Illumninatus! Author Needs Our Help

Criceratops writes, "Almost every fringe-geek worth their salt has read 'The Illuminatus! Trilogy,' or at least the 'Principia Discordia,' and much of the enlightenment therein came from Robert Anton Wilson. On the eve of 'Xena' being officially named Eris, Douglas Rushkoff's blog reveals that the extremely ill Mr. Wilson can't make his rent. Another testimony to how our society refuses to reward those who enrich it... but not if we can help it!"

Comments

I Don't Know, Man

[eldavojohn]

...the extremely ill Mr. Wilson can't make his rent. Another testimony to how our society refuses to reward those who enrich it... but not if we can help it!

Well, this post will be modded as flamebait but it can be as much flamebait as the above. First off, I will argue that our society does not, in fact, "refuse to reward those who enrich it." Enrichment turns out to be subjective and relative of how many people you enrich. I think we rewarded The Beatles and Stephen King quite handsomely. It is true, however, that authors produce art that is becoming less and less appreciated by the general populace daily so it does not surprise me that a fringe Sci-Fi author has fallen on hard times.

Second, I don't know what he spent his money on or what he will spend my money on. When I give money to people on the street asking for it, I take them into the nearest restaurant and order them up a meal and leave. That's so I know my money isn't spent on drugs. I'm not saying he's a drug addict, I'm just concerned he might not be able to afford his rent in the first place for a particular reason. I pay my rent just fine, it was harder in college but I've made ends meet, what makes him so special?

Lastly, he's lived in Brooklyn his whole life. Fine. I would like to point out, however, that there are many other spots where rent and living is cheaper. I know quite a few small peaceful towns in Minnesota where rent for an apartment is $200/month everywhere. Get a job as a stocker at WalMart and stop being an anarchist/conspiracy theorist (hey, that's what it says on the linked Wikipedia page) refusing to do actual work for money in our 'system'.

I haven't read any books by him, so maybe I'm really missing out on something. But instead of sending him money, I'd rather send him a letter advising him on how to live a better life throw a steady income job.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[WhyteRabbyt]

[i] Get a job as a stocker at WalMart and stop being an anarchist/conspiracy theorist (hey, that's what it says on the linked Wikipedia page) refusing to do actual work for money in our 'system'.[/i]

Kind of hard to do that when you're housebound and only have a few months to live, y'know.

And where on earth do you get the assumption that he ever refused to work for money?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[onion2k]

Get a job as a stocker at WalMart

Did you miss the bit where the article says he's extremely ill? I imagine that a shelf-stacking job isn't a viable option.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[I(rispee_I(reme]

I haven't read any books by him, so maybe I'm really missing out on something. But instead of sending him money, I'd rather send him a letter advising him on how to live a better life throw a steady income job.

You seem supremely qualified to comment, sir. I told Emily Dickinson practically the same thing: "Shut up with that emo shit. It's not paying the bills, and they're looking for a girl to do needlepoint in the village." Sadly, she didn't listen to me, and she died poor, alone, and unappreciated.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[iion_tichy]

"Get a job as a stocker at WalMart and stop being an anarchist/conspiracy theorist (hey, that's what it says on the linked Wikipedia page) refusing to do actual work for money in our 'system'."

Perhaps you missed the part where he is 74 years old and extremely ill?

I also would like to know more about the why and how he got into his situation, but your comment really seems to be far over the top. Not everybody who is poor is "refusing to do actual work".

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[qortra]

I think the reason is already given: he's ill, and he's receiving hospice care or medical care. Even with insurance, medical bills add up REALLY QUICKLY. For that matter, I don't know how good writer's guild insurance really is (or even if such a thing exists), but I imagine is probably isn't stellar. People can blow through fortunes (like 7 digit fortunes) in a matter of months if there are expensive procedures to be done. I don't know what he makes from book sales or how much he had saved, but he'd have to be a fairly wealthy author in order to absorb modern medical costs without a problem.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[voice_of_all_reason]

Book? Drug addict? Stephen King?

O, Discordia!

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[eldavojohn]

Did you miss the bit where the article says he's extremely ill?

I don't see that anywhere in the 'article.' Now I see it in the Slashdot summary but the article only says he was in an extremely pitiful flesh suit.

Go ahead and quote the part in the article where it says this. If he is ill, I am extremely sorry for him. I'm sorry for making a suggestion to get a job but, you know, Robert Jordan of Wheel of Time Fame is also extremely ill and I don't see him making the front page of Slashdot asking for rent or medical bill money.

I apologize for sounding coarse but people go through hard times. I sincerely hope that the last months of Robert Anton Wilson's life are enjoyable and that he spends time with his family and friends.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

And where on earth do you get the assumption that he ever refused to work for money?

He's a Republican, and all Republicans KNOW that the only reason that people are poor is because they CHOOSE to be poor. Being 74 and crippled by illness is just making excuses, and living in Brooklyn and eating that FANCY catfood instead of the bargain variety is simply wasteful extravagance.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[shivan]

if you would have bothered to research just a little, you would've found out why

The general deal is that he's suffering from the more morbid symptoms of post-polio syndrome, can't really walk, has trouble swallowing, and is extremely frail. He has friends serving as fulltime nurses and aids, but doesn't have family capable of providing support. The IRS and medical bills have also worked against his solvency.

Try getting a job with those symptons ..

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Even with insurance, medical bills add up REALLY QUICKLY

Sorry for going off topic here, but what do you mean? Isn't the whole reason for medical insurance that your insurance pays the bills for you?

Coming from a very different coutry to yours (where we care for our infirm, rather than deride them like the first poster) I find it hard to get to grips with some of the concepts.

In fact sometimes I think I'd prefer not to know. I've often wondered what happens when someone needs life-saving medical treatment but doesn't have medical insurance. I figure the answer is somewhere between 'the doctors treat them out of kindness' and 'they get turned in to soylent green and given to feed unemployed, homeless people' but I'm too scared to read in to it in case the answer is closer to the latter for comfort.

Now you tell me that even if you have health insurance, there's no guarantee that you won't be turned in to soylent green?!

Can anyone explain how your country works in this regard?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, I stop reading after the words "cosmic thinking" appear in a sentence.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[supasam]

Even if you have insurance, they can drop you at any time for what ever reason, they can refuse treatments, and they will just cut you off at a certain point. It's pretty much bullshit.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

It's hard to make generalizations because it really depends on the company and your plan. Under our system, the insurance company usually doesn't pay all of your bills - just most of them. They might only pay 80-90%. That's awesome compared to you paying 100%, but that can still eventually lead to a crushing debt.

The best part is when someone has a chronic illness from birth, such as hemophilia. When they're young they're covered by their parents insurance, but eventually they'll go out on their own and have to get their own. No insurance company will sell them a policy because the company can be almost certain the kid'll cost them more than the kid'll ever pay. The kid's just fucked unless they can score insurance from a spouse.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[miyako]

It's actually a rather complicated situation, and I'm not sure anyone in the US really understands completely how it works. Here is my attempt to explain it anyway.
Basically, medical insurance in theory is supposed to help protect you in the case that you have a bunch of medical bills. In practice what actually happens is that insurance companies either require deductables on the order of thousands of dollars per procedure (where every tiny thing is it's own procedure) or they simply don't cover very much.
Furthermore, unless you're extraordinarily healthy, once you get past a certain age it can be very difficult to get health insurance at all, because insurance companies are afraid you might actually use their services.
Finally on that note, even crappy insurance is extremely expensive- and unless you work for a company who helps pay for it, or are rich, you can't afford health care.
Now, for people who don't have health care, there is Medicaid and Medicare. These are basically government insurance. The problem is that over the last several years they have been gutted to the point where they are even more impotent than they used to be.
Whether you have Medicare or Medicaid or some insurance plan, the bills quickly add up and people are usually left in a situation where they can't afford any more medical treatment. From there the options depend basically on what exactly the person is dying of.
If you get shot/stabbed/dismemebered/etc. Then basically you can walk into any hospital in the US and they are required to give you "stabalizing treatment" - which basically amounts to stopping you from bleeding to death before they take your billing information. For people dying of long term terminal diseases (e.g. cancer, organ failure, etc.) then there are free hospitals. The idea is that when you go to one of these hospitals they take as much as they can get from you, and leave it at that. Of course these hospitals also generally have abysmal quality, so nobody who can afford to pay any medical bills goes to them, so they never get new equipment/have the budget to hire good doctors/etc. This makes a viscous sort of cycle. These also tend to be in rather bad areas in the bigger cities- they mainly serve to tread drug overdoses and gunshot wounds. If you live in a small town and need to get to a hosptial like this- too bad.
Your other choice aside from the free hospital is to go to a hospital that is equipped to give you some of the best medical care in the world, but it basically involves liquidating all of your assets and turning them over to the hospital, then getting as much on credit as you can, then when you have no more to give they cut you off of treatment and transfer you to the free hospital. These hospitals generally aren't equipped to keep up the level of treatment you've been getting, so at this point generally they dope you up on pain killers and let you die.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem supremely qualified to comment, sir.

When you're asking for my money, I am supremely qualified to comment on what you're going to do with it.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

That is horrific. Why doesn't anyone do anything about it? I can't believe that a majority of the population would rather let people suffer than have to pay a bit extra in tax for a public healthcare system; especially when the future is uncertain for everyone. Anyone could end up suffering, even the greedy.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[minus_273]

" I told Emily Dickinson practically the same thing: "Shut up with that emo shit. It's not paying the bills, and they're looking for a girl to do needlepoint in the village.""

Clearly you have not read Emily Dickinson. Shudder.. cringe..

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Abcd1234]

That is horrific. Why doesn't anyone do anything about it? I can't believe that a majority of the population would rather let people suffer than have to pay a bit extra in tax for a public healthcare system; especially when the future is uncertain for everyone. Anyone could end up suffering, even the greedy.

Communist!

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

That was some funny shit... well done.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[@madeus]

Now you tell me that even if you have health insurance, there's no guarantee that you won't be turned in to soylent green?!

Can anyone explain how your country works in this regard?

As difficult as it is for those of us in less barbaric countries to imagine, you are indeed hung out to dry if your health insurance runs out, and it's only good up to a point. Usually the limit is up to a specific dollar value - or covers treating a given illness for a limited time span. The maximum amount a policy covers it varies depending on the premium you are willing to pay / can afford each month.

Where the system falls down is when someone has a serious long term illness, such as Cancer, and the treatment works, you can easily end up running out of insurance cover 2 or 3 years down the road. When that happens, you have to sell all your possessions (house, car, TV) to pay for the drugs (which are really expensive - often hundreds of USD worth a month). When the money ultimately runs out, and you are lying bed ridden, flat broke in low rent accommodation - having been forced to sell all of your valuable possessions just to stay alive - you simply stop getting the medication you've been getting and you are left to succumb to the illness (that is, to die).

If you have a partner, then they are left with nothing when you die - not even the house you used to live in (because you'll have used up all the money from the life insurance pay out that would already have been made when your condition was diagnosed on the medication you needed to keep you alive), making it a double tragedy for them. I don't know how someone is supposed to get their life back together after something like that.

"Emergency rooms" are required to treat all patients brought in (regardless of insurance or ability to pay), so when you are at the final stage of your illness at deaths door (days, or hours before the end) they will give you medication to control the pain, but that's the extent of the free treatment available (and you / your partner will still get a hefty bill for any services rendered, they just can't - by law - refuse to treat you even if they know for sure you can't pay it).

Scary stuff.

Such is the price people seem willing to pay in return for lower taxation and greater spending power at the checkout.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[YrWrstNtmr]

I can't believe that a majority of the population would rather let people suffer than have to pay a bit extra in tax for a public healthcare system

Basically, we don't really trust the government to not screw it up.

(Any government, not just the current bunch of fools)

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[nomadic]

But instead of sending him money, I'd rather send him a letter advising him on how to live a better life throw a steady income job.

You don't get invited to too many parties, do you...

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[VJ42]

Thanks for the info; you've also made me feel infantely better about the NHS, from whom I got anti-epileptic brain surgery absolutely free when I was 15. According to my then conultant only 12 of these particular operations are carried out per year at that hospital (the world renound Great Ormond Street children's hospital). Had we had to pay for it, well I think my parents would still be paying back the debt now, a couple of years short of a decade later.

People continually moan about the state of the NHS, but it's safe to say I'd rather become ill here in the UK than over there in the USA.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[JustOK]

Yet, even more supremely qualified would be those who gave YOU that money.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[aplusjimages]

I always find it funny when people try to discourage people from doing good deeds. If you want to start a fund for Robert Jordan I say do it. I won't write a short essay on how I think it's a waste of time and how there may be some hidden agenda to buy drugs with the money.

I understand discouraging people from replying to spam or supporting terrorism, but to discourage people from helping another person just seems like time wasted on everyones part.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[ArikTheRed]

Yeah, but Wheel of Time? I mean, that series sucked ;)

In any case, despite the lack of a slashdotting, he is asking for medical bill money: http://www.dragonmount.com/News/?p=270%20

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[VJ42]

Well, the Majority (all?) Europian governments have managed it; even us here in the UK. Canada and Australia seem to manage aswell. I'm sure you over in the USA don't have standards of governance all that far behind the rest of the western world. If you're anything like us, you'll continually complain about your national health service, but I'd still rather become ill here, than over there in the USA.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Short Circuit]

I'm familiar with those...my grandfather's dealing with post-polio, and I'm the only family member who comes around with regularity.

I know what he's going through.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[somersault]

Amen. I've broken a few bones, and had plastic surgery on my ears on the NHS. I guess I should stop being annoyed at how much the government taxes everything, since the NHS sounds so much better than anything Americans will have anytime soon.. :S The pricing does sound extortionate too though. Drug companies must be making a killing (no pun intended).

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

he is 74 years old and extremely ill

Then he can be a Walmart greeter!

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

In practice what actually happens is that insurance companies either require deductables on the order of thousands of dollars per procedure (where every tiny thing is it's own procedure) or they simply don't cover very much.

Not true at all, well, not in all cases anyway. It's amazing the amount of FUD being thrown about here. Fact is, if your a "professional" then there is a good chance that you have pretty decent medical insurance. For instance, since I've been a developer (going on over 20 years) I've had pretty good insurance. Deductables are around $200/year and most things are covered 100% (minus a $10-$15 copay or office visit fee). When we had our kids we only ended up having to pay the deductable and copay (and the copay was a one time shot for each pregnancy, IOW each visit related to the pregnancy was treated as one 9 month long visit). I've known two people who've ended up getting heart bypass' and have had to pay fairly little out of pocket. Of course the paperwork will eat you alive and many mistakes are made, but if you stick with it, it is heads and shoulders above what many around here would lead you to believe. Now before you start flaming away, keep in mind that my point is that not ALL insurance sucks. I know the flip side as well, my parents are on Medicare, and it sucks. Out of pocket expenses are higher, but the biggest issue is the quality of care is less than good (i.e. it sucks bad). We also have a few friends who basically have no insurance, or pay for insurance out of their own pockets (independant contractors and in one case a self employed lawyer) and that certainly sucks. But the fact is decent insurance is out there, and like it or not, one has to factor this in when you're deciding what type of career to pursue. Go the artistic route if you want, more power to you, but you have to plan for any issues (such as insurance) that this will entail.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Who rated this trolling sack of cat crap insightful?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Does Robert Jordan really need more money? I mean, WoT has been pretty damn successful - like, NY Times bestseller list consistently. And reading that link looks like the donations are supposed to be donated for "Amyloidosis research". IMO, the situations aren't really comparable. Besides, I've already bought some of Jordan's books, but I haven't actually paid for any of RAW's books.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Mr. Slippery]

Basically, we don't really trust the government to not screw it up.

Yeah, so instead we let a bunch of corporations (which are creations of the government) screw it up.

The free market works well when buyers and sellers meet in the marketplace with equal power, full knowledge, and all costs accounted for in the transaction. These assumptions do not apply to basic medical care: there is a tremendous power and knowledge differential, and if my neighbor can't get treatment for his bird flu or TB (or even for some chronic condition that makes him more at risk to contract bird flu or TB) that puts me at risk.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Descalzo]

No, he's asking for donations to medical research.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

You are definitely missing out on something. The man has post-polio syndrome. At this point in his life, he is wheelchair bound and is having difficulty talking and even swallowing. His entire life is pain, but he suffers with dignity, still bringing humor and insight to those fortunate enough to be able to visit him.

Having not read his books, I can understand where you might have a hard time sympathizing with his situation, but this is something you need understand; Robert Anton Wilson brought enlightenment to the Western world. More than just a Sci-Fi author, this man truly changed peoples' lives in the most personal and spiritual way. He stood for the most American of values, those of Freedom. Personal freedom, to do what you want with your body without the government interfering, freedoms of speech and (alternative) religion, privacy, freedom from oppression and authoritarianism.

He had a way of using humor and fiction mixed with historical fact that influenced people to truly open their minds to a new way of thinking "outside the box". Like a Zen Master, his writings made people understand the world in new and different ways. For these reasons, the man is highly revered by many people as one of the most important authors of the 20th century.

Now that he is old and dying in severe pain, many people are finding this as a unique opportunity to repay him by letting him die in peace. It's always sad when someone influential to you has died, hearing that they died alone and penniless. We are now able to tell the man that we love him and want him to be happy in his last days. Hopefully you now have a better understanding of why this /. post is so important.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Shajenko42]

Now, for people who don't have health care, there is Medicaid and Medicare. These are basically government insurance. The problem is that over the last several years they have been gutted to the point where they are even more impotent than they used to be.

Unless you're a single male under 65. Then you can die in a ditch as far as society is concerned.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[tehcyder]

When I give money to people on the street asking for it, I take them into the nearest restaurant and order them up a meal and leave.

Sure, but don't you get tired of being beaten up?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[thrillseeker]

Yet, even more supremely qualified would be those who gave YOU that money.

It became his the moment he got it though - and only he is qualified to do with it as he see fit - not you, not I, not the do gooders of the government and society.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Opie812]

I haven't read any books by him, so maybe I'm really missing out on something. But instead of sending him money, I'd rather send him a letter advising him on how to live a better life throw a steady income job.

Instead of sending him money why not buy one of his books. He should get royalities from that right?

P.S. I haven't read any of his books and doubt I will so I can't say if you're missing out on anything or not.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[ischorr]

Several things that you supposedly read should have tipped you off.

Summary: "the extremely ill Mr. Wilson can't make his rent"
Article: "whose *infirmity* and depleted finances"
Article: "Bob is a human being in a rather painful fleshsuit"
Article: "I refuse for the history books to say he died alone and destitute"
Wikipedia article (which you say you read) depending on when you read it:
Wikipedia: "This author who has changed the lives of many is dying of post polio syndrome"
Wikipedia: "Robert A. Wilson is currently under hospice care at home with friends and family." ...But you didn't actually read any of this (you even quoted the article wrong after being called out!!). You skimmed a few things, jumped to conclusions, then rushed to get first post by being about as much of an ass about it as possible - revealing how much you're just a sad, sad, excuse for a human being.

RAW himself did not ask for money. A fan of his, however, did. Your high horse died about 2 posts ago, *get off of it*.

Also, you've never once taken a homeless guy into a restaurant. Liar.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[ArikTheRed]

Medical research... for his condition... in his name. You obviously have no idea how hospitals work.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[r3m0t]

A viscous cycle? Indeed. :)

To the sibling post: did you know NHS is the third-largest employer in the entire world? My dad said so, and he works there (IT job), so it *must* be true. ;)

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Ginger Unicorn]

wwhat kind of bastards would threaten to evict a dying man? so what if he cant pay his rent, he'll be evicted by the grim reaper in a few of months.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[iminplaya]

Why doesn't anyone do anything about it?

Because Nobody is not on the ballot.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[nanio]

How is parent flamebait? This is the only funny post Slashdot has today. Someone send this guy some coupons, all will be well.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[IsItWashable]

"This makes a viscous sort of cycle."

Man, I'd hate to be stuck in one of those!

