Boring Personal Details

Why I am posting this:

Jamie Johnson stopped his column at Vanity Fair. I am unsure if the unbanning of my account earlier this year was intentional or accidental.

John Irons discontinued his blog and became a managing director for the Rockefeller Foundation. In a comment, which I can't find and might not have been published, I asked how he would spend $1 billion in an effective way, then continued the line of thought by asking how to spend $10 billion.

After I submitted some comments to Robert Reich, it was observed that his next post mentioned being in Washington, D.C. and asking Democratic lawmakers why they were not trying harder to create jobs. Some other events but not as important; commenting on a Wall Street Journal article was my first exposure to the fact that many people are just interested in scoring points in an online debate and not in actually finding solutions.

Someone stopped appearing in Gmail chat after I linked the 2011 Norway shooting to 'signal decay' in World of Warcraft in an email I sent to several people around April 13 or 14. As of about three weeks ago they have been visible on chat again though.

Jared Bernstein stopped his 'Friday music' feature for about a month. Mike Konczal started blogging at an organizational website instead of Wordpress. Paul Krugman might have avoided posting music concerts too, I honestly can't remember. After visiting Seattle in May, Paul Krugman posted ten videos of music performance -_-

Yoko Ono said some things on Twitter, but I did not read most of them. One thing that I remember is that someone said something every day to her.

I recently learned that Roger Ebert published a book last year but I have no idea if it was related.

(Just a note, the "lack of wealth" or "national debt proves lack of wealth" idea seems to be a good explanation for most people's lack of acceptance of working less, and if ignoring luxury goods purchases by the rich would also explain why people might agree to lower wages but not to working less. Corporate profits—from trade?—would magically be converted into gasoline for the working poor instead of private islands and foreign cars for rich people.)


I thought about sending this as an email but it seemed that this would leave people with questions about why change could not happen more quickly, as documented above. This site really should not have been necessary. While I have explained various results of fixing problems and the errors that many people make about the economy, the theoretical benefit and cultural viability should have been clear from the explanation about flows of money, the one with the bananas.

So as these things often go, there was a girl. She was Japanese but I think born in the United States, so if she spoke the Japanese language it was not very well.

According to this scenario, there are two possibilities: I died in Iraq, or I forgot about her or was made to forget about her. Since I was roughly aware of her birthday to within a 10-day period, this second possibility did not seem as likely.

One conflict which has not been explained on this site is the implications of whether lack of explanation does, in fact, make values placed in things more difficult to remember. If it does, then this could imply that a culture that does not emphasize the need to give reasons for holding something in esteem is one where people have agreed that the reason for mistakes is the tendency for people to forget things.

This would then explain why problems exist in the world if the dominant strategy is not, in fact, a selfish one, while also avoiding the idea that inaccurate standards are the cause of problems.

Contradicting this perspective on memory leads to conflict by implying that there is a serious underlying problem and this can, and should, be fixed. Living one's life in accordance with the idea that memory is the reason for mistakes is therefore, in a sense, the 'nice' thing to do.

However, if it is possible for the problem to be fixed, then these definitions become reversed. Of course, this hinges on whether there is a stable solution to inaccurate standards so that attitudes toward memory and honesty by one generation are applicable to the next one.

So my situation is very ambiguous. Certain details suggest this girl had greater understanding of this than I did, and has been avoiding doing anything that might seem selfish or anything that would contradict the narrative that I had died.

If you search for her name, Elyse Sugimoto, it doesn't turn up much. One is a song I linked before. So I don't know how she would feel if this idea was used and my name was associated with it. Up until now, I feel that everything I have done was with intentions that were consistent with her benefit. I don't have her email address.

I am not sure I would still be able to say that about my intentions if change happened more slowly and I allowed myself to leave my current situation before then.