◘ voice; ◘ 04

Aug 30, 2011 14:57

[hey Network it's the same old robovoice, perfectly disguising a very buried melancholia. He's been losing himself in statistics and quiet of late, and the fruits of his labor are evident at last.]

According to my research, 21% of unique comm numbers introduced to the Network never contact the Network a second time. 2% of unique comm users appear ( Read more... )

john morley | ghost

Leave a comment

voice; nottheanswers August 31 2011, 19:47:05 UTC
I figure I'm at least more stable here.

I've never been rich, pretty much the opposite as I was growing up, actually. I did well enough in the news business to accumulate some savings, though.

Reply

voice; technophantom August 31 2011, 21:19:53 UTC
Did those circumstances factor into your acquisition of your current hobbies? Or was that unrelated?

Reply

voice; nottheanswers September 1 2011, 08:56:33 UTC
To some degree, maybe. The directions I tend to focus them in, at least.

Reply

voice; technophantom September 2 2011, 01:06:50 UTC
Finding people. Restoring order to a chaotic world.

Reply

voice; nottheanswers September 2 2011, 15:05:08 UTC
Finding people's just the card I was dealt here. And I don't figure myself able to do anything so great as restoring order on a massive scale, but maybe I can bring a few of the bastards who're keeping things in their own order to justice.

I'm not sure I'd call it chaos, though. I just think there are certain forms of order that don't work for any but an elite few.

Reply

voice; technophantom September 3 2011, 02:20:33 UTC
Legal justice is just the majority's version of order.

Reply

voice; nottheanswers September 3 2011, 07:54:30 UTC
Don't be so sure. Majorities can be bought, just like anything else.

Reply

voice; technophantom September 3 2011, 16:50:49 UTC
Bought, brainwashed, bamboozled.

This is why the law is an impediment.

Reply

voice; nottheanswers September 3 2011, 20:28:02 UTC
Sometimes, not always. It needs a lot of problems worked out with it, but we'd probably be worse off without.

Reply

voice; technophantom September 3 2011, 20:44:11 UTC
We appear to disagree.

Reply

voice; nottheanswers September 3 2011, 20:50:42 UTC
Maybe we do.

I just think a total lack wouldn't work on a large scale. The purpose of it is to keep people safe, but those in power spoil it for everyone below. Put the blame where it belongs, but no point in tearing it all down wholesale unless you have something to replace it with.

Reply

voice; technophantom September 4 2011, 20:07:24 UTC
The difficulty is mainly the wealth gained by the exploitation of others, legal chicanery and exploits institutionalized into the system.

The entire model does not need to be replaced, but neither can it be adjusted from within. The law as is often serves to block true justice; hence an impediment.

I do not propose removing the law. I will also not laud its effectiveness in delivering justice to those without money.

Reply

voice; nottheanswers September 5 2011, 08:47:19 UTC
That's fair enough. It's also why I prefer to direct most of my attention to the top of the chain.

I may not be able to overhaul the whole mess, but I can at least hold those who would abuse it responsible.

Reply

voice; technophantom September 5 2011, 18:07:35 UTC
Is this a line of questioning designed to produce a confession, Mr. Sage?

Reply

voice; nottheanswers September 5 2011, 18:40:49 UTC
I don't know, is there anything you're feeling inclined to confess?

Reply

voice; technophantom September 5 2011, 19:02:28 UTC
Not at the moment.

I rarely find people so freely sharing their designs on removing corruptive forces in society.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up