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[eln]

I can almost guarantee that he's never actually done that. I'd imagine the closest he's come is throwing a half-eaten Egg McMuffin out the window at a homeless person.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Angostura]

Wait until you become a parent (assuming you aren't already) - that's when you appreciate it even more. Watching my wife nearly, but not quite dying following a placental abruption, and been saved, despite half her blood bodies landing at my feet when they opened her, having the infant whisked off to ICU two weeks and having it, and my wife come out just fine. The NHS is a fine institution. Some of the patients take it for granted.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the US is a country containing a majority of self-centered, ignorant, and short-sighted fools, such as the first poster.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[VJ42]

Wait until you become a parent (assuming you aren't already)

Oh, I've had to use the NHS quite alot; as I mentioned I had anti-epileptic brain surgery on the NHS, my epilepsy has had me in and out of hospital more times than you can count (though now thankfully under control), they've been a godsend & long may it continue. I don't think we could have managed under the US system.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[inviolet]

Scary stuff.

Such is the price people seem willing to pay in return for lower taxation and greater spending power at the checkout.

Let us say I have the misfortune of catching a terrible and expensive disease, and it chews up all of my insurance and savings.

Now certainly I would want others to foot the bill for me. Be it through insurance, or medicare, or medicaid, or welfare, or whatever other form of transfer payment is available. I myself would want this very badly.

But... why should others want to do so or be required to do so? What if they have carefully laid up their own futures, and have no wish to receive any transfer payments at all? Why should my misfortune fall onto their shoulders?

And don't you dare say "but the insurance companies or the government can pay for it". Companies and governments are fictitious entities: only individuals exist, only individuals can earn or lose money.

Are you certain that society is a better place as a result of implementing medical transfer payments?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[eldavojohn]

No, sir, you are the one who is the liar.

Nowhere on the Wikipedia page does it say "polio" I just did a search for it. I read most of it and did not see anything that said he was ill.

I apologized for saying these things many posts ago, yet you still, for some reason think it's important to call me a liar and a "sad, sad, excuse for a human being." I did not know he was ill. Only the summary explicitly says that and I will stand by it. Nowhere on the article did the author come out and say he was "ill." I apologized, I was wrong, human beings are wrong.

I'm not on a high horse. I've taken homeless people to restaraunts, I really have. Sure they were McDonalds, but I also hand out water to homeless people if I see them baking in downtown D.C.

It does not shock me that my post is modded as flamebait but the fact that yours isn't stuns me even more.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Frodrick]

But instead of sending him money, I'd rather send him a letter advising him on how to live a better life throw a steady income job.

RTFA, Jerk. Maybe you can send him a letter advising him "not to die from Post-Polio Syndrome", or not to waste all of his money on needed medical treatment, or maybe you can tell him how it is his own fault for being silly enough to contract Polio (before there was a vaccination for it) in the first place.

Or maybe you could forget the Neocon ideology that holds that everyone in trouble is there because of their own failings. That's just an excuse NOT to care.

And just maybe you could spend a bit of time helping your fellow man rather than preaching at him.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[jdcook]

This wasn't bad but I think some clarifications might help:

1) It is extremely important to distinguish between employer-provided insurance and privately-purchased insurance. The theoretical purpose of medical insurance is not, as you say, to protect you in case of a large number of bills. It is to pool risk and collect enough money from each insured to cover the cost and a bit of rake-off for the insurer. The purpose of medical insurance *companies* is to make as much money as possible. Therein lies the rub.

Employer-provided insurance tends to be pretty good. Most people work for large companies and these companies use their bulk purchasing power to get something very close to this risk-pooling arrangement. People trying to buy insurance on their own, however, are completely at the mercy of insurance companies. They will face possibly ruinous exclusions, especially the nebulous "pre-existing condition", and a great many hurdles. The insurance companies work hard (which is expensive) to find reasons not to pay the claims of these people.

2) The long-term problem is a bit similar. If you work for a long time for a large company, you are generally well covered until Medicare (*not* Medicaid) kicks in. Increased worker mobility (i.e. decreased job security) makes the insurance problem greater.

3) Medicare hasn't been gutted (though there was a debacle recently with the new PHARMA welfare act, err, new drug benefit) because it is for old people and old people vote. Medicaid has always been pretty crappy because it is for poor people.

4) The US already has a decent program in Medicare and a very good program in the Veteran's Administration Hospitals. However, expanding these programs to universal coverage is politically impossible at the moment.

Even the mediocre NHS is far better (even Canada's crappy system is better though France's system may be best of all) from a coverage per dollar standpoint. The administrative costs associated with the US system are extreme and provide no medical benefit to anyone.

I remain convinced that the US will eventually embrace single-payer under a less corrupt Republican administration (a Nixon-to-China moment if you will) when big business republicans realize they cannot afford it any longer and faux libertarian (that's a bit of snark since I don't believe there are any *real*, i.e. uniformly consistent, libertarians) entrepreneur types realize that the dangers of leaving a job and foregoing insurance can make entrepreneurship far too risky. (I'm not entrepreneurially inclined but if I were, I'd worry a lot less about losing my house since I could always go back to the rat race and rent than losing my insurance since I might get cancer while uninsured and simply die).

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[/ASCII]

Check the history of the Wikipedia article. The section mentioning Wilson suffering from Polio was there, and then removed shortly thereafter. If either one of you had could stop assuming the worst about the other and do a bit more research, you'd see that it is perfectly plausible that both your stories are true.

Or you could just accuse each other of editing Wikipedia to suit your arguments, whatever.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Nimey]

The best part? The fundies in power who won't let such terminally-ill people commit suicide or be willingly euthanized because it's against their religion, and they're not willing to step up and pay for it. If I'm ever in that situation, I'll do my damndest to check out before my family is destitute from paying for my meds. Prolonging my life for a short time isn't worth that much.

See the ruckus over Oregon's death-with-dignity law. See der Fuehrer and congressweasels scrambling to take away Oregonians' right to die as they see fit.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[robertjw]

That's a great point. I'm not for government supporting everyone with tax dollars, but if this guy is important a fan should definitely feel good about contributing. The only time discouraging people from helping someone else is when the other person is just a scammer (like certain Nigerian princes). In this case the recipient of the funds is obviously not in a situation where he can help himself or just pocket money from donators.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't accuse him of anything, I was only trying to say that I apologized. I've had to do it twice now and I'll do it again:

I'M SORRY.

In my defense, when I read the Wikipedia entry (which I did) and when I read the article (which I did), I did not find any evidence of him being terminally ill. There was allusions to him being elderly or "infirmities" but I read nothing of direct illness.

Donate whatever money you want, my original post was just me wondering why this is front page Slashdot material. OT eldavojohn

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Let us say I have the misfortune of catching a terrible and expensive disease, and it chews up all of my insurance and savings.

But... why should others want to do so or be required to do so?

Because it could equally as likely happen to them.

Why should my misfortune fall onto their shoulders?

Equally why should their fortune fall on your shoulders?

The well off person who has millions in the bank to cover all medical eventalities has likely been fortunate enough to have been born with a skill that has enabled them to obtain that money. Maybe the ill person isn't so bright, maybe he's only capable of getting a low paid job and can't afford the medical insurance. It's all the luck of the draw at the end of the day. Why should the millionaire be able to watch him suffer just because he was lucky enough to be born with the right set of abilities or intelligence?

Are you certain that society is a better place as a result of implementing medical transfer payments?

No, but I am sure I can not stand to see another person suffer. I've been in tears since this thread started and the thought that America can stand by at let its citizens die sends shivers down my spine.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[DavidTC]

Are you certain that society is a better place as a result of implementing medical transfer payments?

Of course it is.

The defination of a society is a group of people who band together for the common good.

What if they have carefully laid up their own futures, and have no wish to receive any transfer payments at all?

The only way to have enough money to never worry about medical bills is to be born rich, or win the lottery. Period. You're talking about less than 1% of the population.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[ischorr]

Notice that I quoted the two different things he would have seen (at the top of the article even) on Wikipedia between the time the Slashdot article was posted and the time that his comment was posted - depending on at what time he read it. I even mentioned that the two Wikipedia quotes depended on when he "read" that article.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[xrobertcmx]

Decent Insurance is out there, I used to have it. However after my last job search it was stay in a job that pays less and has really good insurance like you describe or take this job I'm in now. Get a substantial raise, work in the field I want to be in, and have crap insurance with deductables on everything. Basically $25 per office visit. $500 annual deductable before insurance kicks in, except in the case of in network doctor visits. 10%/90% split for all hospital visits and stays including Emergency room care after satisfying the $500 annual deductable and the $250 hospital, well it amounts to a co-pay. Now 10% doesn't sound like much, until you look at the bills to have your gall bladder out.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[VJ42]

Actually, Yes I did; IIRC it comes just behind the Indian railways and the Chinese army.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[psykocrime]

The defination of a society is a group of people who band together for the common good.

Exactly. The problem is when a group of people decide to form a "society" and then want
to involuntarily include people who might not want to be part of it.

The only way to have enough money to never worry about medical bills is to be born rich, or win the lottery. Period. You're talking about less than 1% of the population.

Or you could work hard, live a fiscally responsible lifestyle, live below your means - instead of living on credit card debt
like so many people - and save money for a rainy day. And if something really crazy happens and you find that
you aren't prepared for it, despite living responsibly, you can ask for charity from your friends, family, community, etc.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

The well off person who has millions in the bank to cover all medical eventalities has likely been fortunate enough to have been born with a skill that has enabled them to obtain that money.

Funny. Statistically speaking, the well off person was born into a family that is well off. The secret to wealth is to be born to rich parents, then, since you have money, the money condensation principal kicks in. You can just loan money to those who were born poorer and collect interest.

I've been in tears since this thread started and the thought that America can stand by at let its citizens die sends shivers down my spine.

While the stated goal of pretty much any government program, or lack thereof, is to make people's lives better, we all enter into that with a lot of preconceptions and principals. Americans are predisposed towards independence and each person taking care of themselves. This is reflected in our lack of socialism and in our stance on drugs and firearms. Much of Europe is more predisposed towards placing responsibility on a central authority as is reflected in their beliefs about those same topics. Neither is optimal for quality of life, but it is pretty obvious that overall, Western Europe is closer to the ideal.

If you want to hear some scary numbers take a look at the number of Americans that are financially ruined by medical expenses. I think the last time I heard it was something like 50% of all personal bankruptcies were due to a medical problem.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Gr8Apes]

If you're anything like us, you'll continually complain about your national health service, but I'd still rather become ill here, than over there in the USA.

Except during the last 2 weeks of the year. (Canada closed down hospitals because they ran out of money a couple of years ago for 2 weeks. Even seriously ill people had to leave.)

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[k2r]

Meanwhile the Polio-Reference had been deleted because it was "unencyclopedic".
The Polio-Reference was online from 01:28, 4 October 2006 until 06:41, 4 October 2006.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_A nton_Wilson&oldid=79370739

Your still a liar, the other one isn't, he's just not capable of citing Wikipedia correctly :-)

k2r

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

a group of people decide to form a "society" and then want
to involuntarily include people who might not want to be part of it.

The way I see it, you have three choices. One to the north, one to the south, or just swim for it. America doesn't allow you to disown your citizenship within it's borders.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[geoffspear]

If a man with a gun comes into my house and wants to take all of my possessions, I'd certainly want eeryone in my community to pay money to some other guys with guns with nice cars with flashing lights who might want to try to stop him. I may even wish they'd hired enough of these guys with guns to provide a deterrant so the bad guys with guns would think twice before breaking into people's houses.

But why would my neighbors, who haven't been threatened by anyone with guns, want to be required to pay for these people? What if they've got guns of their own, and are reasonably confident that no one's going to try to take away their possessions? Why should my misfortune fall upon their shoulders?

Are you certain that society is a better place because we have armies and police forces to keep us away from total chaos? Wouldn't it be rational to try chaos for a while first, to see for sure?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[@madeus]

To answers these questions seperately:

But... why should others want to do so or be required to do so?

Because someone else who is poor should still be given readily avalible treatment that will save or significantly extent their life, even if it means you someone else has to put with having slightly less money to spend on luxuries.

What if they have carefully laid up their own futures, and have no wish to receive any transfer payments at all?

Everyone (of sound mind) has the right to refuse treatment if they wish, no one is forced to be the receipient of treatment they have not paid for. This raises a valid point though - that of "but what about those who can, but simply don't bother to make provision for themselves" - and it's an issue other countries with state health services are keenly aware of.

That people often to not forsee the need to set money aside for medical treatment they may need in future is specifically why general taxation is usually used as a primary means of funding state healthcare systems. This something that has very strong public support in countries with state funded health systems, because people logically realize if everyone is not forced to, then a siginificant number of people would not [ because people don't think it will happen to them ] and so the system would break down, but if eveyone is obligated to join in, then everyone ultimately benifits (and it really does benifit virtually everyone - not just those with serious illnesses).

Are you certain that society is a better place as a result of implementing medical transfer payments?

I do not think "Medical transfer payments" are a good solution, but they are better than leaving people to go untreated, yes I am certain of that. Having a US healthcare system that is radically different is what's really needed.

I am absoutely certain that society is better off if sick people are given the medicine they need. Just because cannot afford treatment (because they are young, not very bright, not very well educated or a victim of unfortunate circumstances) does not mean they should be untreated when there are so many people with much more money than they need (which is where taxation comes in again).

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Minwee]

I hear that a "Vice President of the United States of America" position may be opening up soon. He sounds well qualified for that.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[rk]

"People can blow through fortunes (like 7 digit fortunes) in a matter of months if there are expensive procedures to be done."

My parents are a case in point. My dad worked hard his whole life for the same company for over 40 years, and retired from them with a tidy amount of money in his 401k.

Then my mom got West Nile which has caused her many problems. She's now basically blind, very physically weak, and had a whole host of other health problems that wiped out his retirement accounts. Their health plan only went so far, and they're a couple years too young for Medicare. So, my dad will now most likely be working for the rest of his life just to keep health insurance on him and my mom. He's still got a pension, but that's pretty much it.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Fact is, if your a "professional" then there is a good chance that you have pretty decent medical insurance.

Even if you are God Himself, your insurance will stipulate a "lifetime limit" of 1 to 2 million dollars of payout before they leave you to die. Heart bypass surgery is a stocking stuffer compared to spending several decades of your life half-paralyzed. Better double-check your policy there. Plus, when you're talking about being insured "as a professional" that almost certainly means you're talking about group health plans, and they only count as long as you're employed.

I was diagnosed with MS this summer, and I have no idea what will happen to me at the end of the year when the company's insurance contract renews. Will the insurance company try to force my boss to fire me? Will they quadruple the rates in an attempt to get my co-workers to make my life a living hell to get me to quit? Or will they just refuse to insure the entire company, leaving us all in the drink trying to find an insurer that will take us just long enough to get my condition ruled a pre-existing condition so that they don't have to deal with it?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[profplump]

The theoretical purpose of medical insurance is not ... protect you in case of a large number of bills

Check out the Insurance article on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance. The purpose of insurance is to provide protection against uncertain, accidental, infrequent, large losses. In the realm of health care, "a large number of medial bills" probably fits into that category.

Insurance companies may cover their expenses by pooling your risk with other customers, but that's just a question of their business practices, and is unrelated to the reason you buy health insurance -- to protect you against exceptional expenses relating to your health care. Routine medical treatment does not fall into that category.

The purpose of say, a Health Management Organization is to provide the sort of cost-sharing arrangement you describe. HMOs are design to cover both exceptional and routine medical treatment, but are specifically not insurance.

There are many people who want to pay into a cost-sharing system like and HMO and avoid paying directly for most of their health care. For people who use more than the average amount of health care this is a great plan (as long as they can dupe some below-average users into the same plan). But I can budget for my routine medical expenses, and insure myself against expenses outside of my bugdet, just like I do for my car and home. Adding this sort of nomenclature confusion to the mix does not help anyone.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude - you're harshing the parent's world view. He wants this guy to look like a layabout. That way, in his tiny little mind, he doesn't have the moral obliglation to help.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[eno2001]

And you've completely missed the point of even being alive. I'm glad you're happy fitting into your little cubby hole instead of exploring the vastness of the universe. The rest of us who've escaped would probably not benefit from interacting with your puny mind.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[buswolley]

I thought that the article read: The Illuminati Needs Our Help!

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, I stop thinking after words appear in a sentence.

Fear not, I've corrected your typos for you.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[rk]

In summary, The US healthcare system is very screwed... It's not really a free-market system nor a socialized system, but a behemoth that mixes the two together to give us the disadvantages of both, but the advantages of neither.

The law states that life-saving procedures must be performed without regard to the person's ability to pay, but that doesn't mean that the A/R department of the hospital can't try anyway, up to and including getting a judgment against you and garnisheeing income for the rest of your life.

With that said, there's a lot of charitable giving that helps out in this regard. I used to work for a non-profit hospital network that had a multimillion dollar fund to help pay for indigent healthcare. It never seems to be enough.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[MightyMait]

Lastly, he's lived in Brooklyn his whole life. Fine.

Actually, he's lived in Santa Cruz County, California for 15+ years. Dunno where you got the Brooklyn thing.

As for getting a job, he's practically an invalid at the moment.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[fistfullast33l]

I live in Brooklyn. It's not as cheap as it used to be. I think San Francisco is cheaper at this point.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing to bear in mind is that the laws of the United States are driven by lobbyists, not the people. The insurance companies have an incredibly strong lobbyist position and a vested interest in keeping their business model the way that it is.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Requiem Aristos]

Sir.

I find your suggestion to "work hard, live a fiscally responsible lifestyle, live below your means" to be about as helpful as Marie Antoinette's suggestion that the poor should "eat cake if they have no bread". I suspect you have no idea of the magnitude of health care costs.

I work hard, and live within my means. I'm fortunate enough to make more than a goodly percentage of the population while not similarly scaling up my expenses. Assuming all goes well, and my reasonable investments provide a reasonable rate of return, by the time I hit retirement age I will be reasonably well off.

Were I to fall ill, the price of care is such that I could easily face bankruptcy. This is without factoring cost increases, which are currently growing at increasing rates. So, if I'm screwed, and I'm making more, and being more responsible than most of the US; where does it leave them? For that matter, where does it leave you?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[photojunkie]

Well, not to be an ass - but you could step through a pile of starving babies while eating a Big Mac and not have a moral obligation to do anything other than try not to get any of it on your shoes... Morality being subjective as it is. Personaly I don't feel that the author of the parent needs to defend himself anymore, he's stated what he believes - had decent (if not perfect) research to back that statement up and has caught nothing but flak for it. Now if this were an argument over the viability of installing time traveling equiptment into a Delorian - then I'd say everyone fight it out. But this is a morality play - give it a rest.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[KDR_11k]

Arnold Schwarzenegger for governor, Terence Hill for president?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[HiThere]

It's not bullshit, but they are businesses with the morals of businesses. And they do drop people unless contractual obligations require that they not.

That said, authors don't have much of a guild. I'd be surprised if they had a group insurance plan. Bob Wilson was crippled with polio as a child, and though he was able to overcome it for years, he also was subject to recurrence (of muscular weakness, not of polio). If he's now both old and sick, he probably can't walk. I'd be surprised if he was insurable for this problem, as it's ... well, not congenital, but definitely pre-existing any possible insurance.

OTOH, a good health plan is contractually obligated to NOT drop you. Such exist. The good ones seem to do reasonably good jobs. (And hospitalization is STILL expensive.)

As for his savings...Bob's books may have sold well for a long period of time, but he was never at the top of the charts. He's never been wealthy, and often lived very near the edge. I'd be surprised if he had any savings. (I'm also fairly certain that the finances would have been managed by his wife, Arlen, who's been dead for years. Also a writer, "relatively successful" [i.e., she's been published in places that paid money, but I don't think enough to live on].)

Writers, painters, musicians...all of these can expect to end life as paupers...if they're lucky. There are exceptions, but that's what they should expect. If Bob was local I'd want to offer him a room and meals. I don't know if I'd be able to, but I'd want to. Unfortunately, he moved away decades ago, and I've lost track of him.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Knuckles]

It's gotta be said, you US people are being raped left, right, top, and bottom. My sincere sympathies.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

I understand discouraging people from replying to spam or supporting terrorism

Huh? I don't support terrorism: I didn't vote for Bush.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[nuzak]

> I'd rather send him a letter advising him on how to live a better life throw a steady income job.

