h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Wow....

"FREEDOM". I like that.

how about free dome?

When I said 'ragheads' in my way too long post, I meant people who use words like ragheads are idiots, bigots and some other racist things I don't know the name of. My family would be considered a bunch of ragheads by those people, so I know the feeling.
Fact is, we in the western world tend to like the Israeli better than the Palestines, because the Israeli dress like us, wear keppels (correct English?)at worst (which we don't, but that's about it...)and the Palestines don't dress like us (turbans and stuff...).
We assume that the people that look like us, think like us, and are therefore the good guys, but we don't really bother checking if we are correct in this.

Equal pay for everyone? This was tried out in communistic countries, and it didn't really work. Why it didn't? Because people don't want to work harder if they aren't given extra money for it.
Socialism (the Marx-thing) is in theory the best type of government. It just don't work that way tho...

Triple D - Might wanna read my Journal Entry on Dualism.
Goy - Socialism is definetly the best theoretical kind of Government. Unfortunately, Capitalism is the best practical kind of Government. Fascism and Communism are the same. Free market anarcho-capitalism would be a tad better, but not much. There's nothing we can do (but God in the meantime I love the complicated labels).
As for the bit about ragheads - there's not really much that you haven't said.

ok, i don't really have enough time to read through everybody's thoughts on the meaning of life, but i read the first page at least and i have a few questions:

since the mice created deep thought (if i remember correctly, they did) and they also created the super-computer Earth, then does that mean that the mice are God? and if they were so smart to create these vastly intellegent computers, then why didn't they come up with a better question than "how many roads must a man walk down"?

was the question to the ultimate answer supposed to have come from arthur dent, or the primative people that the spaceship wiped out? if deepthought was the second smartest computer in the universe, it would have to have known what would befall earth and it was all part of the question. it did say that it checked and double checked!

if anyone can shed any light on this for me, i would be very grateful!
christy

42 was just made up by a dead writer. For Pete's sake get a grip.

Weeelllll.... Even if you were to think that the storyline has any real substance to the ultimate question (which has been determined in this forum that it hasn't), the mice built the first computer (deep thought) and it gave specs for a new computer, built by the guys at Magrathea. The Earth was to come up with the answer (or question), but due to the sudden arrival of the Golgafrinchams, there has been a severe cockup.
Deep thought checked and double checked if 42 was the answer. He had no opinions about the question however.

Surely the meaning to life is to be found in the poetry of Poet Jeltz? Have none of you read his amazing theories? Such power. Such dynamic use of language. Surely there's no more to be said upon the subject. This surely must be the definitive statement.

It obviously was, friend. In an unfortunately terminal manner.
What's the matter? I leave for a week and suddenly everyone drops dead of circumlocutory diorrhea, or cirrhosis of the spleen (apparently). Get back to work!

(All of the above was a longhand bookmark where I could've just put . I wasted ten seconds of your valuable life, and am probably now guilty negligence where it comes to a duty of care towards good taste.)

It obviously was, friend. In an unfortunately terminal manner.
What's the matter? I leave for a week and suddenly everyone drops dead of circumlocutory diorrhea, or cirrhosis of the spleen (apparently). Get back to work!

(All of the above was a longhand bookmark where I could've just put . I wasted ten seconds of your valuable life, and am probably now guilty negligence where it comes to a duty of care towards good taste.)

I was at first ready to agree with Fnord.
But upon a second reading I'm of two minds now.


And who the heck is Jeltz? A Dionysian who encourages the inbibing of riotous licquors by all accounts from A Liquid Warrior et al but beyond that I know nothing of his poetry. No doubt he knows nothing of mine, so I for one am prepared to remedy this impasse.


~jwf~

We need more Apollinians around here. But Jeltz is Vogon Jeltz, he of the terrible poetry in Hitchiker's Guide.

<>


Actually, 42 was made up by a very live writer who is now dead. Bit of a difference there. But I do agree that people should realize that by posting 1400 or so perhaps that one might have been mentioned once or twice already.



Cirrhosis of the spleen? Circumlocutory diarrhoae? In fact I have been quite busy drifting these days - jwf no doubt knows how important and time consuming this activity can be.

az

Once or twice already? I was on a whole THREAD vilifying people who say such pointless sushi!
Busy? Busy shopping? Pah! Well, I guess you're living your meaning at least.

Grasshopper,

Am learning to walk on rice paper without tearing it . . . hence drifing . . . these things take time.

az

Oh.. THAT Jeltz. It helps knowing he was Vogon. For those of us whose heads are filled with six decades of minutia and occassionally need more than a single word or name to satisfactorily grasp these arcane and esoteric references, let me say 'Thanks' for filling in the blanks. I've been firing a lot of blanks lat...

Oh right, the meaning of life.
Uhm... for some people it's nothing more than being critical, especially of bad poetry. How much this actually means to those who have passed over, remains (thankfully) to be seen.


~jwf~

Perhaps things can ONLY change when they are observed, unlike what Schrodinger says. Sounds like a fitting Meaning.

'Meaning of Life' can, and possibly should, change constantly. For some it changes moment by moment, for others day by day, for others year by year. But for others - never.

I also think one can hold several meanings of life within themselves, without any of them contradicting the other. And when they do contradict, well, this makes for something interesting, I reckon.

Are any of us the same person we were yesterday? If we are lucky, we are not. Not to say we don't have a base of 'who we are'. But that as we experience new things we should have the ability to change and grow. So that, although we may have solid roots happening, this doesn't mean that sprouting a few new leaves changes who we are fundamentally. It only adds new and interesting aspects to who we are. I think it is very important never to be afraid of change and growth. In order to experience life as well as we can.

leafily yours,
az

I too, am 42, and haven't had any great revelations. Mind you it's only a book!! (which I've been listening to for the past 20 odd years) Anyway, we all know-it's the question that is far more important.

You're just, just, on one side of the line that denotes annoying fool from useful comment, Researcher 225533 (good number, by the way).
Az - I take it you're repeating this every few weeks for the benefit of newcomers. Sounds a lot like when I said that we're all "in constant evolution" or something. Maybe just saying those five words would save a few paragraphs.