Bernie wrote: I am of the opinion that it has become a very simple matter of 'sustainability.'

As a tangent to Bernie's discussion, I note that implied in a statement that something isn't "sustainable", is the value given to "sustainability", or conversely, "that something that is not sustainable is undesirable".

Without getting too corny, is the beauty of a warm summers day any less beautiful or desirable because it doesn't last 365 days?

Often the value of impermanence is the ability to establish a glimpse, or insight into an alternative. Transferring this metaphor to the virtual environment, I feel there is value in some of the transience that we experience, because through transience comes refinement and development.

Without experiencing what doesn't add value, comes an insight into how to add value. Stability or sustainability over time isn't a necessary condition of adding value since people can obtain value on their way to a longer term destination. Our time in high school, for example, was a status that is not sustainable (for us as individuals) yet it provides unquestionable value.

(If this sounds like an apology for Chaos Theory then it is not meant to).

The Age – September 4 2007

The Taliban have at last released the South Korean hostages. I am sure that most people have breathed a sigh of gratitude and feel great relief in their hearts for the released hostages.
But let’s think for a moment about what happened here. A group of Christian zealots decided to conduct missionary activities to convert non-Christians in the non-Christians’ own country where non-Christians represent the vast majority of the population.
Regardless of what you think of Muslims (and their own band of zealots); what incredible arrogance for Christians to enter a land inhabited by non-Christians and attempt to convert them to their brand of zealotry!
Religious testosterone has reared its ugly head once again in the form of “The fiction that is the creation of my god is better than the fiction that is the creation of your god. “
When Karl Marx said that religion was the opiate of the masses, he was on the right track but understated its impact: it is not an opiate of the masses, it is a social carcinogen.