You are a horrible person and a complete waste of oxygen. I really sincerely mean that.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Knuckles]

why should others want to do so or be required to do so

Very simple, because the less desperate people you have in a society, the better life is for everyone. The result of the US mentality of every-man-for-himself is that even the wealthy live like prisoners in their own communities with walls, fences and security guards.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[smellsofbikes]

I don't find it funny, I find it weird and sad. It's the opposite of altruism and it confuses me. I've dated two unbelievably smart (perfect SAT, one got her PhD at 23) women who were both libertarians and both felt actually *offended* and angry when someone did good deeds, especially if someone gave strangers gifts. Hell, didn't even have to be strangers: my grandmother willed something really expensive to me, my brother, my (then) girlfriend, and my brother's wife. My girlfriend loathed my sis-in-law and was furious that sis-in-law had gotten something for doing nothing, even though my girlfriend had also gotten something for doing nothing. It made her so mad she couldn't sleep, because she didn't think that my sis-in-law deserved it. I completely don't understand that -- how could you ever be upset at someone being nice to someone else? Both of my ex-gf's that thought this way kept saying "nobody ever gave ME anything" (which was, of course, completely false.) That's how they justified being angry when people gave stuff to someone else: if I didn't get free stuff, nobody else should, either. Neglecting the fact that they did, in fact, get lots of free stuff -- air, water, shelter, health, and most of all intelligence -- it shows a smallness of spirit, a meanness, to begrudge other people getting aid.

The woman I'm dating now, I'm dating mostly because she struck me as being a truly generous person when I first got to know her.

There's an interesting psych experiment about this. I can't remember the name. The general idea is: you walk up to two random strangers (don't know each other) and say "here's (a *lot* of money, like 1/4 annual salary) for the two of you. One of you gets to divide the money between you, and the other gets to say whether the deal goes through or not." What they found -- I'm remembering this from Science News from about five years ago -- is that in primitive societies whatever the first person chose, even if it's taking 80% and leaving 20% for the other person, the other person would accept, coz, hey, it's free money, right? But as the education and lifestyle of the people involved improved, the refusal number crept steadily towards 50-60%: people were turning down getting $5000 if that meant someone else got $15,000, because they felt it was unfair. That's like retributive anti-altruism, and apparently it's really widespread. Weird, huh?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Knuckles]

Or you could work hard, live a fiscally responsible lifestyle

You have no fucking idea what intensive medial care costs, liberterian fuckwit.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[scharwenka]

you could step through a pile of starving babies while eating a Big Mac and not have a moral obligation to do anything other than try not to get any of it on your shoes... Morality being subjective as it is.

Is it?
I can't believe that there is any sane human who could do what you describe and not have the feeling, at least upon reflection, that maybe he had behaved badly.
"Moral obligation," no... but I think we definitely share a set of instincts that form the foundation of what we call morality.
We may, based on our own rationalizations, decide not to help Mr. Wilson. However, I suspect that at least we would all agree on some level that there might be something not quite right about a dying man being kicked out onto the street.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't accuse him of anything

"No, sir, you are the one who is the liar."

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[soulhuntre]

"Check the history of the Wikipedia article. The section mentioning Wilson suffering from Polio was there, and then removed shortly thereafter"

THis is why Wikipedia is a useless point of reference for just about anything.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[photojunkie]

I could make the "survivial of the fittest" argument, but my heart wouldn't be in it - No, I don't feel that Mr. Wilson deserves to be in such a situation, nor really does anyone. I would like to see the money raised to at least put him in a comfortable way until his departure. All humans - regardless of their contributions to the culture - deserve the chance to die with a bit of dignity.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[QMO]

So, to summarize the point of insurance that most people miss/forget/ignore:

Having insurance should be more expensive than not having insurance, on average.

I'm willing to pay that difference for many things because insurance costs are more predictable than the costs of not having insurance.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Exactly. The problem is when a group of people decide to form a "society" and then want to involuntarily include people who might not want to be part of it.

This is called a government. It simply is not possible to remove the benefits brought to you by the government if you want to opt out of some of them. In the case of socialized medicine, if everyone else is paying for it, but you don't want to, how exactly are we to remove the benefits from you. Sure the hospitals can refuse treatment if they know who you are, but how exactly do you pay back the other benefits, like greatly decreased rates of violent crime that the rest of us are ponying up for? And what guarantee do we have that if your funds are insufficient you won't act out of desperation and contribute to the violent crime, at our expense? Nope, if you don't like it, you've got to vote to change it or move.

Or you could work hard, live a fiscally responsible lifestyle, live below your means - instead of living on credit card debt like so many people - and save money for a rainy day.

Your views are simplistic and misguided. I make more money than most and have the good fortune to be in a job that provides me with some health insurance. If I were to become seriously ill, like 99% of the population I would not have the means to get the medical care I needed. Of the 1% who do, most of them got that money through inheritance. Why should they have the money to live extravagantly because of their birth while I die in the gutter? There is no reason in particular, it is just part of how life is not fair. So I might feel completely justified in going to one of those wealth people's homes, and robbing them. Maybe I kill them in self defense during the robbery. Or maybe I'm too sick, but my brother who is well and has years of military training does it on my behalf. Or maybe, he just robs you and a bunch of other people as well.

Socialized medicine benefits all of us through generally increasing standards of living, demotivating desperation and crime, and promoting equality that partially redresses the circumstantial wealth from inheritance. Anyone who looks at the numbers sees the benefits very clearly. It is one of about 3 major contributing factors for the US's violent crime being so much higher than western Europe.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[dave562]

Such is the price people seem willing to pay in return for lower taxation and greater spending power at the checkout.

I think the bigger issue is that people are willing to work themselves into the ground and wear out their bodies and souls to the point where things like cancer can develop and spread. They are willing to turn a blind eye to the environmental hazards that contribute to cancer. They're willing to adopt the mentality that, "It won't happen to me." and then further the mentality with, "And even if it does, they can cure me with this super duper modern medicine stuff."

The saying goes that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Your average American isn't worried about preventing anything. They're too busy with work and school and the spouse and the kids to actually relax and take care of themselves.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[moonbender]

You don't take into account the vastly larger bargaining power an insurance company has. On your own your possibilities are limited, extremely so if you are alone and sick.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[KDR_11k]

There are many people who want to pay into a cost-sharing system like and HMO and avoid paying directly for most of their health care. For people who use more than the average amount of health care this is a great plan (as long as they can dupe some below-average users into the same plan). But I can budget for my routine medical expenses, and insure myself against expenses outside of my bugdet, just like I do for my car and home. Adding this sort of nomenclature confusion to the mix does not help anyone.

The problem is the basic egoist mindset of pretty much every person out there. Making these optional would not work as the healthy don't think they'll need it and the chronically sick will drain your funds quickly. The only real way to handle it is to force EVERYONE to pay their share. Guess it boils down to forcing people to help each other (socialist) or adopting a stance of "help yourself or die" (liberal). Obviously the people who need help prefer the former and the people who can help themselves (at least now, who knows if you get hit by a car tomorrow and spend the rest of your days in a wheelchair) prefer the latter.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

While the stated goal of pretty much any government program, or lack thereof, is to make people's lives better, we all enter into that with a lot of preconceptions and principals. Americans are predisposed towards independence and each person taking care of themselves. This is reflected in our lack of socialism and in our stance on drugs and firearms.

One quibble, isn't Americas stance on drugs the opposite of independence?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[t0rkm3]

Luck has very little to do with accomplishment.

There are lucky individuals, but life sucks in that way.

I'm not quite a millionaire (total assets worth ~750K) but I know more than a few. Most are first generation. They earned their money through dogged determination, a hard eye toward expenses, and consistently well thought out business practices.

On more than one occasion in athletic, intellectual, and artistic pursuits I have beaten down the more talented opposition with one word: persistence.

So take your sob story and shove it. We (My family) have been around the block a few times, more than once having everything taken away(via Cherokee v. US Govt imbroglios)and we have fought our way up. Don't denigrate me with your cynical pessimistic self-image.

As for the gentleman above. I think it's great that someone wants to help him out. By all means everyone that feels motivated to do so, should give as much as they feel compelled to give.

My uncle was partially debilitated as a part of treatment for mis-diagnosed schizophrenia. We (my extended family) all pitch in to help him and his children out as needed, and that is the essence of the American way as it began. Take responsibility for those immediately around you, because when you surrender that responsibility to the govt, you also relinquish that power.

You relinquish the power to build him a home that suits his personality quirks, because altering govt provided rentals is not an option.

You relinquish the power to find a doctor that suits his particular needs, because the govt appointed dr will just have to do.

I once won the lotto... I had a severe head injury that was operated on by a particularly talented neurosurgeon. He happened to have opened a practice in Tulsa, OK because he liked the town and the people. He did this despite admonitions, on the part of the major hospitals in the area, that he wouldn't have enough business in Tulsa to support himself and his team. Surely, under a govt program he would have been where he was more urgently needed, in denser population center... outside of my 45min survival window.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

One quibble, isn't Americas stance on drugs the opposite of independence?

Our prohibition of them is in opposition to independence (same as most of Europe), but our treatment of addiction as a personal, legal responsibility, rather than a medical problem is indicative of our bias towards personal responsibility.

I was referring to the latter, but you make a valid point with regard to the former.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[QMO]

I don't understand if you're misunderstanding "average" or if you're referring to HMOs (which are not entirely insurance, but that's another topic), or what.

But I can't help but assume that you misunderstood something, since any insurance company (health, auto, life, doesn't matter) that doesn't take in more premium than it pays indemnity, goes bankrupt.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[profplump]

The compromise between the two is *insurance*. You pay for you own basic medial expenses. If something catastophic happens, like getting hit by a car, you can use your insurance to cover the exceptional medical expenses. Then I don't have to depend on everyone pulling their weight, nor do I have to provide for those who don't.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[KDR_11k]

The problem is that insurance means a company that makes a profit and as such will avoid covering those in need as much as possible while pandering to the healthy. From what has been said in this discussion most insurances are unwilling to cover chronic illnesses. And that's what RAW is suffering from.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[profplump]

Which is why you only want to insure against exceptional risks -- i.e. getting hit by a car -- and not against all risk -- i.e. routine medical exams.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[doom]

fistfullast33l wrote:

I live in Brooklyn. It's not as cheap as it used to be. I think San Francisco is cheaper at this point.

You know, sometimes it seems like folks like myself with hipster-intellectual pretensions ought to be demanding a kick-back from the real estate industry. If they want our help making neighborhoods fashionable enough for the yups to move into, we really deserve something for it.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[profplump]

Of course they won't cover chronic illnesses after you discover them. It's not a risk once you know about it, it's just a liability.

Failing to have approriate insurance before you discover your chronic illness is unfortunate, but hardly the fault of the insurer.

If you wanted to do something about not allowing insurers to fail to renew policies because someone is making continuing claims then I might agree, though the circumstances in which this is currently legal are already limited.

It's also quite possible to get a policy that pays $X upon discovery of your chronic illness Y, so that the risk of being dropped from coverage no longer exists, as the payout is up-front. Such policies are not entirely common, but they can be obtained.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Appearantly apologizing will do nothing for you on Slashdot ... you've lost a lot of respect from me, eln.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[moonbender]

I'm referring to HMOs, I understand the difference, whatever, it's nitpicking, I think health insurance is fairly well understood to refer to HMOs, too. It doesn't matter, though. The point is not that people pay less premium than indemnity, it's that the total indemnity paid by the insurance is not equal to the total "indemnity" paid if all members were not insured. (Accordingly the average cost per person in the insurance is lower, too.) The insurance has to pay a lower total because it concentrates the bargaining power of all the insured individuals.

An example: Of 1000 people 100 need heart surgery, nobody is insured, everyone is at the mercy of the hospital and gets a rate of $10000 per surgery, average cost is $1000. Now everyone is insured, and the insurance company forces the hospital to lower the rate per surgery to $5000, average cost is now $500. Of course the insurance premium would be something like $750, so that the insurance co still makes a lot of money.

Obviously, whether the average cost and accordingly the premium really is lower than the single bargaining average cost depends on how good a deal an insurance can get (maybe I'm overestimating it) and how large a profit the company wants to make.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Article: "I refuse for the history books to say he died alone and destitute"

Don't worry, Article Writer:

Wikipedia: "Robert A. Wilson is currently under hospice care at home with friends and family."

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[KDR_11k]

Problem with chronic illnesses is they can cost a lot, even millions (of course over lifetime), to treat constantly. Others mentioned insurances having a lifetime limit of a few million $ in their contracts that a chronically ill person can easily hit. Up-front payments won't cover them forever, either. At the rate you need to throw money at some of them the payout would have to be bigger than the lottery jackpot to last until your death.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

He shouldn't have thrown his money away on hookers and coke.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[langarto]

Commenting just to fix a wrong moderation. It's too easy to moderate with this new system :(

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[profplump]

There's a limit to how many people can receive millions of dollars in medical treatments under any sort of cost-sharing or insurance plan, even if there is 100% participation and 100% cost-sharing. And so long as there aren't very many people who need such treatments, the cost of insurance with adequately high payouts should still be reasonable, as cost by frequency product would still be low.

Perhaps I misunderstand, but it seems that you're presuming that somehow a total-health cost-sharing system would provide a higher efficiency (in terms of premium costs vs. benefits received) than an insurance program. I don't see any reason to believe this would be true, and in fact, I can name a couple why it wouldn't -- higher administrative costs to process more claims and lower disincentive for frivolous healthcare services.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

uuh. sarcasm, dude. you do know what 'supremely qualified' means in this case, right?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[h4rm0ny]

I work in the NHS currently, in Primary Care. It is a fine institution with a lot of hard working people in it. And yes, I too would far rather be ill here than in the USA. But it is very much under assault at the moment. The current government is doing everything it can get away with to privatise British health care and in some instances, we see the involvement of the same big players in the US market. I could talk at length about the tricks that are being pulled to force us down the privatisation route, but suffice to say that it is a concerted and determined and underhanded policy coming right from the top. If you've benefited from the NHS in the past, then you should do what you can to try and hang on to it. A good start would be to write to your MP to complain about the billions that are being funneled to US companies under the guise of the new "Choose and Book" IT system, which is part of the larger "Connecting for Health" program - code name: Gravy Train. Google is your friend.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Do you still buy gasoline? The really wierd thing in the GWOT is if it wasn't for our overreliance on energy from the middle east, we'd probably be ignored as far as the Shi'ite-Sunni civil war is concerned.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[DavidTC]

Or you could work hard, live a fiscally responsible lifestyle, live below your means - instead of living on credit card debt like so many people - and save money for a rainy day.

I was going to be polite, but as the other posts addressed your stupidity in polite terms as well I ever could, I have decided to be rude. There are three options here:

1) You're a fucking moron who has absolutely no idea how much medical costs are. In which case, here's hoping you need some obscure procedure to live that your insurance doesn't cover so you can stare at your $3000 after-taxes paycheck, your $5000 bank balance, your $20,000 retirement account, and do the math in your head for a $100,000 hospital bill.

2) You're a deluded idiot that thinks that people somehow have control over their medical expenses, who thinks they or a loved one could never get cancer or some other long-term disease that will not only wipe out their finances, but cause them to lost their insurrance when they can no longer keep their job. In which case, here's hoping you get cancer, and recover, and then have to live with half a million dollars worth of medical bills and no job.

3) You are the 1% of the rich I was talking about, and are additionally worthless scum. In which case, here's hoping you get hit by a truck. And get dragged under it a hundred feet.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Can anyone explain how your country works in this regard?

Not really, but I'll try. Insurance companies, like any other business, survive only if they are profitable; that is, only if premiums taken in are greater than costs going out. To that end- the cheaper your insurance is the less it covers and the sooner you hit such nasty little contract surprises as "maximum lifetime payment".

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[CRB2500]

In 2001 it was 50%. It will get higher as the population becomes older and suffers from more chronic illnesses.

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankrup tcy_study.html

Single payer is a step in the right direction.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[sacanas]

How hard did you work on making an utter ass of yourself? Did anyone bother looking at his homepage instead of a blog entry? If so, you'd find this at the bottom:

RAW Bedside Update October 4, 2006 Donations have poured in since friends of Bob Wilson got the word out that he could use some help with steep healthcare costs (Donation link above). Thank you so much for your generosity! Bob requires 24 hour care and this kindly swarm of donations has enabled Bob to receive the care he (and everyone!) deserves. Bob is not one for the begging bowl. He would rather that fans wishing to help out simply buy his wares. But his friends, understanding the potential financial strain of Bob's needs, set up the Friends of Robert Anton Wilson relief fund, and your response has been astounding. Bob "is" presently cheerful, without pain and ceaselessly optimistic. Here's a quick history of Robert Anton Wilson's scenario. Bob has post-polio syndrome which has severely damaged his legs and weakened his body. He had a hard fall in June of this year which landed him in the hospital. He has since not been able to walk and is thus confined to his bed (overlooking beautiful Monterey Bay fnord), requiring 24 hour care. Due to Bob's acute weakness in June and July, many of his family and friends felt that Bob could go at any time. He has since rallied slowly with up's and down's, and like most things, his condition seems in the maybe state. Bob has no pain, has a hearty appetite, is in steady good, sharp humor, is surrounded by family and friends, and feels he shows signs of slow recovery. Praise Bob! All hail Eris!

http://www.rawilson.com/main.shtml

You haven't read his books and you think he lives in Brooklyn. All I read from your post is pure crap. In fact, it's like a contest amongst the people here to be as abrasive and cynical as possible. You failed. I love how you go off on misconceptions and false information. It's a pity this subject ever got on this site. I can only hope he can manage to laugh at it.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[eln]

I only saw the original apology, which seemed fairly backhanded to me. Apparently the original poster has apologized more fully, and I apologize for not taking that into account.

As for losing respect, I wasn't aware anyone had any respect for me around here anyway, so that's sort of a pleasant surprise.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[jcr]

Emily Dickinson is far more enjoyable once you realize that you can sing any of her poems to the tune of the Yellow Rose of Texas.

This is a particularly effective way to irritate high-school English teachers.

-jcr

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Chibi Merrow]

Actually the person two levels up who said no one in the US understands how it works still got some things wrong... For one, a medical deductible applies for an entire year, not on a per-procedure basis. For two, things are not as unaffordable in the US as people would like you to believe. The average person with average medical needs will still pay a significantly smaller percentage of their income for medical expenses than the average individual in the UK will pay in taxes to pay for NHS. Also, you generally have a pretty decent turn-around time on seeing doctors on non-life-threatening procedures (whereas I've known people to wait 30+ days for "blinding eye pain" in the UK or over a year to see someone for a spinal injury in the Canadian system); I've never had to wait longer than three days to see someone and even three days was an extreme case--normally I can get into an office the same day or the next morning when I'm ill.

In the case of childrens problems (like the earlier mentioned epilepsy surgery), there are dozens of hospitals all over the country that specialize in doing free work to treat children. Often these places are also some of the best (if not THE best) facilities to deal with whatever problem they're treating (Shriners for burns, St. Jude's for cancer, etc.) and they specifically look for cases where the family can't afford the treatment.

And then there's the fact that people who take very good care of themselves or are just born with good genes and never get sick aren't forced at gunpoint to pay for everyone else. (Well, they are to an extent, we all pay for the Medicare system, which wasn't gutted and has actually expanded significantly in the past eight years, unfortunately...)

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[TomRitchford]

You're just a truly horrible person.

Let us hope your turn is next and that you die sick, miserable and alone.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[gcatullus]

I work in a home heating oil company, and we routinely get customers who file bankruptcies.

As a creditor you get all sorts of forms that list what the debtor owes, whom they owe it to, their income, their assests, etc. I can attest to the fact that for at least 1/2 the bankruptcies I see, their are medical bills involved. But the medical bills aren't the largest debt, it is usually to credit card companies. Also, it should be noted that if anyone is considering bankruptcy, then it might be worth their while to spend on a lot of things that can't be repossesed, such as utilities, dental work, etc. This could inflate the medical "costs" forgiven in bankruptcies.

Now, maybe the high credit card bills that I see are because the debtors had to use them to pay for medical procedures, but if the medical expenses were the sole cause of the bankruptcy, then you would assume that most of the debtors OTHER bills would have been paid.

