Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maceng2 who wrote (39685)	8/24/2002 10:07:57 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi Pearly_Button; Re Nash speaking to crowds in Peking. This is more evidence of the cultural imperialism of the United States. Nash is only famous because of Hollywood. How many winners of the Nobel prize in Economics can the average person name? Only Nash, and him only because of Hollywood. But it's not just China where Hollywood conquers all. Nash could go to Saudi Arabia and give a speech to sellout crowds. And as in China, the crowds would mostly be the younger generation. This is where the United States is unbeatable, what the Chinese call "cultural hegemony", LOL. If we just wait the nasty regimes out, like we did the Soviet Union, all these nasty countries will fall into our hands like ripe fruit. If we go to war against them, or support their enemies in their useless ongoing local pissing matches, then their ripening will be so much delayed. But even with that delay they will eventually fall into our hands. People talk about the advance of militant Islam. When I was a kid people talked about the advance of militant Communism. (Compared to the Communists, the Islamic Fundamentalists are nothing more than a joke.) But while people in the West fear the advance of Islam (or Communism, once), the obvious lesson of history is that it is the values of the West that advance, not the values of Islam. The book "A Beautiful Mind" is a great read, and is more accurate than the movie. (Nash was an insufferable a---ole.) I studied Nash's embedding theorem in grad school, but I never heard of the work he did in Economics until reading the book. Frankly, I think his topological results are far more important than what he got the Nobel prize for, but there is no Nobel prize in Mathematics. He was quite a nut case. The book gives a much better idea of what actually happened, but the movie was well done in the area of showing the madness. Since imaginary companions are a not uncommon feature of children, it seems natural that a few adults would also be blessed with the same thing. -- Carl P.S. My dad once kicked my sister's imaginary friend in the butt (you know, with the side of the shoe, not a full blown kick) in order to hurry the imaginary friend into the family car for a drive.