@12
exactly :D

@18
replace 'process' with 'flow' in translation, as per you @8 "the whole thing sounds clunky. there is no flow to the language."

flow is microcultural if not personal subjective, so there is flow, though different, even better. like mobiles, microblogs, and having other things to do force our hands, or like haiku or poetic metrics -- *glish can be punchier and more powerful when it lacks indirect construction, it can be more profound for its freedom from cliche.

this might be half the reason writers age so well: their flow grows foreign and affects us as such.

if you love language, then you love it all.

it's technically incorrect and a bit prejudicial to write "there is no flow" to chinglish or the like. being flamey in chinese was to smile over it :)

@8
有流程，但是它是不同的流程 -- 更好的流程!

* A deep neural networking interface is released. What was once a local publication, "bOING bOING The World's Greatest Neurozine," popularizes the NNI on their blog, upgrading like-minded millions.

Nanoseconds before the singularity, the last offline thought is comment #1923863259 from the do-you-see-what-i-see dept. at Slashdot:

1) I, for one, welcome our new cyberpunk overlords, you insensitive clod!
2) Imagine a Beowulf cluster of happily mutated extrasolar user bases, all belong to us!
3) prof%!$*%& [NO CARRIER]

Sadly it is from user ID 19256052, both a karma whoring fanboy and the one user who had always worn his tin foil hat.

"Blessed Are the Geek, the Geek Shall Inherit the Earth."

@#10
no, attachment causes meaning. without attachment there is no meaning.

yes, without meaning there is no suffering, and without attachment there is no suffering, because without attachment, there is nothing.

consider
* music -- one note has no value without another note, alone it is not high or low or anything. one beat cannot a rhythm make as rhythm is the relationship, it is the attachment between beats.
* mathematics -- one point has zero dimension, no value, does not exist without relation to another point.

#10, you impute science for disassociating society from old wisdom. your comment shows the folly of reliance on rhetorical bits of old wisdom.

you suggest we "just ask a buddhist," but the "middle path" principle mitigates a simple "attachment causes suffering." i quote "The Buddhist Middle Path is a path of compassion and of wisdom. Wisdom requires balance ...." -- Professor Asoka Bandarage at the Conference on ‘Civilizations and the Challenge for Peace: Obstacles and Opportunities,’ United Nations General Assembly

attachment is a tool which can be used for suffering or for compassion. has boing boing not taught us the folly of attacking tools?

here in seattle recently, the 14th dalai lama shared lessons of his buddhism during the Seeds of Compassion gathering. his guidance was intended for both rational people and for people of faith. from him i gathered:

compassion requires attachment; further, "compassion" is mindful attachment in a word.

if you ask a buddhist believer about attachment and the neuroscience of selling your stuff, he or she may reply with clichés such as "attachment causes suffering." if you ask a thinker who respects buddhist mindfulness, you may learn that attachment neither causes nor resolves suffering, while it can be used to do both.

er, that was

i <3 this, and i'm never letting go

i this, and i'm never letting go

Thanks Jack, you pointed this in just the right direction. More about the naming of Times Square:

In 1904 when the deal went down, apparently no money changed hands, so it's not sponsorship by The New York Times.

As at [All Hail!] Wikipedia, Times Square was first known to New Yorkers as Long Acre -- "George Washington stayed in Long Acre while in New York during the American Revolutionary War." A half century later with industrialization, it became Longacre Square, its name from the mid-1800s until 1904.

Then, "it was renamed Times Square on April 8, 1904, by proclamation of Mayor George B. McClellan, Jr. at the urging of Adolph Ochs, owner and publisher of The New York Times."

At the urging, eh? What did Ochs have on McClellan? Those were wild times in the newspaper business.

Anyhow, Jack you're right to raise the informality of neighborhood naming. "Times Square" is not a sponsorship in that The New York Times does not appear to pay for the privilege, right there in the cold heart of paying for play.

Full circle, then: perhaps The Times types don't go out of their way to connect the dots just to not overplay their hand. Should they shine a light on their 104 year-old favor, Times Square could become Bloomberg Square, Trump Square, or with 70-some billionaires in The City and its glitziest bauble up for naming, someone will pony up.

One more juicy bit from Wikipedia: Before its renaming as Times Square, Longacre Square had a nickname: Thieves Lair. So a mid-1800s nickname neatly sums up our modern Times Square in the eyes of mid-1800s Marxism.

I took this occasion to upload a couple tangential Times Square snaps on Flickr, calling them Diddy Square, 2005 and Thieves Lair, 2004. Cheers. BG

I have been to or through Times Square ... must be more than 100 times ... yet I did not know it was named after The New York Times.

Captain Obvious might advise "if you're not going to run your brain, then don't run your mouth [or your keyboard]" but I suppose a lot of people might not associate Times Square and The New York Times. From Dick Clark's New Year's Rockin' Eve to Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade, and from The NBC Nightly News (with Tom Brokaw, anyway) to MTV TRL, "Times Square" is an incredible eyeball magnet and pronoun. It is so much a pronoun that in these thirty-odd years I never considered its etymology.

The Times should do more to connect the dots. It is certainly among the most mainstream naming sponsorships, but is it also the least understood, or the sponsorship fulfilling the least of its potential?

Flying Squid, Karl Marx won't just be there, you have to WANT to see Karl Marx :|