Possibly a medical problem led the debtor to be out of work and lose income, but If that's the case, I don't know if you can say that "medical expenses" ruined them.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[KDR_11k]

No, I don't expect lower premiums from it but I expect better coverage since they'd be required to cover everyone. There has to be some reason people don't end up paying as much if they are hospitalized in countries with complete cost sharing.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[somersault]

Maybe we do pay more in taxes over here, but then cases like this author's wouldn't exist, ne? It's a lot better helping everyone out than just helping out celebrities who have fallen on hard times. America seems to be very scared of heading towards 'communist' type ideas, even when the ideals behind those ideas aren't actually bad. National healthcare is a good idea. Yes, there are rather long waiting times here, and that's not good. Maybe that will never improve, maybe it will. If people want to pay for their healthcare they can go to private organisations here too, but if they can't afford it, as this Author can't, then they can still get some help. When it comes to treatment the NHS may have long waiting lists, but when it comes to prescribed medication they're quite organised and effective.

Anyway, if you ever did get seriously ill, I'm sure you'd change your perspective on how your system is so much better because everyone has the right to be selfish.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[QMO]

True.
IMO, people misunderstanding that principle is one of the two biggest reasons for rising health costs.

The other is that the patient isn't the customer. The insurer (or HMO) is. I agree that, as things are now, large insurance companies can negotiate volume pricing on procedures, which are better than non-affiliated prices. the problem is that, as in any other economic system, prices are very dependent on what the customer can pay. So, since the customer (the insurance company or HMO) has very DEEP pockets, the prices are constantly getting adjusted upward as fast as people can get used to them.

Think about it. How many non-insured people will ever pay a million dollars for a treatment. Very few, because they can't. And since there are lots of people with insurance that CAN pay high prices for things, there is very little incentive to find cheaper ways of doing things. Finding a cheaper way to do a million-dollar cure does not get enough new customers to make the lower price worthwhile.

Please note: This is kind of rough thinking, and I don't have any real data to back it up, so think about it, but don't be too quick to believe it.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[eam]

doom wrote:
> You know, sometimes it seems like folks like myself with hipster-intellectual
> pretensions ought to be demanding a kick-back from the real estate industry. If
> they want our help making neighborhoods fashionable enough for the yups to move
> into, we really deserve something for it.

Easy. When you move into some broken down neighborhood slum, buy some land. When the neighborhood becomes fashionable enough for the yups to move in, sell the land for massive profit. There's your kick-back.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[doom]

Easy. When you move into some broken down neighborhood slum, buy some land. When the neighborhood becomes fashionable enough for the yups to move in, sell the land for massive profit. There's your kick-back.

Yes, the thought's occurred to me (and to some other folks).

One of the reason's that San Francisco's Chinatown remains Chinatown is that a lot of the land is owned by neighborhood associations...

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[PCM2]

insurance companies either require deductables on the order of thousands of dollars per procedure (where every tiny thing is it's own procedure) or they simply don't cover very much.

I think the second part here is more correct. Deductibles typically cover the entire year, not every procedure. If you have a $5,000 deductible and you amass $100,000 in medical bills, you will have to pay the $5,000, but you won't owe any more on that for the rest of the year.

Like you say, though, insurance companies typically don't pay all that much. They have set amounts that they have unilaterally decided each procedure is "worth." So your doctor might bill you $500 for a CT scan and the insurance company says, "No, sorry, we only pay $350 for a CT scan." My mom worked for many years in an office that did medical billing, and she explained to me that a doctor never, ever sees the full amount of any procedure billed to an insurance company. (This, incidentally, is why doctors and dentists of all stripes are desperate to get into cosmetic procedures -- insurance doesn't cover these, so the patient pays out of pocket, the full amount.)

For small procedures on an individual basis, doctors often "eat" the difference. You can see it on your medical bills when they show up: CT Scan, $500, Insurance contribution, $350, Balance remaining, $150, patient owes $0. But when your medical bills for multiple procedures start to add up -- especially if you spent any time in a hospital -- the institution kicks in and goes after you. In many cases they will have no qualms about sueing you for the balance, especially if the unpaid amount is adding up into the thousands or tens of thousands of dollars. As you point out, even hundreds of thousands of dollars isn't out of the question -- one nasty car accident might cost that much to the uninsured. It's a real shame, but the hospitals have a fair point -- what's a private medical group supposed to do when nobody's paying their bills?

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Chibi Merrow]

There's nothing selfish about keeping the money I earn. Just as there's nothing charitable about paying for other people's health care when you're forced at gunpoint.

Yes this author can't take care of his own expenses. But look what's happening, CHARITY is picking up the slack. There are places to help those that honestly can't help themselves, the government doesn't have to force anyone to do it.

I'm confused by your offering the example of prescribed medications as being "organized". I fail to see what the American system, wherein I take my Prescription to a Pharmacist and get it filled, is lacking.

And I have been seriously ill in the past, as have several of my family members. And in no case did it ever make me feel I was entitled to your paycheck. Why does being ill mean you can take someone else's stuff? Let people donate what they want, don't take it from them by force.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[somersault]

I know that nobody is being 'forced' in that system, but I still think it's more sensible than only those better off (who are more noticeable) benefitting. The government should look after all it's citizens, not just those with money. I'm saying the prescribed medications are organised, because they're readily available, and also only £5.60 no matter what type or amount of medication you're getting, for example your doctor could prescribe enough medication for 1 month or 6 months and it would still only cost £5.60, which was very handy when I was a student.

I know that being ill doesn't automatically entitle you to take money from others, but relying on donations isn't very efficient. Since I started thinking more about healthcare and government services from this Slashdot Plea (TM), I've improved my view on taxation somewhat (though fuel tax is still far too high, and I'm not sure if it's even going towards things like healthcare, or held in the transport sector..)

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[Anonymous Coward]

I do, but I put it in a 10 year old car that gets 40MPG and bike to work 3 days out of 5 throughout the year (15 miles/rt). Unfortunately, unless you want to live apart from "normal" society, at some point you will be using petrochemicals in one way or another. Pretty much everything you buy needs them in the manufacturing or delivery of them. I don't want to have to hunt for my food, so I do go to the grocery store. Buy a bike, stop buying new cars every three years (lots of energy went into their production), live close to where you work (if you can afford it), spit at people driving SUVs and other gas guzzlers.

Re:I Don't Know, Man

[yusing]

"Writers, painters, musicians...all of these can expect to end life as paupers...if they're lucky. There are exceptions, but that's what they should expect."

Very, very sad, but true. Thanks for spelling it out.

It takes courage to devote a significant part of one's life and energies to the arts. Lots of well-known creative people ... Wallace Stevens, WC Williams, Herman Melville come to mind ... had to do what they did in their spare time. That works for the geniuses, but not for those who need more time to create... and most of what they create is done 'on speculation', with no guarantee of any reward for their efforts. Arts contributors recognize that, but there aren't very many of them.

Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[gentimjs]

Cue all the anarcho-capitalists about how people "deserve" poverty for some reason if they have difficulty performing economically, and how they are "sure" he could work at mcdonalds or something...

/me rolls his eyes

How about some of us who havent read his books consider buying a copy?

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Tx]

How about some of us who havent read his books consider buying a copy?

Why should I? Fair play, if I come across one of the guys books, and it looks like something I want to read, then I'll buy it. But the tone of your statement above makes it sound like we owe the guy a favour, and I don't see why that should be the case.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Anonymous Coward]

Cos if you buy a copy of one of his books, he'll only get the measley 5% from the publisher

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

If people aren't buying his books, it's probably for a good reason. Just because someone is sick, doesn't mean you should just give them money. If you want to, that's one thing. I know that when someone begs me for money (like this 'news' story does) I'm motivated to not give them anything.

And if you go around writing books that 5 people want to read, and think that'll keep you fat and happy for the rest of your life, you do deserve what you get. I'd much rather write books or paint than work at a hospital, but the crap I create is garbage that nobody but me likes. So, I have a job and insurance, because I don't want to be like this guy.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[gnork]

You obviously haven't read one of his books... judging from the tone of your post you never will. That's probably for your own good, as you wouldn't grasp them anyway (Yeah, I am soooo 133337 because i read his books). And you know sh*t about him... seems to entitle you at least for some cynicism. I hope you will have the same fate when you grow old. I had a lot of fun while reading his books and will help him out.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[AcidLacedPenguiN]

yeah and probably like 5 years later too. . .

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Oligonicella]

There are no fictional books that are 'required' reading, despite the plaints of those who have read them and think others that choose not to "wouldn't grasp them anyway". Pompous, and probably wrong.

I write, but I do not expect that to float me unto death. I work as a backup to what I enjoy.

He appears to have sold books. That puts him way the hell ahead of most writers.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Anonymous Coward]

So, I have a job and insurance

He was paralyzed by polio. Try keeping your job and your insurance when you can't even move. I know we have the medical leave act, but I think "I need medical leave for the rest of my life" doesn't count. Even if he had insurance on his own, they'd have almost certainly raised his premium until he was forced to drop it, and if not, he probably hit that 1-2 million dollar lifetime maximum pretty quick by the time he got to 74. Too bad his family isn't rich, the Republicans would be all over it, as long as they weren't the ones that'd have to pay to keep him alive.

It's interesting though. I got a letter from social security telling me that if I became completely disabled today, I'd receive a whopping $160 a month to live off of. The drugs that keep MS from eating my brain cost roughly $20000 a year, and are fortunately covered by my insurance. It certainly would have been a pleasant surprise to discover that the Republicans were actually serious about this "compassionate conservative" thing, but I think it's pretty clear now that they're just full of bullshit.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[gnork]

Never said that there is such a thing as "required read". And for the pompous attitude, I already stated that I am leeeet because I read his books.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Anonymous Coward]

Cue the conformists to drag out that tired old drivel about how the most peaceful individuals in the world (i.e. the anarcho-capitalists you refer to) have no heart, or generosity, or compassion for others -- ironically just as freedom reaches out to help this person in need, proving that coercion has no place in solving this problem.

Just what did you think this article on slashdot was about, using the coercive power of government to solve his problem? As far as I can tell, it's a call for voluntary support -- which is the fundamental prerequisite of any capitalist transaction.

(I think I see what's going on here -- you must be one of those people who thinks that what we have in the US is capitalism. Not in the slightest, grasshopper. Capitalism requires voluntary association, and that requires strictly limited or no government, which obviously we're light years beyond today.)

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[gentimjs]

So your choice of what car you purchased or what fast food joint you ate at last was compulsary forced on you personally, at gunpoint, by Mike Dukakis and his tank I suppose then?

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[alexgieg]

In a perfect free-market society, the remedies one needs would cost less, because they wouldn't be patented, being thus manufactured by lots of companies. All goods, including houses and terrains, would cost less, because there would be far less taxes on them, and there would be no additional annual taxes either. Houses would cost way less to build, because the company who makes them would be able to contract extremely cheap labour to build them (persons who would love to receive these low wages, because this is more than the perfect nothing they now receive). Environmental laws, by not existing, would mean the technology used to build the houses, from materials to transportation, would cost less too. And there wouldn't be any laws making more difficult for new house-building companies to enter the market.

As a result, there would be a lot more houses available, driving their prices even further down. And as a secondary result, the monthly house-renting prices would be a lot lower too. All those people who can't currently afford renting a house would afford them, including the cheap-laborers mentioned above.

And this includes Mr. Wilson.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Anonymous Coward]

The average American pays upwards of 40-50% of his yearly earnings to government though federal, state, and local taxes and fees combined. This represents the public sector, i.e. the coercive sector, of one's paycheck. (The part which the individual has no free choice in how to spend.) What's left over represents the private sector, i.e. the voluntary sector, of one's paycheck. (The part which the individual does have free choice in how to spend.)

Let's review the simple business model of government: (1) you take money from some people, by threat of force, (2) you distribute some of it to other people, (3) you keep a cut for yourself. Now, of course nobody is employing immediate coercion against me to get me to eat at McDonalds, but on the other hand, government is most certainly employing coercion against me to fund their corporatist schemes. (What we have in the US is called corporatism, not capitalism, I hope you realize. Capitalism requires the seperation of business and state -- the exact opposite of what we have.) McDonalds, and indeed any large corporation, benefits from having government entangled in the market, necessarily at the expense of small business and everyone else who doesn't agree to it. That includes me. Why do you think large corporations are constantly pushing for more regulation over the market? Because they know that it will burden small business -- the potential competitor -- much more than it will burden the established corporate giants.

You didn't think government was stupid enough to admit, or better yet, advertise that coercion is in fact its core tool and fundamental prerequisite, did you? Wake up, my friend. Wake up.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Anonymous Coward]

And in a perfect communist society everything you need would be free.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[mmkkbb]

And as a secondary effect, the lack of environmental protections and labor protections would result in a wasteland controlled by those with the cash, with the bonus that the only power available to those without money is labor. No thanks.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[vertigo]

Hello,

>So, I have a job and insurance, because I don't want to be like this guy.

Trust me, there's no risk you'll ever be like that guy.

Hail Eris!

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[gentimjs]

Actually all of that is nonsense. In your so-called "free" market, the costs would be exponentially high as we have seen with attempts at free-market systems where the wealth continually travels upwards to the most greedy who find ways to exploit excesses of labour (cheap or otherwise) and charge "whatever the market will bear" for the product... thus, for things that people actually need like homes and food, the maximum possible will be charged, and NOT a fair price. And before you try and claim that scores of oppressive taxes or something cause the prices to artificially go up, for markets like pharmesuticals there are more grants and government subsidies then there are taxes, and the prices are STILL way too high.

Now, if on the other hand you are advocating a survivalist-economy ala little house on the prarie, then you are correct about your assertations on price. However, enjoy living without electricity and without paved roads.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[zzyzx]

Of course, RAW was one of those anarcho-capitalists and 20 years ago probably would have mocked the idea of helping someone else like that. I love his work, but no longer buy the philosophy behind a lot of it.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Mr. Slippery]

How about some of us who havent read his books consider buying a copy?

Buying books is fine, but by the time he gets the tiny royalty from that he'll be dead. And the tiny royalty from a book purchase doesnt't reflect the value received from reading a mind-altering work like Cosmic Trigger.

So send money now. Buy books later.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Anonymous Coward]

Historyless, researchless, pretentious. Yeah, that's you I'm talking about. The stuff he's written is some of the most read SF there is; I grew up in a small farm community in Norway, and even THERE the local library had the Illuminati Trilogy. It is considered a major classic. You not knowing about it says things about you: That you're culturally iliterate, and that you didn't even bother to do minor research before spewing crap. You should be prouder of yourself than to do such.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Mr. Slippery]

If people aren't buying his books, it's probably for a good reason.

Plenty of people have bought his books over the years. Wilson is a well-known author and speaker:

Robert Anton Wilson is the coauthor, with Robert Shea, of the underground classic The Illuminatus! Trilogy , which won the 1986 Prometheus Hall of Fame Award. His other writings include Schrodinger's Cat Trilogy, called "the most scientific of all science fiction novels," by New Scientist, and several nonfiction works of Futurist psychology and guerilla ontology, such as Prometheus Rising and The New Inquisition. Wilson, who sees himself as a Futurist, author, and stand-up comic, regularly gives seminars at Eslan and other New Age centers. Wilson has made both a comedy record (Secrets of Power) and a punk rock record (The Chocolate Biscuit Conspiracy), and his play Wilhelm Reich in Hell was performed at the Edmund Burke Theatre in Dublin, Ireland. His novel Illuminatus! was adapted as a 10-hour science fiction rock epic and performed under the patronage of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II at Great Britain's National Theatre, where Wilson appeared briefly on stage in a special cameo role. Robert Anton Wilson is also a former editor at Playboy magazine.

If you don't know, or don't like, his work, fine. That's your problem. Go read some other story. But his work is well known among the /. demographic, and some people may want to take action.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Anonymous Coward]

First off, they're asking for a little extra consideration as to purchasing his goods. They're asking you to go to Amazon or your local book shop, then buying a copy if you want to. It's the same as any other time that you go shopping for books, they're just asking you to consider that book in the corner that you might not have before.

It's the power of personal choice at work. You can choose to help the guy, or choose not to. I thought you guys only had fits like this when "The Gooberment" *makes* you?

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[somersault]

Yeah, because all the government does is for profit, there's no other reason for it to exist than to line the pockets of politicians. I'm not saying they aren't greedy, but your argument is a little one sided and pointless o_0 maybe you need to wake up? It's nice slagging off politicians, because they mostly seem to be a bunch of narcissistic twats but *shrug*

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[DavidTC]

You don't even know who RAW is, aren't you?

Okay, here goes: RAW writes books that do, indeed, sell. I own four of them. The Illumninatus! trilogy is the second book on the bibliography of the Hacker's Jargon file. His Schrödinger's Cat trilogy has been called the first quantum sci-fi novel.

His books referenced Buckminister Fuller, Timothy Leary, James Joyce, Aleister Crowley, and Alfred Korzybski, either as geiuses or complete lunatics depending on different character's moods. He's one of the most psychologically aware sci-fi writers, often describing people's 'programming' and 'reality tunnels'.

Frankly, if you don't know who RAW is, I have to question what the hell you're doing posting on slashdot.

So, considering he was a successful writer, or at least as successful as they come, and they won't sell you private insurance if you have post-polio, what exactly should he have done to pay his medical bills?

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[DavidTC]

Yeah! Luckily, only well-known writer need help in paying their medical bills. There can't possibly be anyone out there in the same situtation who can't appeal to slashdot because he spent his live paving roads that hundreds of thousands of people use every day.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[DavidTC]

Um...no he wasn't. Hagbard Celine was, arguably, an anarcho-capitalists, but there were other characters in the books, and plenty of them had different viewpoints. In fact, that was specifically commented on at the start of the very first book, by the left-wing character who started the story by being broken out of prison.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[somersault]

and because there is no tax, there is also no Police service, so anyone with a gun can kill you and take your house with no fear of any repercussions. And thanks to the lack of organised roads, education, electricity, gas, water, sewage systems etc, everyone gets to be Amish! Yay.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[arthurpaliden]

Why should I buy it. Information needs to be free, I will just get a scan of my friends copy the same as I do my music. After all like a musicsion he can make money by personal apperences.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Anonymous Coward]

Why haven't you ever sent me a thank you letter, for paying for your MS drugs for you?

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a reason why the US government of today dwarfs the US government of only 50 years ago, let alone 100 years ago, both in revenue and power over the people.

There's a reason why no government in the history of organized coercion has ever significantly and permanently reduced its powers through the democratic process.

There's a reason why the US government has been at war with somebody, somewhere in the world, for every single year of the past 100 years.

There's a reason why every year, there are thousands more laws on the books than the year before.

Ultimately, history proves that all governments expand in power throughout their lifetimes, and that the power elite will focus their efforts on that expansion of power above all else. There's a reason for that.

I'm going to let you guess the reason for all this. Hint: It doesn't take any more than common sense to decipher this mystery.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Anonymous Coward]

I assume you're advocating the use of coercion (government) to solve this problem. Are you aware that the US government now takes almost 50% of the average American's yearly earnings through federal, state, and local taxes and fees combined? The US government is a trillion dollar business -- the richest, most powerful government that has ever existed in the history of organized coercion.

If the most powerful government the world has ever seen can't eliminate poverty and crime, why do you continue to worship this religion they call democracy?

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[Knuckles]

Not flamebait at all, stupid mods! It is exactly what happened.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[alexgieg]

When there is demand, the offer appears.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[mrbooze]

In a perfect free-market society, the remedies one needs would cost less, because they wouldn't be patented, being thus manufactured by lots of companies.

Except that it costs millions if not billions to research and bring a drug to market, so nobody would do it because as soon as they spent all that, a dozen other companies start duplicating their work for a minute manufacturing cost eliminating any possibility of ever recouping the investment.

Now, if somehow drug research costs drop to near-zero, perhaps because there is no legal requirement for safety testing, every few years another thalidomide hits the market. When we're lucky, it's a drug that shows its terrible effects right away. For the drugs that take years for the effects to develop, society is potentially crippled decades later. Of course, since there's no laws about honesty in advertising, the companies making said drugs can just keep denying it. Every citizen is required to be an expert in pharmacology to interpret for themselves the volumes of contradictory data, some coming from real scientists (presuming they exist) and other false data being released by the drug companies to deny any blame. Not to mention all the competing companies releasing false research about competitor's drugs.

