you're living in, but it's not the one I see every day. Now that does sound like sci-fi.
-
Hah. Don't forget, I've read your fanfic, Lucy.
Yes, my massively vanilla PG-13 hetfic will surely lead to my public humiliation one day. (Now, if you had access to my bookmark list, *then* you might have some good blackmail material.)
-
Unless you're suggesting that scientists and academics made all that shit up?
Well, duh. All that Scientific Method stuff is sooooo twentieth century. We just try to draw graphs that look pretty. Right, Bart?
-
We live in an era in which political leaders lie to us, in which our entire economy is collapsing and political discussion is diverted by talk of spaceships. I cannot help but see a connexion.
But why blame spaceships? Why not blame Paris Hilton, or the All Blacks, or U2? They all distract people from Serious Discussion, after all.
People will *always* be diverted by things that are not politics. Back in the seventeenth century, they could have been arguing about the Divine Right of Kings, and instead they were buggering off to see the latest play by that Shakespeare bloke. And yet the English Civil War still happened. The point isn't not what they're diverted by, or if. You're not going to get anywhere by attacking the diversion; you'll get somewhere by starting a discussion that holds their attention. Yeah, it's harder. It's also, in the long run, more effective.
-
People need to be informed and active about what is going on here and now, not in a galaxy far, far away.
Yeah, but - why are you assuming that everyone here is not informed or active just because *this particular thread* wandered off-topic? The PAS features lots of informed political and current events discussion every day. Assuming that we aren't or can't or won't think about both areas - false dichotomy.
But, you know what? When I go to my next Young Labour meeting, I'll make sure to tell them that I can't be informed or active about politics because I enjoy pop culture too much. I'm sure they'll understand.
-
Eeew.
But I'm told chicks dig that stuff ...
Dude, there are *limits*.
-
Good on her, if this pans out; I have every faith that she will do an excellent job.
And, Geoff, I think she hasn't spoken up because Goff needs time to establish himself without the ex-PM popping up every five minutes to offer an opinion. It's been the right tactic, even if Goff hasn't taken as much advantage of it as he could have.
-
I worked at the Electricity Commission on the CFL project promoting and subsidising high quality bulbs, we got about six million out into peoples homes, saved a whole lot of $ and energy and sparked off some market development and competition in the lighting suppliers.
I think price is one of the biggest factors in resistance to CFLs. We've replaced all our bulbs with them, but it's taken a long time. Just making them remotely comparable in price to incandescents would help a lot in converting people to them. Yeah, I know they probably work out cheaper over the long period, but it's an example of the boots theory of economics.