We may or may not be able to get this information reliably across the country though, because since there is no regulation of broadcasting, whoever can build the most powerful transmitter owns the airwaves.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[rolandzebub]

All 5 people, huh? You might want to look at the number of posts on this thread again, you self-righteous fool. I hope you are a janitor at that hospital, because you have the bedside manners of a fucking Republican. Now do the world a favor and go kill yourself.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[alexgieg]

Three questions:

a) Name these examples, please.

b) Define "fair price".

c) If the prices asked are so incredible high, please explain me how the exploiter will avoid nine other companies opening in the same area to provide the same service looking for their share of the cake.

In regards to "c", please note that answering "they'll form a cartel" doesn' work. The first company will still have to bear the burden of seeing his profits drop tenfold, since there are a total of 10 businesses now sharing the same amount of customers. And there's also the problem of those other 300 companies opening due to that enormously giant revenue they see there...

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[alexgieg]

Wrong. You'd have way more power than that. Who would prevent you from purchasing a gun, for example?

The more widespread weapons are, the less violence there is. You don't act dumb when 20 people around you can shot you dead before you're able to say "Shit!". Businessmen that acted unfairly would have a lot to be afraid from, don't worry about that.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[alexgieg]

Well, there's not much to buy anyway, or to sell, when all humans are dead.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[reanjr]

I think the vast majority of the world would pride themselves on being culturally illiterate in regards to sci-fi.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[jkauzlar]

I've read Illuminatus, and I've only read about 10 sci-fi books in my life. Someone I know just mentioned the book not too long ago at a breakfast party, so he must have had a pretty good impact on culture. I'd really recommend taking a look through it next time you're at the bookstore. It's definitely not for everybody, but taking that into consideration, it's a very remarkable book. It came out in the mid-70's I think, and has a cyberpunk feel.

Also, the band 'Love' from the mid-60's was one of the most popular at the time and an all-time critical favorite. They released Forever Changes ni 1967, which anybody who likes 60's psychedelia should own. They were Jim Morrison's favorite band. Anyway, Arthur Lee, the man behind the music and lead singer just passed away because he was too poor to afford adequate surgery. There was a benefit concert for him, but it was too late.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[alexgieg]

Except that it costs millions if not billions to research and bring a drug to market, so nobody would do it because as soon as they spent all that, a dozen other companies start duplicating their work for a minute manufacturing cost eliminating any possibility of ever recouping the investment.

When there's demand, the offer appears. And there surely is a demand for new drugs. Don't worry about that, research would still be made and new drugs developed.

Now, if somehow drug research costs drop to near-zero, perhaps because there is no legal requirement for safety testing, every few years another thalidomide hits the market. When we're lucky, it's a drug that shows its terrible effects right away. For the drugs that take years for the effects to develop, society is potentially crippled decades later. Of course, since there's no laws about honesty in advertising, the companies making said drugs can just keep denying it. Every citizen is required to be an expert in pharmacology to interpret for themselves the volumes of contradictory data, some coming from real scientists (presuming they exist) and other false data being released by the drug companies to deny any blame. Not to mention all the competing companies releasing false research about competitor's drugs.

You describe a situation where there's a demand for pharmacological experts. So there will arise an offer of pharmacological experts. This leads to a demand for a system of identifying the better and dismissing the worst experts. Have you already seen magazines of product and service reviews? That's how this is solved: people would have a lot of interest in buying these magazines. And how to discriminate between good and bad magazines? Because the good ones wouldn't want to lose their reputation by allowing bad reviews to pass through, thus losing their readers.

We may or may not be able to get this information reliably across the country though, because since there is no regulation of broadcasting, whoever can build the most powerful transmitter owns the airwaves.

There's already technology that allows multiple signals to share the same frequency. And even it there wasn't, this situation would promptly create a demand for such a solution. When there's demand...

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[mmkkbb]

No, they'd have a hired army. You're advocating a return to feudalism.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[DavidTC]

The most powerful government in the world hasn't ended poverty or crime or, in fact, what I was actually talking about, provided health care.

However, it's fairly obvious that, at least, it's simply not trying with reducing poverty and providing healthcare, because other countries seem to manage those just fine. (And, of course, lower poverty and you pretty mcuh automatically lower crime.)

But I'm not going to get in a discussion with you, as you're clearly an idiot who needs to get shot, taking to a hospital, and required to sign an indentured servitude agreement for the next decade before you get treated, which would be nice and legal in your universe.

Re:Cue all the anarcho-capitalists....

[somersault]

How exactly is that a mystery? They're trying to give themselves something to do and a reason to get more money and power. It's not exactly a conspiracy so much as what happens when you have any large organisation. It gets bloated, and cutbacks do have to be made from time to time. I dont like to get involved in politics, but I don't believe every politician is sinister, and I believe that even because of the greed, people would cut down on the size of departments etc, and try to make things more efficient where they realise that is possible (which isn't every place possible).

Anyway, I'm not really impressed by any of those facts. It's obvious that once the government has power over something, it's not going to want to relinquish it, and that as the world becomes more complex, so a government would need to become more complex, which usually means getting larger.

As for the US government always being at war, yeah, that's pathetic.

In fact, your common sense answer is probably the one I mentioned. As time advances, systems tend to grow more complex as they adapt to their environment. But you seem to be using the growth of government as an example of human greed (which does exist too, and I see people trying to exercise power over others at the workplace here). It's kinda sad if you really think that growing legislation and government is always a bad thing, because sometimes the government actually help people (maybe not in America though).

If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[fuzzybunny]

I bought the Illuminatus! trilogy in college, and it gave me many hours of pleasure--not just from reading the book, but from games, references, in-jokes, cultural bits and bobs and whatnot.

I don't care what he spends his money on, or why he's in trouble, but this is just one of those little bits of culture, like Snow Crash, Neuromancer, Iain Banks' Culture series and any number of other miscellaneous books that contribute to letting me look at life in a more fun way.

I agree with the guy who said "if a bum asks for money, buy him a sandwich". Where this differs is that here's someone who's actually done something cool and worthwhile and inherently nifty.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[j_snare]

I'm not saying anything about the guy here, but it's more accurate to say that what's being asked here is not similar to "if a bum asks for money, buy him a sandwich", it's more accurate to "if a bum asks for money to pay for food, you give him money trusting him to use it to buy food." I don't see contact information for his landlord or something anywhere.

There is zero accounting here of where this money is going. Hell, what happens if this request is so successful that he gets enough money to pay his rent for 5 years, and he dies in 2 months? I don't want the sob story spams to start up, just hoping that someone is kind enough to be taken advantage of. I'm sick of too much of that already.

Tell you what, you provide the proof, and I'll send money. I'll need proof of:

• That this fellow is indeed who he says he is.
  
• That he is truely unable to pay his rent. (i.e. open the books up)
  
• List of donations and amounts already received, up to date
  
• Details on how the money is definately going to Robert Anton Wilson and no one else.
  
• Details on any and all "administrative fees" or anything else taken out before the money is put towards the rent.
  
• Plans for how to stop the donations when there is enough.
  
• Details on the trustee, including legal documents stating what will happen to the money afterwards if there is some left over (though hopefully if they stop the donations there wouldn't be much for this).

Unless you're willing to open the books up and keep them open, then my donations either go to an organization I can trust, or one who IS willing to open up the books.

It's truly sad that we cannot just trust those around us, but there are far too many who take advantage of that trust every chance they get. I think we all know better than to trust everything we read on the internet...

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[David Gerard]

http://www.rawilson.com/ - same PayPal address, the author's own site.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[XenoPhage]

Interestingly enough, I'm just reading this for the first time. I'm nearly at the end of the book and I must say it's been a very odd ride. I've never read a book where they jump around from topic to topic so incredibly fast. It's like talking to a kid with severe ADHD..

Given that though, it is quite the interesting book.. Albeit a tad unbelievable, but it comes together nicely in the end.. :)

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[anomalous cohort]

I felt sorry when I heard that the Robot Animal Within is nearing terminal status, both physically and financially. I have read many of his books and have always considered him to be of great merit in the libertarian free thinker category. I met him once and found that he had a deep, spiritual quietude.

I would donate if I thought that the money could actually help the author instead of his creditors.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[metamatic]

Obligatory Monty Python sketch:

Hello? Ah, Mr Victim, I'm glad to say that I've got the go-ahead to lend you the money you require. Yes, of course we will want as security the deeds of your house, of your aunt's house, of your second cousin's house, of your wife's parents' house, and of your granny's bungalow, and we will in addition need a controlling interest in your new company, unrestricted access to your private bank account, the deposit in our vaults of your three children as hostages and a full legal indemnity against any acts of embezzlement carried out against you by any members of our staff during the normal course of their duties... no, I'm afraid we couldn't accept your dog instead of your youngest child, we would like to suggest a brand new scheme of ours under which 51% of both your dog and your wife pass to us in the event of your suffering a serious accident. Fine. No, not at all, nice to do business with you. (puts the phone down, speaks on intercom) Miss Godfrey, could you send in Mr Ford please. (to himself) Now where's that dictionary. Ah yes, here we are... "inner life"... "inner life" ...

Call me a crazy fool, but once I verified the e-mail address was really his, I decided to risk sending him $10 without seeing a complete set of double entry financial accounts. I guess I'm just not as much of a merchant banker as you are.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[kruhft]

It's truly sad that we cannot just trust those around us, but there are far too many who take advantage of that trust every chance they get. I think we all know better than to trust everything we read on the internet...

Hmmm...sounds like you are a good candidate for reading the Illuminatus trilogy or any of his other books ;-)

No Spitting. -- The Mgt.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Profane MuthaFucka]

I agree completely. Even Jesus commanded us all to do background checks before giving a bum an hamburger. That's why he's the savior. He thought of everything!

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Anonymous Coward]

> Interestingly enough, I'm just reading this for the first time. I'm nearly at the end of the book and I must say it's been a very odd ride. I've never read a book where they jump around from topic to topic so incredibly fast. It's like talking to a kid with severe ADHD..
>
> Given that though, it is quite the interesting book.. Albeit a tad unbelievable, but it comes together nicely in the end.. :)

You sound like I did about 15 years ago. If you think it "comes together nicely in the end" the first time you read it, wait'll you read it the second time. (When you're finished, take a few days off from reading anything, then start over. Then put the book away for about 6 months to a year and give it a third read.)

Illuminatus! is one of those very very few books that gets better the more times you read it. I try to read it every year or two, and I'm still finding new things.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Simulant]

Someone please mod parent down. This should most certainly NOT be the first post one sees when clicking the article.

If you don't know the guy or his work then don't send him money. Nobody is asking you to. There's plenty of us fans that will and have, and we certainly don't need or want you looking out for our financial interests.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Captain Splendid]

Where's the -1 Churlish mod when you need it?

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[stapedium]

I'm sure Jesus had background checks in mind when he said,

"Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back."
Luke 6:30

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally, I never trust a man named Olga Celine.

Anyhow, what is he suffering from, and when is his 23-skidoo due?

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like all your money and other worldly possessions, please.

You wouldn't want to disobey the direct command of Jesus, would you?

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[elgatozorbas]

You raise a good point here. Probably the situation is ok, but there's no sense in being naive, something that especially people on /. should be aware of. On the other hand I can imagine Wilson would lose some dignity in displaying his poor financial situation to a 'harsh mecaenas' who wants to see some evidence.

A possible elegant solution would be to organise conferences/invited talks where Mr Wilson could come to, and (over)pay him to do so. For his fans this would be an extra incentive to support him, the moneyflow would be more transparent _without_ need for proof and Wilson would not be embarassed for being a beggar.

If you really appreciate Mr. Wilson and if you have any influence, organise something he could still do and be proud of.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Schemat1c]

Where's the -1 Churlish mod when you need it?

Looks like someone is putting their word-a-day calendar to good use.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Profane MuthaFucka]

Come on, reading comprehension. Asking for stuff is not the same as taking stuff. Seems like all the selfish Republicans can do these days is willfully misunderstand simple words. If you read the words the wrong way, OF COURSE a greedy Republican is going to find lots to like about Jesus.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Captain Splendid]

We call it a dictionary in my neck of the woods.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Anonymous Coward]

Paraphrasing somewhat.

II Thessalonians 3:10 -- If any will not work, neither shall they eat.

In the context of working the mission fields vs. being a busybody, earn your keep.

II Thessalonians 3:13 -- Be not weary in well-doing.

So you should still do good things for others, even if they don't deserve it.

Luke 6:27-30 -- Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you. Bless them that curse you. If they hit you on one side, offer the other. If they take your cloak, offer your shirt as well. Give to everyone who asks. If they take your goods, don't ask for it back.

It says to give something, not give everything.

Luke 6:31 -- And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

The Golden Rule. If someone asks you to give, and you give, great. If later you ask them to give, and they don't, then you know how they want to be treated. Be sure to explain why.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[aiken_d]

It's truly sad that we cannot just trust those around us

No, it's just sad that you can't let go of $20 without demanding DNA tests and genealogy charts. For me, the website is plausible enough, and the address and everything makes sense, so I'll take the minor chance that my contribution is going to a scammer, or that it's going to the right guy and that he's choosing to use it for something other than rent. Whatever. If either of those turn out to be the case, I will be neither bitter nor angry; it's $20, FFS.

There's no rational reason why it should be so, but karma definitely exists. Just remember this post when the time comes that you genuinely need some minor assistance and people demand urine samples and documentation from lawyers and truestees. "Wow," you will think. "I was a snotty little kid back then." And you will be right.

-b

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Profane MuthaFucka]

Well there you go. As I suspected, Jesus probably didn't institute a "no doggy bag" buffet policy when he fed the 5000.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Raenex]

Maybe it's better not to rely on interpretations of words that were passed on secondhand thousands of years ago, and then translated into other languages and cherry picked for content, and finally missing all the context of living in those times. Maybe we can just decide for ourselves what is moral.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Raenex]

I hate you mod commanders. God forbid someone's allowed to voice a thoughtful, yet contrarian point of view.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Anonymous Coward]

but karma definitely exists

Any science behind that "fact"? Oh you say so. I see.

A vengefull invisible being in the sky definitely exists....

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Simulant]

Thoughtful yet crass & cynical, you mean.

The call went out to fans and friends and it came from people (Doug Rushkoff, Boing-Boing editors) whom most fans and friends of Mr. Wilson have probably heard of and trust to some extent.

Nobody asked non-fans/non-friends to send money.
So why does a non-fan/non-friend feel the need to interject FUD on behalf of the people who actually give a damn (and gave few bucks)?

I just don't get why someone who has apparently never heard of Robert Anton Wilson would warn us that he might be ripping us off and I'm somewhat saddened that it's the second comment one sees when viewing the article. I assume that means alot of folks agreed with him.

I'm a cynic myself but I would never presume to tell you that someone I've never heard of but whom you know and admire might be trying to screw you.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[j_snare]

I apoligize that you disagree and thus feel I have nothing useful to say. How very accepting of you. I'm also sorry that you seem to think that other Slashdotters do not have the capability to reason for themselves and must not see anything against what you believe lest they actually disagree, thus we need to bury anything you don't think is right.

Let me clear this up for you though, since I really didn't mean to give that impression.

I don't mean to say that Robert Anton Wilson might be ripping you off, however I took offense to the post that I was replying to's assertion that someone asking for money on the internet and people filling this request is equivalent to a bum asking for money for food and people giving him a sandwich. It's not. You're taking a risk. Giving a bum a sandwich is less of a risk than giving him money to buy a sandwich and trusting him to buy one for himself. I'm sorry, but I've seen far too many people give money to people and see that money misused.

Based on everything I've seen, I'm pretty certain that you're right. The Robert Anton Wilson that we're referring to is the real one, and he needs real help. Fortunately, there's enough people who are giving that help already that he should be set for a while. However, knowing that doesn't make it risk free. You have to know that.

Sorry that the bum and the sandwich reference got me riled up, but there you go.

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Narcocide]

If he fools people into giving him their money legally, then he deserves their money. Hail Eris!

Re:If you send him $5, the fnords won't get you.

[Profane MuthaFucka]

As an atheist, I agree completely. However, the context of this particular thread is from within the worldview of Biblical stories, and that's how I'm responding. If this were Lord of the Rings, I'd be considered a buzzkill if I were to complain that hobbits weren't real.

Wilson

[Threni]

Can't he write another 5 books or something, containing another..uh..stimulating cut'n'pasted bunch of crap from whatever psuedoscientific crap he's into these days?

Re:Conformist bitch

[Anonymous Coward]

Btw he's books are full of fnord lies except cosmic trigger ;)

And thus only the deconditioned will know the truth :-o

Payment for his copyrighted work?

[rueger]

Another testimony to how our society refuses to reward those who enrich it... but not if we can help it!"

You posted that on Slashdot, where every third post is a complaint about the tyranny of copyright and payment for the use of intellectual property?

How naive.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

Amen - Mod parent up.

Pot - Kettle - Black

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh my god you've shown me the error of my ways! We must fight harder for 1000 year copyrights so that the great great great great grandkids can receive reward for the hard work and enrichment that their great great great great grandparents provided our society!

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

Could it be that his publisher has conned him out of his royalties? Not an uncommon occurance, I'm sad to say.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[ScentCone]

You posted that on Slashdot, where every third post is a complaint about the tyranny of copyright and payment for the use of intellectual property?

How naive.

Excellent observation. But I think instead of "naive" you might be looking for "contextually hypocritical." No one that hangs out here for long would be foggy on the way this audience treats the concept of making more money, down the road, for something you did yesterday (to say nothing of 30 years ago). Especially when what you did was produce some information (which wants to be free, blah blah blah). What the folks looking to send this guy money really want is to reward him, with cash, for his slightly loopy world view.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

You posted that on Slashdot, where every third post is a complaint about the tyranny of copyright and payment for the use of intellectual property?

How naive.

You mean the very same slashdot where non-traditional methods of compensating creators are constantly under evalluation and up for debate? Where people recognize that it takes not only time and effort to create something new, but that nothing is ever completely new and that we all stand on the shoulders of the giants who have come before us?

Yes, how naive indeed.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[bhsurfer]

What's wrong with rewarding a "slightly loopy world view"? Isn't that what artists exist for?

I'm not necessarily saying "give give give" in this particular case (although I like his the books and his world view), but I personally feel that life would be much duller without people who have the insight to see things differently and the guts to put it out there for public consumption. Lots of artists & writers have died poor -> don't make the typical mistake of creating eqivalency between *talent* == *lots of money* because it's a lie.

Just because the wealthy propogate the myth that those without money are somehow less worthy doesn't make it so. Artists don't have to live with the same bullshit values about what's important. Mozart died in poverty. So did Van Gogh. Phillip K Dick. Jack Kerouac. What were their landlord's names? Who did they owe money to? What banker got to keep all the property? History has forgotten lots of self-appointed *important people* who had plenty of money but in reality did nothing of substance - it remembers the people who had something more to offer. I don't find the idea of helping one of those people that repulsive. YMMV, of course.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I think there is an issue with taking the "slashdot platform" as a whole and using it to assume that slashdotters are inherently hypocritical. The people that argue for abolition of copyright may not be the same people that spit blood when the GPL is violated. I hope no one here is arguing for both because that is hypocrisy - GPL is protected because of copyright law, without it, we probably would not have seen the Linksys router software released, among other things.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[bogado]

There is nothing "hypocritical" with the point of view of the many people who disagree with copyrights. The main problem is that copyright is not to reward the authors, but to maintain an industry that has not adapted to the new era of the Internet. It is about Disney and others to be able to keep milking mickey and other "high valued" culture and at the same time keeping the reels of film that have the record of many of what our father saw when they were children rot, for they do not have immediate "market value".

Everyone believes that authors should get rewarded, but copyright does not help and indeed each day that passed it is making the lives of authors harder and harder. Why? Because there is a thought police, soon you will not be able to cite any trademarks or known character in a book without paying for it and at the same time that the policy on "fair use" gets harder and harder to defend, the expiring dates on copyright keep getting near the end of all known universe.

Sure some "big names", Stephen King, JK Rowling and Sidney Sheldon, for instance, get rewarded for their work, they get payed, and well payed even if they do not work. But I believe that this is all wrong, this does not give any incentive to JK Rowling to create a new Harry Potter, it is the reversed, while her old books are selling she could stop or hurry a poor one that is certainly going to sell. On the other hand, somewhere in the world there is, and I am certain of that, a new Shakespeare that is dying of hunger, and I am not talking about this author that you all know.

Copyrights are not healthy for the culture, for thousands of years people would create using as their base old tales and adding to stories that people are interested to hear. But nowadays the law protect a few while giving a burden to other thousands, why do you think I cannot create a fan-fiction Harry Potter book? It is only to protect miss JK Hollings, sure 99,99% of the fan fiction will suck big time, but what if there one or maybe two great book that would be created this way? And why does this should not be stimulated? The teen that starts writing poor fanfics in a backyard zine or to his blog can grow to became a great author. I bet that the first thing that all those best sellers written sucked hard, well many here would agree that many of the best selling do suck now, but this not the point.

So no, we are not being hypocritical when we say that copyright sucks and information want to be free, but this does not mean that authors should dye of hunger, alone and confined in their homes. If there is one thing that is allowing this to happen is this copyright way of thinking that rewards a few, should I say 10 at most, and keeps all of the rest hungry and this is the same in all areas, music, fine arts and even sports and while a few people get millions and millions of dollars many people, some even with talent, will not be able to get enough to get on with their lives from their work.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[raddan]

Because the vast majority of those people producing works are raking it in, right? I work for a publishing company, and I can tell you man, that it ain't so. There really are fat cats out there. The people who run the publishing companies are absolutely filthy rich. Authors and musicians regularly get stiffed, mostly because they sign away all their rights-- those are the only terms that most publishers will accept.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Rogerborg]

Not really. The Slashdot zeitgeist is that creators should live on pity handouts, like mimes, and only earn as much as they can stuff in their cheek pouches, like squirrels. That fits this begging post rather neatly; I'm almost certain that I recall mime-squirrels forming a core part of Discordia.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[petrus4]

Not *everyone* who reads /. is a rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth Communist.

I'm aware that mine is a minority opinion around here, but I feel that capitalism has its' place just as much as socialism/communism does. The keyword is balance...like any other problems, financial/sociological ones need to be solved on a case by case basis. Sometimes that calls for a capitalist solution...other times it can call for a more Marxist one...sometimes something in between. Both philosophies are equally useful in different situations...it's identifying which is the right one for each given scenario that's the trick.

The thing to keep in mind is that although it might not seem like it, on the communist side Marx (and to a lesser extent, his intellectual descendants) came from fundamentally the same motivation as Rand and von Mises, et. al, on the capitalist side of the fence; namely, the desire to solve human social and economic problems, and the belief that they could do so. The founders of these philosophies in most cases weren't the people who went on to cause problems by engaging in an unbalanced persuit of them.

The pendulum has been swinging back towards communism to something of an unhealthy degree these days...but that is because in some areas, (namely the American government) capitalism is likewise being persued in an unbalanced and unenlightened way...hence a popular backlash to try and correct the situation.

Social/economic thought IMHO exists as a fairly complex ecosystem that is quite similar to many others...each element is ultimately dependent on the rest. Unfortunately, your extremists on either side don't tend to recognise that, and thus have the attitude that their way is the only right one and the other school/s of thought need to be erradicated.

I'm aware that that itself probably sounds like quite a leftist statement...but only if you think of environmentalism (or the recognition of complex, interdependent systems) as being exclusively the domain of the left. I find myself hoping that such is not the exclusive domain of the left...because if it is, we're in very serious trouble.

We have such a scenario along these lines in the Linux world currently. On the more leftist side we have the FSF, whereas ESR and the OSI are more representative of capitalism and corporate interests. On the FSF side, Richard Stallman continually implicitly attempts to deny that perspectives other than his own are valid or acceptable. On the OSI/corporate side, we have corporations developing plastic, mass-market distributions which comparitively speaking lack technical integrity and are at times developed by individuals who apparently have little knowledge of or regard for Linux/UNIX history or traditional methodology.

Both of these groups can and should act as effective counterweights for each other, but in order to do so, they both (particularly the FSF here) need to acknowledge the other's right to exist. The FSF needs to recognise that corporations aren't going anywhere any time soon, and that because programmers need to eat, (among other things) corporate sponsorship can not only help to keep FOSS alive, but can also assist in moving it forward. Stallman needs to ditch the reflexive idea that all corporations by definition want to destroy FOSS. What corporations want more than anything else is to make money, and they will either help preserve or attempt to destroy FOSS purely based on the extent to which they perceive that FOSS will contribute to their ability to make money. IBM, Red Hat, Novell, and several other companies apparently have found ways in which FOSS can help them make money...and so they are not trying to destroy it. Microsoft might be, but Microsoft are a unique case...the proverbial full spectrum dominance is something they've always wanted.

On the opposite side of the coin, although the existence of standards such as the LSB, FHS, and even POSIX itself are a great start, we need to find ways to give corporations more concrete incentives to actuall

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

I hope no one here is arguing for both because that is hypocrisy - GPL is protected because of copyright law, without it, we probably would not have seen the Linksys router software released, among other things.

You don't understand the intent of the GPL. It is a hack of copyright, intended to turn copyright law against itself. The fact that it depends on copyright law is part of that hack. In RMS's ideal world, there would be no need for the GPL because the market would reject non-Free software as defective, just as the market today would reject a car with the engine compartment welded shut.

So, there is nothing hypocritical in supporting the GPL in the current environment and being for the abolition of copyright law as it stands today.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

Good point. What about the royalties for his books? He should be doing well unless he likes cocaine...

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Frosty Piss]

You mean the very same slashdot where non-traditional methods of compensating creators are constantly under evalluation and up for debate?

Unfortunatly, his landlord and the local grocer don't take "non-traditional methods of compensation."

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[div_2n]

I grow tired of the "Slashdot hates intellectual property rights" argument. I get the sense reading the posts here that very few are against rewarding people that create worthwhile material whether it is music, books, programs or graphical art. What I believe the overwhelming majority here protest is publishers, *AA getting the bulk of profits off the backs of creative geniuses. Also, after paying, "we" want to be able to put it on whatever medium we wish to use what we've already paid for. That's it.

Personally, if I could Paypal bands/artists/creators directly for their works I enjoy, I would. Heck, I'd probably pay again for the same work down the road in the right setting. In the end, the amount they get from me would be substantially higher than what their distributors pay. But that's just me. Your mileage may vary.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[haystor]

He has assets with which to pay the rent. Put the copyright to the series up for sale.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Mr. Slippery]

where every third post is a complaint about the tyranny of copyright and payment for the use of intellectual property?

RAW's situation is exactly proof that copyright is a lousy way to see that authors can make a living, and what we have here is an attempt to invoke an alternate model where fans act as patrons.

I have a couple of RAWs books. The royalties he received from those purchases probably is an order of magnitude less than the money I just sent.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Sancho]

If copyright didn't exist, we wouldn't need the GPL. Most of us just want people to play by the same rules--i.e. if you're going to use copyright and want to include a GPL'd bit of code in your project, then GPL the project as per the terms of the GPL (simplification, I know, but it gets the point across).

Besides, I think that copyright holds a very useful purpose. My problem is the system which has made copyright indefinitely long and removed the original social contract behind it. Before the extensions were purchased by lobbiests and made legal by the courts, there was a chance that I or my children might benefit from a work copyrighted in my lifetime (and by benefit, of course, I mean that we might be able to take that work and create our own from it). Now, that simply isn't the case. As soon as a major piece of "intellectual property" comes up for copyright, whoever owns it will throw a few million at Congress to get a new extension. This is what irritates me, not that copyright exists, but that it has become infinite, for all intents and purposes.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Sancho]

Actually, it's not copyright which has created the situation you witness, but cartels of companies ripping off artists by demanding 90% of their profits.

That said, it's up to the artists to deal with this. They can either self-publish (an expensive and difficult proposition, and they'll probably never get wide coverage) or go with someone who handles all that, but takes a large part as a fee. Note that copyright has no impact here, only contract law.

You ask why people can't create Harry Potter fanfic and rise to greateness? If they're such great authors, why can't they create their own characters? Copyright would then work for them, too.

No, copyright has an important place in the world. It's simply grown far too large.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Lemmy Caution]

A pet peeve: Marxism is not, ultimately, an economic model. It is a political model based on a socioeconomic analysis. The Marxist political program, insofar as it was blueprinted at all, is for political control by the working class, including control over the means of production. This is not the same thing as centralized command economies (although centralized command economies could well be the result of such a political change), and it is certainly not the same thing as a system of public benefits provided by a government which obtains its revenues by taxing individuals and organizations - the very revenue model for social-democratic welfare states relies on capitalism, on markets of labor and other institutions that are inconsistent with political control of society by the working class.

Marx was writing before the era of globalization, as well. The idea that the bulk of one country's working class could well be another country (e.g., China) was not something he addressed: he was perhaps under the impression that societies could be understood in national terms in some way.

I don't write this to defend Marx or Marxism (nor to critique them), but to correct an inappropriate reference to them.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Sancho]

Luckily, copyrights aren't mandatory! If RAW had wanted, he could have released all his work into the public domain and requested donations rather than royalties! He chose to go with the system.

Frankly, neither you nor I have any idea why he's out of money right now. Obviously his illness is a part of it--frankly, if I got Polio, I wouldn't have a job or insurance (for very long), either. I spend money on non-necessities, and I'm sure RAW has, as well. The point is, for you to say in big bold letters, "copyright is a lousy way to see that authors can make a living" and assert Robert's situation as proof is without logical basis or factual knowledge. At least, if you have factual knowledge (like you're a personal friend of his who knows that he's lived in poverty for his entire life despite having a pretty big cult following of books, games, etc) you've chosen to leave that information out of your post.

Simply put (as others have) it's the publishers associations that have really screwed artists. They take the lion's share of the dough and give out pittances as royalties. Again though, the individual makes the choice to join these groups. RAW could have self-published. Would he have made much money from it? No, almost certainly not, as self-publishing is expensive and doesn't get you quite the wide support base that using a major publisher does. Could the publisher's associations take less out of the book sales in order to give more to the artists? Absolutely, and I'm sure they'd still be getting fatter all the time.

Copyright in-and-of-itself is not bad. It's only bad when coupled with extreme greed. It's sad when artists get hooked into the system, but that's a choice they made. If they want out, they are more than welcome to get a different job. I think that Robert probably got paid to do what he loved, probably got paid more than I do, and probably got screwed (like lots of people do) by illness that took away his source of income. People don't stand up and collect donations on Slashdot for old computer programmers who lost their hands or are too old to see the screens anymore, do they? Maybe I'm just on the wrong website for that particular brand of charity.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, you are just really full of shit, aren't you?

Copyright doesn't stop you or anyone else from creating something original. It protects the right of a work's creator to control the distribution and use of their works. This includes the rights to sublicense or even sell those rights.

You have no rights to someone else's works. If you don't like that, don't buy the works. Only buy works that are in the public domain. Oh, wait if they're in the public domain you don't have to buy them. Does that mean you're just whining because you want something for nothing? Are you too lazy to work, or to cheap and dishonest to pay for your luxuries?

"Information wants to be free" - No, information doesn't want a damned thing, it's not alive.

However, here is some free information for you :

• Information is not a story, a song, or a movie. For those too ignorant to understand, use a bloody dictionary : http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/information. Even a non fiction book is not information. It may -CONTAIN- information, but the book itself, including the author or editor's original words are not information.
• Information is 4+9=13.
• Information is "The past tense of to pay is paid, not payed."
• Information is "The past tense of to die is died not dyed."
• Information is "I am sick of whiney entitlement babies demanding something for nothing."

- A woman who won't date slashdotters, because she doesn't want to hear "Information wants to be free!" when they demand to see her boobs.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[ScentCone]

I grow tired of the "Slashdot hates intellectual property rights" argument. I get the sense reading the posts here that very few are against rewarding people that create worthwhile material whether it is music, books, programs or graphical art.

Of course it's not "slashdot" that "hates IP," it's a very noisy, seldom-challenged group of loons that post comments along those lines. The "you shouldn't get to make money later, off of work you did yesterday" crowd is shrill, carping, ridiculous... but also rarely called on what's wrong with their take on things because they also tend to give comfort to people who are too cheap to pay for their entertainment in general.

Personally, if I could Paypal bands/artists/creators directly for their works I enjoy, I would.

And, as is so often pointed out here, you can. Unless the artist has chosen to do business a different way. Most successful/promising ones would rather concentrate on their art, and hire someone to do all of the paperwork, the promotion, the publishing, the legal crap, and so on. Those publishers are sometimes members of a trade association or two, and those trade associations are the pet demons, around here. But people here keep forgetting that many an artists chooses to personally form a studio or a record label so that they can, themselves, help cultivate and promote new talent, and they quickly realize there's a lot to be said for letting a single entity help with their industry representation and other not-about-the-art-itself activities.

So, if you don't like the business decisions that an artist has made (including the media and related DRM-ish stuff that comes with those deals), don't do business with that artist. Couldn't be simpler!

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

'Engine compartment welded shut' is an analogy to closed-source software. Open source software is certainly highly desirable in that it lets users understand, fix and customise software. However /free/ software is quite different, in that it specifically requires freedom to redistribute and hence prevents authors from making any money from their work (at least by direct means). There isn't really an applicable physical analogy, because (currently) no physical objects can be duplicated at nominal cost.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[bhsurfer]

I don't know what sorts of assets he holds or doesn't hold, what he's sold and what he's kept or what he owes to who so I'm not really in a position to advise him or anyone else in this case. You may know something that I don't, in which case I agree with you. What's the point of keeping something "valuable" when you're dying?

The question in my circle of friends was "where is his family and why aren't they bailing him out?"

At the end of the day though I still don't feel bad about the idea of giving something back to someone who I feel gave something to me, in addition to whatever I might have paid for his books. It'd feel a lot less wasted to me than contributing to someones political campaign, for example, although in a way this guy's body of work IS a political campaign of sorts.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[ScentCone]

Wow. You're like the Valkyrie o' Reason or something. That was fun (and, of course, dead on).

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

>I get the sense reading the posts here that very few are against rewarding people that create worthwhile material whether it is music, books, programs or graphical art.

You must be new here. Welcome to Slashdot!

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[jb.hl.com]

You can't seriously believe that everybody who disagrees with the "copyright is evil" bullshit is an RIAA whore who think that eternal copyrights are a-OK, can you?

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Mr. Slippery]

Luckily, copyrights aren't mandatory! If RAW had wanted, he could have released all his work into the public domain and requested donations rather than royalties!

There are other possible options beside the current copyright scheme or public domain. However, most rely on legal or technological infrastrutre that didn't exist when Illuminatus! was published back in 1975, when Xerox machines were a strange new technology.

People don't stand up and collect donations on Slashdot for old computer programmers who lost their hands or are too old to see the screens anymore, do they?

I seem to recall several appeals for legal funds on /. for programmers in trouble. http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/30/18 54228&tid=123&tid=95&tid=145">Chip Salzenberg, for example.

I'm sure if Torvolds or Wall or RMS or ESR was in the same situation as RAW we'd see people trying to help in the same way.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[bogado]

Actually, it's not copyright which has created the situation you witness, but cartels of companies ripping off artists by demanding 90% of their profits.

Sure, but copyright laws is their tools of choice to explore and suck the most from the artists. Actually, I have thought on that and I do believe that some copyrights are necessary, but in my opinion, or may I say in my utopia (witch probably will never see the light) copyright should never, ever be transferable and exclusivity contracts should have at least a maximum number of year. Well, let's not forget that the copyright protection should last much less and it should have a much weaker protections, allowing people to create derivate work (fanfic for instance).

You ask why people can't create Harry Potter fanfic and rise to greateness? If they're such great authors, why can't they create their own
characters? Copyright would then work for them, too.

I don't know, maybe we should ask that the Grimm brothers or La Fountain, or even Disney. They all got old tales, that every one knows and adapted. Many good authors have created great work based on other people's characters for instance see the great master of comics Will Eisner's "fagin the jew". Much of what we create is based on adapting and copying. A good example of this is when people say that some movie director have made a citation on another movie, were this author less known the same citation would probably be accounted as a copycat.

All of this and you're not even saw my other point where I stated that fanfic can be a good starting place, or tool for learning. By writing a fanfic and sharing with his friends a kid maybe starting to discover his abilities and training them, even from early ages. It is a good exercise and as he grows he may become great and even create his own characters.

As another point for future thoughts, may I ask how many time does Superman has to be recreated? How many times does 'gandalf' and other super mysterious and full of wisdom mages have to be rehashed? Does using a template, that people already know have value in it self? And if not why does people still watches movies and read comics about Spiderman and Batman?

No, copyright has an important place in the world. It's simply grown far too large.

Yes, I agree, as you probably noticed. :-)

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Sancho]

That link doesn't work.

And legal funds are a different beast. Contributing to a legal fund for a cause you believe in can indirectly (or sometimes directly) benefit you. I've contributed to the EFF--not because of any particularly altruistic reason, but because I want to see things change. Giving money to someone fighting the RIAA or accused of patent infringement helps create precedent which supports certain ideals and/or brings things into the public domain. Completely different issue.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Jon Luckey]

Information is not a story, a song, or a movie. For those too ignorant to understand, use a bloody dictionary : http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/information. Even a non fiction book is not information. It may -CONTAIN- information, but the book itself, including the author or editor's original words are not information.


Definition of information 2b at your URL:

the attribute inherent in and communicated by one of two or more alternative sequences or arrangements of something (as nucleotides in DNA or binary digits in a computer program) that produce specific effects."

So you are saying the books you use don't contain sequences of symbols (you know, like letters or punctuation) that produce specific effects (you know, like trigger associations with words from a natural language when interpreted by your brain)?

What does that leave? Picture books?

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Moflamby-2042]

Equating the desire of fighting a frightening future of information control to one of gleefully shafting those who create interesting and useful things is misinformative to say the best. Most of those who do work to fight things that would cause an information hindered future generally advocate a variety of alternatives to paying the mob that seemed to provide these authors and writers their only chances to get off the ground. Information is the life blood of our culture and restricting it stifles and can kill interesting and useful things. Methods to route the money directly to the authors and nowhere else is high on the list, to provide pay for total access rather than per play is high on the list, and on top of that altering the absurd copyright and patent law, destroying the DMCA, reversing *AA suits, flipping casual eavesdropping on its ear, and fighting an endless variety of things that have or will have gone wrong for us or generations to come.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Sancho]

Sure, but copyright laws is their tools of choice to explore and suck the most from the artists.

The key word being "tool". A tool is neither inherently evil nor inherently good blahblahblahrhetoricrhetoricrhetoric.

All of this and you're not even saw my other point where I stated that fanfic can be a good starting place, or tool for learning.

That's fine. Lots of fanfic exists and the copyright creators largely ignore it if it's not for profit. It would be nice if they'd give explicit permission, but so far it seems that there is some amount of implicit permission.

I don't know, maybe we should ask that the Grimm brothers or La Fountain, or even Disney.

Yup. I do pose that question. Worse is the hypocricy of Disney, struggling to keep its products out of the public domain while using public-domain works in almost all of their films.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[rolandzebub]

Most of his books were published long before the Internet and before intellectual copyright became such a cause celeb. But you would know that if you'd read any of his books.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[aiken_d]

You're spot on. I just can't wait to see how "this crowd" changes its tune 30 years down the road, when its significant contributions are old news and everyone's getting older. It's easy to despise the rich and demand more open economics when you're young and idealistic and either making lots of money or still looking forward to money making years.

Somehow it all changes when those years are in your past and you see other people continuing to make good money the work you did years ago.

-b

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Sancho]

I have to take issue with your reply.

1) I didn't say a damned word about the Internet in my post. RAW knew the terms of the contracts he signed (or he should have) and could have chosen not to sign them. He could have self-published, self-marketed. This /did/ happen before the Internet.

2) Is the accusation that I haven't read any of his book supposed to be some sort of sleight? The implied tone from the text says 'yes', yet I can't fathom why that would be the case.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Mr2001]

The "you shouldn't get to make money later, off of work you did yesterday" crowd is shrill, carping, ridiculous...

Nah, the opposite viewpoint is what's ridiculous. The guy flipping burgers at Wendy's doesn't get to just flip a few burgers when he starts, then kick back and collect royalties off of them for life + 70 years, so why should an artist or author? Let them get paid for their labor at the time they perform it, just like everyone else, and if they want to get paid some more, let them work some more.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Mr2001]

The Slashdot zeitgeist is that creators should live on pity handouts, like mimes, and only earn as much as they can stuff in their cheek pouches, like squirrels.

No, not really. I don't think I've ever seen anyone here opposed to compensating creators directly for their labor, for example.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[rolandzebub]

"I have to take issue with your reply." Issue away. "1) I didn't say a damned word about the Internet in my post. RAW knew the terms of the contracts he signed (or he should have) and could have chosen not to sign them. He could have self-published, self-marketed. This /did/ happen before the Internet." Hence he deserves nothing but our contempt, right? The point is, alternative models of income for writers and artists were hardly tenable before the Internet, and even today they are marginal. RAW is a professional writer and supported himself as such through the most sensible means available at the time. But you go right on feeling smug and superior, it suits your pedantry. "2) Is the accusation that I haven't read any of his book supposed to be some sort of sleight? The implied tone from the text says 'yes', yet I can't fathom why that would be the case." Bravo, you get points for reading comprehension. Let me spell it out for you, since you seem to need a little help in this regard - if you were familiar with his writing, perhaps you would understand his contribution to civilization (though I doubt it), and that might mitigate your heartless libertarian pretense. So endeth the lesson. Now go shove that copy of the Fountainhead you keep under your pillow right up your arse, I'm through with you.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunatly, his landlord and the local grocer don't take "non-traditional methods of compensation."

They sure won't run a tab for him either which is the equivalent of the way copyright works today.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Sancho]

People who choose business models that do not allow them to save for the future usually make that choice with full foreknowledge. No one forced him to be a writer. But I guess his 'contributions' mitigate that and mean that we should all empty our bank accounts and give him all our money (see? I can exaggerate, too!)

And if you'll read up a few posts, I mention that we really have no reason to believe that poor income is why he's broke right now. I stand by that. I simply refuse to believe that such a prolific author (and here's the surprise twist: I have read a great amount of his fiction and consider it to be amazing. My list is Schrodinger's Cat, Historical Illuminatus, and Illuminatus!) made less than I make after considering COLA and inflation. I make do, saving some money, investing some money, and living within my means.

Now I'm not accusing Bob of making poor financial choices--quite the contrary, I pointed out that his illeness is probably a great drain on his finances. I also pointed out that if I had his health, I'd be in the exact same position, most likely. My entire reason for replying to this particular sub-thread was the assertion that Robert's situation proves that copyright is a lousy way to make a living. Indeed, I wish that I hadn't even brought up the alternate distribution models because Robert's illness itself is probably enough to put him in this situation, even if he made ten-times the amount of money that either of us make.

As for his contribution to civilization, I'll reserve judgement on that until I see whether his works ever become more mainstream. As it is, I see that he's written some great fiction and has some interesting philosophical ideas. He also has a cult following--my suspicion is that less than one-tenth of one percent of people know anything about him whatsoever, much less anything about his ideals. To swing to the other end of the spectrum in this discussion (and hopefully less vehemently and violently than you managed to), I don't believe that Robert Anton Wilson has cause any noticeable change in current society. I see no significant contribution (yet--perhaps one day he will be required reading in grade school--but with the way the world is going, I doubt it).

And again, all of that is far beyond the point that using copyright can certainly be an effective way to make a living.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Moofie]

No more than you can seriously believe that people who think that copyright is being extended and abused to the detriment of public interest all think that "copyright is evil".

Right?

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[rolandzebub]

People who choose business models that do not allow them to save for the future usually make that choice with full foreknowledge. No one forced him to be a writer. But I guess his 'contributions' mitigate that and mean that we should all empty our bank accounts and give him all our money (see? I can exaggerate, too!)

Writers write because they have to write. It chooses them, and it is rarely the other way around. And who is asking you to empty your bank account? Really, go find another strawman (see, I can be sarcastic too!).

I simply refuse to believe that such a prolific author (and here's the surprise twist: I have read a great amount of his fiction and consider it to be amazing. My list is Schrodinger's Cat, Historical Illuminatus, and Illuminatus!) made less than I make after considering COLA and inflation.

Believe what you want, if that helps rationalize your ideology.

My entire reason for replying to this particular sub-thread was the assertion that Robert's situation proves that copyright is a lousy way to make a living.

I wasn't making that argument, so your point is irrelevant. What I resent is the implication that writers and artists deserve hardship for being so dumb as to rely on copyright. Not everyone can or should live the life of a prudent little burgher. That doesn't mean they deserve our contempt.

As for his contribution to civilization, I'll reserve judgement on that until I see whether his works ever become more mainstream.

You haven't been paying attention. So, you think Douglas Rushkoff isn't mainstream? How about Boing Boing? How about Slashdot? Or do you not believe something isn't influential until it's on TV?

He also has a cult following--my suspicion is that less than one-tenth of one percent of people know anything about him whatsoever...

Cult following . . . accurate, perhaps, but cult is a loaded word. Even assuming you didn't mean that pejoritively, you should know that it often takes several generations for visionaries and original thinkers to disseminate their ideas through society. In that sense your decision to withhold judgment is prudent. Nevertheless, seeing as how your suspicions are based on some number you just pulled out of your ass, it counts for exactly jack and squat.

To swing to the other end of the spectrum in this discussion (and hopefully less vehemently and violently than you managed to), I don't believe that Robert Anton Wilson has cause any noticeable change in current society. I see no significant contribution (yet--perhaps one day he will be required reading in grade school--but with the way the world is going, I doubt it).

Perhaps I was too strident in my initial response. For that I apologize. However, I would argue that yes, in fact he *has* and *is* changing our society, one mind at a time. His influence on what used to be called the counterculture is enormous and growing, and it is from that fringe where new ideas emerge. Prometheus Rising and Cosmic Trigger are significant, seminal philosophical works, and in the thirty or so years they have been in print they have proven far more influential than any outward societal changes would suggest. To quote the man himself, "I think politics is always the last place, the very last place, where important changes register. They register in science, then in technology, then in economics and in social affairs. And then finally the politicians have to adjust to them."

But don't send him any money, it's no skin off my back. Peace unto you.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

You have completely missed the point. The reason physical analogies don't work when compared to Free software is because software (just like any other pure information product) is non-rivalrous and non-excludable. The hood welded shut analogy has nothing to with those characteristics so simply parroting that no physical good can be an applicable analogy for an information good is rather pointless in this context.

Furthermore, when you claim that Free software licensing prevents authors from making any money from their work by direct means you are 180-degrees out of sync with reality. Free software licensing makes it almost mandatory for authors to make their money directly from their work, more directly than traditionally copyright model does.

With the traditional copyright model, somebody, often the author, must act like a venture capitalist, putting up the time, effort and resources to create the new software with the simple hope that he will recoup the investment with a profit. Free software makes that model infeasible (more proof that the GPL is a hack of copyright law) thus leaving the author to fall back on the contract model - he finds a buyer willing to purchase the results of his work, gets that buyer to sign a contract (and thus assume some, if not all, the risk of development) and then gets busy creating the final product. He gets paid directly on delivery and everyone is happy, customer got he wants and the developer got paid. No risking an investment on the whims of the market and not a very radical market model either since contractors have been working that way with physical goods for aeons, and information goods for at least 40 years, probably millenia if you consider how artists used to be compensated before the advent of the printing press and subsequent development of copyright.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[ScentCone]

Let them get paid for their labor at the time they perform it, just like everyone else, and if they want to get paid some more, let them work some more.

So, someone should be paying an author as he types things? Or just when the chapter is finished? Or just when the manuscript is complete? Who will pay that, before anyone has bought a copy, yet? Now, it's a week later, and he hasn't "worked" for days. Just absurd for him to receive money next month as people start to discover and choose to buy his work, right?

How about the family businesses guy, or farmer, that works for months or years to build up something that won't really show its value or its returns until some future (and recurring) date? Would you be happy if all million people that will ever buy an artist's work all bought it, together, the same instant he stopped typing it? Would that suit your authors-are-the-same-as-burger-flippers model? If you're OK with that, then why do you care if the same million people make those purchases over the course of a week? Or a month? Or 25 years? It's his work. He invested the time and effort, and it may or may not pay off. His risk. Most will fail, some will succeed. Your preference is to make the risk (taken by the artist) always a surely losing effort. Nice empty world you're proposing, there.

Just because you aren't creative enough to build something that has lasting appeal and don't understand that symphonies, novels, films and the like can't be cashed in at the end of the day like punching a clock at McDonalds doesn't mean you can't grasp that you're missing something. Because you really, really are.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

div_2n wrote:
>
>Personally, if I could Paypal bands/artists/creators directly for their works I enjoy, I would.

Just buy t-shirts or other merchandise directly from the artist's website. Most of that will go to the artist, versus the vast majority of money that would go to the record companies if you bought their CDs through them.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Mr2001]

So, someone should be paying an author as he types things? Or just when the chapter is finished? Or just when the manuscript is complete?

That's a detail he can work out with whoever's paying him, don't you think?

Who will pay that, before anyone has bought a copy, yet?

That's a strange question; you might as well ask who will pay the barber before anyone has gotten a haircut yet. You pay a barber to cut your hair, and you pay an author to write something. You don't know exactly what he'll come up with, just as you don't know exactly how your hair will look until it's done, but that's why you work out your expectations beforehand.

Now, it's a week later, and he hasn't "worked" for days. Just absurd for him to receive money next month as people start to discover and choose to buy his work, right?

Buying copies of a previously-created work is a relatively recent phenomenon whose only success has come from the fact that, for a time, it was easier to mass produce copies than it was for individuals to make their own copies.

If he wants to get paid next month, he can work next month. He already did last month's work last month, and if the amount he got paid wasn't enough, then he should've asked for more before he started working on it.

Would you be happy if all million people that will ever buy an artist's work all bought it, together, the same instant he stopped typing it? Would that suit your authors-are-the-same-as-burger-flippers model? If you're OK with that, then why do you care if the same million people make those purchases over the course of a week? Or a month? Or 25 years?

I don't. What I care about is when someone tells me I can't share or copy certain information because his business model requires that he's the only person who can do that. No one else demands that kind of control, because there are perfectly sensible business models that don't depend on it.

He invested the time and effort, and it may or may not pay off. His risk. Most will fail, some will succeed.

Don't you see how foolish that is? That's the same business model that a bum uses when he walks up to a car stopped at a traffic light, washes the windshield without asking, and expects the driver to pay him. Do the work first, pray that you get paid later.

Most people don't "invest" their time and effort without any guarantee that they'll be compensated for it. Some do (e.g. an entrepreneur starting up a new business), but they realize they're taking a big risk, that no one is obligated to come to them for anything, and that they'll have to compete to make money. But apparently competition goes out the window when the product being sold is a plastic disc with a certain sequence of bits on it.

Your preference is to make the risk (taken by the artist) always a surely losing effort. Nice empty world you're proposing, there.

Nonsense. If you think that, then you really need to read what I wrote again, because you've completely missed the point. My preference is to eliminate the risk by making sure the artist already has a paying audience when he starts working - just like a barber already has a paying customer when he starts cutting hair.

Just because you aren't creative enough to build something [...]

Ooh, I can play that game too: Just because your work isn't good enough that people want to pay you for it doesn't mean you get to stifle everyone else's free speech.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[p0ss]

Personally, if I could Paypal bands/artists/creators directly for their works I enjoy, I would.

In the current enviroment of media titans, how would you have heard of these artists without the producer? Artists dont like this situation anymore than you do, but their hands are tied. I know at least 100 fledgling creators, but the only way you will ever hear of them is if some publisher deigns to pluck them out of obscurity and into fox syndication. Sure the creator will loose 90% of the revenue from each sale, but 10% of a million is heaps better than 100% of nothing.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[ScentCone]

My preference is to eliminate the risk by making sure the artist already has a paying audience when he starts working - just like a barber already has a paying customer when he starts cutting hair.

Let's cut to the chase, here. This is where your vision completely falls apart. How will an artist with a brilliant (but as yet unrealized) creative idea line up paying customers in advance? If he knows he's got something that a wide audience will (when they can actually see it) appreciate enough to buy, how much time would you have her spend not creating the work to run around ... what, securing grants? getting politicians to approve some sort of tax-subsidy-for-only-good-artists? You can talk all you want about buying "book futures," but in practical terms, it's uttern nonsense. Commissioned work is for the small (perhaps singular) audience that commissions it.

An author (to stick with our example) is exactly like an entrepeneur spending six months building a new storefront or preparing (and pumping money and time into) some new service or product that will later serve its market. Someone who invests a million dollars in dreaming up, designing, writing, producing, staging, and promoting a stage musical does so knowing that the only way to recoup those costs is to sell at least a million dollars worth of tickets or related stuff (like recordings). You can't get a million dollars worth of revenue out of your opening night, so the gamble is that your reviews will be good enough to ensure a lasting popularity that will drive revenue to the point of earning back the investment. But if the work sucks, then too bad. He loses the investment. The thing is, your model doesn't take into account the front-loading of the work. Yes, the performers are getting paid a salary for that day's performance. But the creator of the work is (or is not) making that money back over time. Maybe he shouldn't! Why are you looking for a way to pay him for something that might not be worth it? If he's willing to take the chance, you should be happy that no one (other than him) had to part with any cash until they find it's worth it. Same with a book or a film.

So, you want to eliminate risk and pay creative people before they create - a perfect recipe for mediocrity, at best. Would you have any provision for taking back the money from a person who, essentially, lied about the quality of what they were going to produce? No? Then that means that whoever, in your model, is paying in advance is risking their investment. So, now the artist isn't risking anything, but the financial backers are. You've just moved the risk away from the artist and off to someone else... but you're also removing the incentive to produce something that may be so good that it exceeds the expectations and rewards the artist enough to give them the ability to work on much better, more complex projects going forward... on their own investment.

What I care about is when someone tells me I can't share or copy certain information because his business model requires that he's the only person who can do that.

But it's so simple! Don't do business with that person. If you're right, and the world really wants patron-powered, or taxpayer-funded, or commissioned-only work from artists that then have no control over how their work is used, then you shouldn't have any problem finding them or the people to pay them. But you also should have no problem walking away from the creative works of people who choose a business model you don't like... since they obviously see the world differently (in a way very opposed to yours: they want influence over the use of their work), you surely wouldn't want to prop up them and their ill-conceived world view by supporting them or their work anyway, right? Why would you want to celebrate (by reading words, or listening to music, or watching images) an artist that you think is acting contrary to your

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Mr2001]

How will an artist with a brilliant (but as yet unrealized) creative idea line up paying customers in advance?

Again, this is a strange question to ask, because millions of other people have faced this same problem. How will a new barber, landscaper, architect, programmer, etc. line up paying customers if they haven't seen his work yet? Maybe they lower their prices so people feel better taking a risk on someone they don't know. Maybe they do a little work for free just to get samples of their work out there where people can see it. It's not exactly a trivial problem, but neither is it unique to artists, and I think artists are clever enough to overcome it just like everyone else.

But the creator of the work is (or is not) making that money back over time. Maybe he shouldn't! Why are you looking for a way to pay him for something that might not be worth it?

If someone decides to pay him for his work, then his work is worth it to that person, by definition. Just like if you pay for a haircut, you've decided that the barber's time is worth $Y, even though you haven't seen the final results yet. If your hair turns out to look absolutely terrible, then you have some grounds to argue that the barber didn't hold up his end of the deal, but generally you work out your expectations beforehand and then settle for whatever you get as long as it reasonably fits the description of what you asked for.

Would you have any provision for taking back the money from a person who, essentially, lied about the quality of what they were going to produce?

Yes. Put your expectations in writing before work starts, then if you aren't satisfied with the results, find an arbitrator and show him that the work didn't meet expectations. Just like enforcing any other breach of contract.

No? Then that means that whoever, in your model, is paying in advance is risking their investment.

Whoa! Slow down there, hoss. I said yes.

But it's so simple! Don't do business with that person.

That'd be fine, if not for those annoying little laws saying I still can't copy or share certain information even though I'm not doing business with the person who holds a monopoly over it.

But you also should have no problem walking away from the creative works of people who choose a business model you don't like... since they obviously see the world differently (in a way very opposed to yours: they want influence over the use of their work), you surely wouldn't want to prop up them and their ill-conceived world view by supporting them or their work anyway, right? Why would you want to celebrate (by reading words, or listening to music, or watching images) an artist that you think is acting contrary to your sense of liberty? Just let them rot, since you don't like them anyway.

Ridiculous. If I don't like the politics of the guy who discovered the speed of light, should I not use that number? If I think Marconi was an asshole, should I stop using anything with a radio in it? A person's discoveries or creations are separate from that person. Enjoying the creation is not necessarily a celebration or support of the person.

You just want your entertainers to follow the burger-flipping model because you resent the ones that sometimes hit it big, and feel sorry for the ones that might seem creative, but can't pull it together to generate an audience large enough to live off of.

Er, no, you're way off. I've already explained to you why I want them to follow the money-for-labor model: because if they've already been paid for their work, they have no justification for telling me what I can or can't do with my own computer, CD burner, or internet connection in the future. The money-for-labor model is one that doesn't depend on stifling anyone's free speech.

Re:Payment for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

You actually think that 'posts' translate into 'action'?

How naive.

Update to this story - Money raised

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI there is an update to this posted on BoingBoing yesterday. They were able to raise enough cash to pay for at least the next 2 months rent. Check it out: http://www.boingboing.net/2006/10/03/robert_anton_ wilson_.html.

Re:Update to this story - Money raised

[Anonymous Coward]

I feel compelled to repeat what was said on boinboing, it might lead to a change of heart in some:

Anyway, this morning Bob's daughter showed up at his house in tears because she had checked his PayPal account and found money for next month's rent plus more. Bob called me to say that he couldn't believe people would care so much about him and as we talked (which isn't easy for him at this point) he was overcome with emotion more than once. He is so touched and RELIEVED at the possibility of staying in his home. He kept repeating to me his deep felt appreciation and disbelief that people would care so much about him. What a humble and sweet man.

Quoting the man

[fruey]

Dr Lecter, my candidate for the male archetype of 1951-2000, will never win any Nice Guy awards, I fear, but he symbolizes our age as totally as Bloom symbolized his. Hannibal's wit, erudition, insight into others, artistic sensitivity, scientific knowledge etc. make him almost a walking one man encyclopedia of Western civilization. As for his "hobbies" as he calls them -- well, according to the World Game Institute, since the end of World War II, in which 60,000,000 human beings were murdered by other human beings, 193, 000,000 more humans have been murdered by other humans in brush wars, revolutions, insurrections etc. What better symbol of our age than a serial killer? Hell, can you think of any recent U.S. President who doesn't belong in the Serial Killer Hall of Fame? And their motives make no more sense, and no less sense, than Dr Lecter's Darwinian one-man effort to rid the planet of those he finds outstandingly loutish and uncouth.

On the strength of that, it's not hard to understand how he ends up being on the fringe of society. Even if he does kind of have a point.

Re:Quoting the man

[sacrilicious]

Dr Lecter's Darwinian one-man effort to rid the planet of those he finds outstandingly loutish and uncouth

... and tasty. Don't forget tasty.

Re:Quoting the man

[Nimey]

Bob is a trip. As another poster said, he's opened my eyes to a whole new way of looking at things.

Re:Quoting the man

[Anonymous Coward]

Jimmy Carter?

Re:Quoting the man

[rolandzebub]

Being on the fringe of this society of violent, ignorant apes strikes me as a mark in his favor.

Re:Quoting the man

[Moofie]

Depends on which end of which bell curve we're talking about.

Re:Quoting the man

[coastwalker]

I bought the Illuminatus trilogy in the UK a couple of weeks ago - I already own the originals but figured that the package would make a good book to re-read on my next holiday. I enjoyed reading the series so much the first time around that I figured that buying it again would put some cash in his account right now as thanks for the pleasure I had from the originals. I get the impression from various posts that this minor effort may not be enough. I will put some dosh directly his way if I can figure out paypal - dont use it much. Hail Eris :-)

In other news ...

[Kombat]

In other news, another 300 cancer patients died today because they couldn't afford the examinations that would have detected their disease earlier, at a preventable stage. Nor could they have afforded the treatment that could have beaten their cancer, even if they'd known about it.

If you're looking for sob stories about nice people falling on hard times, there are for more worthy cases than Robert Anton. Why don't you stop by the local Veterans hospital, or contact the Children's Wish Foundation, if you really have money you feel should be used to help others.

Re:In other news ...

[savorymedia]

In other news, another 300 cancer patients died today because they couldn't afford the examinations that would have detected their disease earlier, at a preventable stage. Even if healthcare was "free", how many of us lazy people would actually be getting cancer exams at a time that would be early enough to prevent it or even treat it?

Re:In other news ...

[Threni]

> Why don't you stop by the local Veterans hospital,

Veterans are worthy? How did you work that out? They're the ones carrying out war crimes, American Imperialism etc. You'd be better of contributing to the Red Cross and other organisations who are trying to help the victims of those thugs and their families.

Re:In other news ...

[Beyond_GoodandEvil]

If you're looking for sob stories about nice people falling on hard times, there are for more worthy cases than Robert Anton.
Didn't you hear? They beat the women in Kumar! Hopefully, that snapped you out of your moral superiority with your snarky little comment about the local VA hospital or Children's Wish foundation. If not, shine on you crazy diamond.

Re:In other news ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dick.

Re:In other news ...

[ArikTheRed]

Oh sheesh, give me a break. I've never understood the "If you can't help everyone, why help anyone" arguement. Everyone is not equal, and should not be treated as such. I am far more likely to give money to a cultural icon whom I personally respect, than some guy I don't even know.

Re:In other news ...

[gotak]

Me. Canada and free health care means you can get a yearly physical, which I do go get. So they do some blood tests and your doctor tells you which things they want you to keep an eye out for. So for men between 20 and 35 it's testicular cancer so he has me checking my balls every month.

Re:In other news ...

[Kombat]

I've never understood the "If you can't help everyone, why help anyone" arguement.

I didn't say that. I gave 2 specific examples of other people you could help.

Everyone is not equal, and should not be treated as such. I am far more likely to give money to a cultural icon whom I personally respect, than some guy I don't even know.

Why? Because he wrote some books? That makes him worthy of charity?

Let's keep things in perspective here. You're saying that since this guy wrote some books, and is famous, that he deserves your money. But the soldiers who lose limbs fighting for your right to read those books don't deserve your money, because "you don't even know them?"

I weep for our future.

Re:In other news ...

[ArsenneLupin]

Groovy! Is he cute at least?

Re:In other news ...

[ArikTheRed]

I didn't say that. I gave 2 specific examples of other people you could help...

Correct... other people. But instead of giving $25 to random folks, I could give that $25 to someone I know. Why is charity only good if it's for strangers? Why? Because he wrote some books? That makes him worthy of charity?

Again, correct! But he didn't just "write some books". Its not every day that someone writes stories so ubiquitous that they becomes absorbed into our everyday culture. I'd give money to Orwell or Joyce, too. Let's keep things in perspective here. You're saying that since this guy wrote some books, and is famous, that he deserves your money. But the soldiers who lose limbs fighting for your right to read those books don't deserve your money, because "you don't even know them?"

I never said anything about fame being a qualification. I said that I know him... thats enough. My dad was a POW in Vietnam, and his knee was blown out by shrapnel... I'd have give him money too if he had needed it. If I had any left over and was feeling charitable, I may donate to some random cause, but there is nothing wrong with prefering your heros over strangers... nothing wrong with that at all. I weep for our future.

You presume too much, young one.

Re:In other news ...

[ArsenneLupin]

But instead of giving $25 to random folks, I could give that $25 to someone I know.

$23, darling, $23.

Save 2 dollars, and please him even more by showing that you remembered the number.

Re:In other news ...

[adavies42]

Ah, altruism. Charity doesn't count if it goes to someone you actually know something about and want to help--it must go to complete strangers so as to eliminate any remote possibility of your benefitting from giving it. What a way to live.

Re:In other news ...

[jacoby]

Not gonna say not to visit the Veteran's home or help kids. Worthy things to do. But....

RAW is someone I consider a friend. Someone I haven't thought about in a while, but a friend nonetheless. I've read the Illuminatus! Trilogy, I've read what's been published of the Historical Illuminatus Chronicles (the last book never made it, which is frustrating), Cosmic Trigger and a few others. He is a big influence on how I think and what I find funny. Is there anything wrong with trying to help a friend?

Re:In other news ...

[Thuktun]

People may choose which causes they should donate their time and/or money to using their own guidelines. If you don't want to participate in this, then don't.

Just don't mock others for choosing to help someone else.

Re:In other news ...

[Mr. Slippery]

If you're looking for sob stories about nice people falling on hard times, there are for more worthy cases than Robert Anton.

Maybe so. This happens to be the case before me at the moment, so I'm sending money. If I spend a lot of my time going around trying to rank who's "most worthy" of receiving a couple bucks, that's time wasted I could be putting toward doing good or making money to contribute to good causes.

Re:In other news ...

[Mr. Slippery]

But the soldiers who lose limbs fighting for your right to read those books don't deserve your money, because "you don't even know them?"

Soldiers work for the government, which is much more of a threat to my right to read books than the people of Iraq, Yugoslavia, Somalia, Panama, Grenada, Vietnam, Korea, Lebanon, Panama, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Cambodia, Laos, Libya, or anyplace else the U.S. has conducted military actions in the past 50 years.

The last time the U.S. was threated with invading forces that posed a threat to our rights was 1814. (No, Pearl Harbor doesn't count, Hawaii wasn't a state. Nor does 9/11, it as an act of mass murder, not an invasion attempt.) The last threat against the rights of U.S. citizens by the U.S. government was probably on Bush's desk this morning.

I salute veterans and active military personel for their courage and their desire to serve. And I'm grateful for the VA's tax-funded health care, which saved my father's life last year. (He served in Viet Nam.)

But in choosing to serve the U.S. government, they've displayed poor judgement. Serving the government and serving the nation are two very different things.

Re:In other news ...

[Anonymous Coward]

A-Men

Re:In other news ...

[mckayc]

Give me a fucking break.

Re:In other news ...

[bobsledbob]

I thought the number was 42.

Oh wait, wrong author.

Re:In other news ...

[love2hateMS]

In other other news: 600 cancer patients in Canada, with its free medical system, died waiting for six months to see a cancer specialist. (Don't mock me, I personally know someone this happened to).

Re:In other news ...

[Nimey]

Fuck, this is insightful? Did you know that Japan had plans to invade the US West Coast and destroy the Panama Canal? Whether or not they could hold that territory is immaterial.

You've also forgotten the Cuban Missile Crisis. Had things gone badly, the Soviets would have nuked us then invaded.

Re:In other news ...

[Mr. Slippery]

Did you know that Japan had plans to invade the US West Coast and destroy the Panama Canal? Whether or not they could hold that territory is immaterial.

Would the Japanese have liked to invade the West Coast? Probably. Was it something they could actually implement? Doubtful. The best they managed were the bomb balloon attacks.

The Panama Canal is not in the U.S., last I checked, so is not relevant to this discussion.

You've also forgotten the Cuban Missile Crisis. Had things gone badly, the Soviets would have nuked us then invaded.

Had the Soviets been stupid enough to nuke us, our retalitory strike would have wiped them out. Before the Cuban deployment, the U.S. had the USSR outgunned by about an order of magnitude.

In fact, that's why they wanted missles in Cuba in the first place, to create a workable nuclear deterrant against the U.S.

(Certainly the USSR had rational basis for desiring such a deterrant, with the U.S. being both the only nation to ever use nuclear weapons and a nation which had participated in an invasion of Russia in support of the Tzar duing the Russian Revolution.)

It was more likely that the U.S. would attempt to (again) invade Cuba; there were plans and preparations underway for this for this. We're all fortunate that Khrushchev had a cooler head than Kennedy and negotiated a deal. (Of course, Khrushchev wasn't on a steady regimen of amphetamines and steroids.)

Re:In other news ...

[coastwalker]

Charity doesn't need to 'count' other than contributing to the overall sum of human happyness - which it invariably does even if it only makes the giver feel good for example. Put the hair shirt in the trash and lighten up, kindness is good for humanity no matter how irrational. In fact the more irrational the better I think. Hail Eris :-)

Re:In other news ...

[LunaticTippy]

$25 is twice better than $23.

$ (2+3) * (2+3)

Re:In other news ...

[LunaticTippy]

My dad died from cancer recently. First, they cancelled his insurance. Then, they took his house. Now, they're threatening me to cover his debts.

Oh, and the hundreds of thousands he spent didn't help him.

I'm pretty pissed off at the US healthcare system right now.

Re:In other news ...

[Silthanis]

No, the grandparent had it right. Twenty Five is not only a multiple of Five, but it is Five Fives, (See the Law of Fives, from which the figure 23 derives). Hail Eris!

Re:In other news ...

[ultranova]

In other news, another 300 cancer patients died today because they couldn't afford the examinations that would have detected their disease earlier, at a preventable stage. Nor could they have afforded the treatment that could have beaten their cancer, even if they'd known about it.

You know, that can be easily changed: vote in social democrats who make healthcare 100% publically funded. Problem solved. Of course it means that you may need to pay more taxes (or may not - it's also possible that the increased public healt gives a positive return of investment in purely financial terms), but you don't need to worry about yourself, your children, friends or anyone else dying because you or they can't afford medicine.

That this has not already been done propably tells something about American society and values. Something quite unflattering.

Can I buy his book?

[Anonymous Coward]

If I buy his book, will that help him? Or has he sold the rights on or something?

If you're going to donate money...

[Anonymous Coward]

...at least make sure that the story is true and the money goes to the right person. This is the internet: anyone can claim to be someone else or to be speaking on behalf of someone else. I'd recommend that you at least wait a couple of days before you donate. If it's a fraud, chances are it will be uncovered shortly. If you donate now, you'll feel awfully silly when it turns out that this is just another "boy with cancer has one last wish" hoax.

Also, if you drum up money for someone else, you might have a better chance of succeeding if you ask people to donate to personal accounts of that person, not some fund or even some other person's account.

Re:If you're going to donate money...

[kfg]

. . .if you drum up money for someone else, you might have a better chance of succeeding if you ask people to donate to personal accounts of that person. . .

According to Bob's own website the account is his personal PayPal account.

KFG

Ancient Greeks need cash too!

[Speare]

I've heard that the ancient greek civilization has come on hard times too. Since they were the ones who actually created the Eris / Discordia mythology, shouldn't they get a spare dime too? I mean, it's nice to rework some old public domain ideas into a story and copyright it (see Disney), and it's nice to be generous to your fellow man, etc., but I don't get this call to action slashdot article stuff.

Re:Ancient Greeks need cash too!

[Anonymous Coward]

Did I forget to mention, forget to mention Memphis? Home of Elvis and the ancient Greeks....

A small nod to the Talking Heads, who, if they fell on hard times, I'd be very willing to help!

Re:Ancient Greeks need cash too!

[Mr. Slippery]

I mean, it's nice to rework some old public domain ideas into a story and copyright it (see Disney), and it's nice to be generous to your fellow man, etc., but I don't get this call to action slashdot article stuff.

In no way did RAW merely "rework some old public domain ideas".

If you don't know anything about the guy or his work, perhaps you should at least Google for his name before speaking up?

Re:Ancient Greeks need cash too!

[Anonymous Coward]

Reworked the Eris/Discordia mythology?! You really haven't read these books, have you.

About the only connection beyond the names is the reference to the story where Eris wrote "to the prettiest one" on an apple and left it for three other goddesses. BFD. I highly doubt the orignal stories involved an anarchist roaming the seas in a submarine, or the travels of a foot-long penis cut off during a sex change operation.

FWIW, RAW also wrote about a dozen non-fiction books. The Illuminatus! series and subsequent novels were popularizations of these concepts.

Cosmic Trigger 1

[Terminus32]

Was RAW's greatest work!

I wish it were easier...

[Delusion_]

...to find out what way is the "best" way to buy published works that funnels the most money back into the content creator's pocket as opposed to the distributor.

Sometimes, it's fairly easy - I prefer to buy CDs at concerts, where a band I already know I like (hey, I did pay for a ticket after all) and possibly some new opening band(s) gets a substantially larger cut of the profit from the sale. Some music and books are also available at the creator's website, particularly if the group or author has a "vanity" label/publisher, and the price is usually comparable to the big-volume retailers.

I don't claim to be a total altruist in the matter, as I do and always will love truly great used book stores (John King's Books in Detroit, anyone?), but in the situation where the price is going to be fairly close (and it often is) from the cheapest method to the one which funnels the most money into the creator's pocket, I'll pay slightly more for the product.

The margin of return to the creator, though, is fairly difficult to pin down in most cases, and where the musicians/authors/etc. know, I appreciate it when they provide that information on their websites.

HUH, Whatever happened

[gx5000]

HUH, Whatever happened to christian charity ? I'm not intent on writing flamebate here but really, I for one am sick of people claiming religious morality and sitting on their hands. Oh yeah, I'm an atheist too, but I seem to think that a seventy year old in pain is worth a couple of bucks, and with our health care in canada, well, I know it's just that much harder in the US if you fall ill... Just my two cents. Peace out !

Re:HUH, Whatever happened

[91degrees]

I think the question is, why does this guy deserve more compassion than anyone else?

As such, I'm feeling sufficiently guilty that I'll probably make a donation to a completely unrelated cause.

Re:HUH, Whatever happened

[Sancho]

I'm all about Christian charity, too. There sure are a lot of people who could use our help. Why is RAW targetted? I wonder how much these people who are sending him money send to other charities?

Re:HUH, Whatever happened

[M1FCJ]

Did you read his stuff and what he has to say about churches and organised religion in general? If it comes to being a Christian, RAW will not get a dime but probably will be shoved off the bridge by a good Samaritan.

Re:HUH, Whatever happened

[Anonymous Coward]

That's because while religion isn't very popular on /., Libertarianism is. (That's anarcho-capitalism to those of you outside the U.S. who may have a different definition of libertarianism) This is an entire political philosophy based around the phrase "I got mine, fuck you!"
  So yeah, compassion is not easily found here.

Re:HUH, Whatever happened

[gx5000]

Thanx, after forty three years on the planet, your comment made my day ;-) Cheers !

Re:HUH, Whatever happened

[gx5000]

Sorry, being an atheist I must be mistaken about the "turning of the other cheek" and "loving thy neighbour" and "treating thy enemy as...anyways, enough said ;-)

Re:HUH, Whatever happened

[coastwalker]

I suspect the money only comes from people who value the creativity and ideas that RAW has brought to our times. By definition that probably wouldnt include many dogmatic christians who wouldnt 'get' his ideas. For example its perfectly ok to be mean and self centered about giving because it makes you feel good. After all the recipient doesnt mind that you felt good about giving, they are just happy that they have been helped. Its ok for some Christians to only give to those people that someone has told them are deserving. Its also very fine for other people to give aid to people based on different criteria as in this case. He may well have been naughty and blown his cash on parties and an extravagant lifestyle. Who cares, this is the guy who probably has a planet named in honour of the mindset his works talk to - 'Eris'. Not a bad lifetime achievement award I would say. It would also speak volumes about that mindset if this request for help was ludicrously, unfairly, pointlessly, oversubscribed. Which probably wont happen but would certainly brighten up peoples lives with bit of laughter. Hail Eris :-)

So... why can't I just pay some more taxes...

[neuraljazz]

So that EVERYONE can have good enough, free healthcare, rather than choosing some single lucky soul.

Also, we do value authors - that's why copyrights run out after 25^^50^^75 years so that creators^^^^^large businesses can make money inperpetuity.

Re:So... why can't I just pay some more taxes...

[GigsVT]

Because it just doesn't work that way. Get the fuck over it, or move to a socialist country like Cuba or China.

Re:So... why can't I just pay some more taxes...

[gx5000]

You forgot us in Canada Bud ;-) We're always mentioned in "that" list when the US speaks of healthcare... Cheers !

Re:So... why can't I just pay some more taxes...

[GigsVT]

He'd fit in better in a fully socialist country, I think. He's not just accepting of the theft of the fruits of his labor, he's actively advocating the theft of everyone's resources.

Re:So... why can't I just pay some more taxes...

[jamstar7]

Kid sounds like a Democrat. They never saw a social program they didn't like, paid for by a larger chunk of your income...

Enlightenment Window Manager?

[cab15625]

Is someone asleep up there in the editing room? What does a sci-fi author have to do with the Enlightenment window manager? He may have written some nifty (well, strange) books, but AFAIK, he's never coded a epplet in his life. (click the article's icon if you don't know what I'm talking about)

Re:Enlightenment Window Manager?

[Anonymous Coward]

Duh, you get enlighenment from reading illuminatus!

so read the book and get a free windowing manager that kicks arse!

I cant believe that you did not know that!

Re:Enlightenment Window Manager?

[rayde]

i read through the wikipedia article, poked further through the related links, and only then became enlightened that this guy pretty much has nothing to do with Enlightenment.. :-\ bad use of topic icons.

Re:Enlightenment Window Manager?

[quadrate]

A message for minds shrunken by rigid syntax: Sometimes words have more than one meaning.

Re:Enlightenment Window Manager?

[wed128]

But logos only have one

Re:Enlightenment Window Manager?

[Criceratops]

Ah, sorry, I didn't know there was a window manager called Enlightenment.

I kinda thought it was about the other kind of Enlightenment, which Mr. Wilson has been particularly fond of distributing...

Perhaps that is more enlightening?

And I'm delighted that his daughter reported that he now has rent for a while. Goddess bless all of you who gave your $23.05...

Now if we can only raise money to buy a nuclear submarine and paint it bright yellow and get the Illuminati on the run! That would be the REAL tribute to Robert...

BTW, Mr. Wilson, if you or someone you love is reading this, my newborn son's middle name is Robert... (although it's a joint tribute for both you and Mr. Heinlein... hope you don't mind sharing).

Hail Eris!

All Hail Discordia!!

Re:Enlightenment Window Manager?

[coastwalker]

Talking of yellow submarines I'm 50 pages into 'Sewer gas and electric' by Matt Ruff which has an implausably cute submarine. Would probably amuse RAW who is in recipt of a random paypal email from me. You seem to have kicked off the usual furious debates here, discussion is live and well for sure and has spiraled off in the usual random directions :-) Though even the KLF turn up at some point.

By the way did you know that the planet Eris is named after the discordian Eris and not the Greek one. Strongly influenced by bobs efforts I've no doubt. (actualy I just made that up, but I belive its true... who knows).

Hail Eris.

Wrong enlightenment

[Virak]

Am I the only one who was a little confused by seeing the Enlightenment logo up there?

Re:Wrong enlightenment

[Canordis]

The article submitter probably meant spiritual fnord enlightenment and was clueless to the actual meaning of the section, or maybe intentionally used it as a sort of joke or lack of where to put it. Of course, the five guys who only read the Enlightenment section will be pissed.

Re:Wrong enlightenment

[fatboy]

Nope, I was too.

Re:Wrong enlightenment

[Spaceman40]

You and me both -- either the poster thought they were pretty funny, or they just haven't achieved true enlightenment yet. :)

Re:Wrong enlightenment

[Denial93]

He wrote "Illuminatus!", which is (among many other things) about the Illuminates, who are after Illumination, which is also known as Enlightenment. I thought it was a rather nifty joke, but I'm still ruining it. Heh.

Re:Wrong enlightenment

[Saxerman]

Discordia comes in many flavors, but in some that taste slightly purple you may find a story of zen from which the word enlightened might be linked to a page which does not exist fnord. And if you seek but no not find what does not exist, have you not, in fact, found exactly what you were looking for?

What is he doing

[ajs318]

At the risk of sounding like a troll, what is he doing in a private, fee-paying hospital? Is the National Health Service not good enough for bestselling authors?

Re:What is he doing

[jeffs72]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess he isn't in the UK and so cannot participate in your NHS. Medicare and so forth cover stuff like "oh my god my head's on fire" but I don't think they do a whole lot of advanced treatment stuff. I could be wrong though, I have health insurance.

Re:What is he doing

[ajs318]

Don't you have your own National Health Service, or something similar, in the USA?

Re:What is he doing

[DagdaMor]

No they don't, not for terminal care, and even with health insurance he will be well over his maximum draw on the cost. Adn he isn't in a private hospital, he is living at home, with friends caring for him.

Re:What is he doing

[ArikTheRed]

Wow, thats the most innocent sounding question I've ever heard of Slashdot! I imagine a small child, ragged hat in hand and doe-eyed, speaking with a whistle through a lost front tooth.

Re:What is he doing

[DavidTC]

Why would we have one of those things? That's just emboldening the sick!

e17

[goarilla]

Who else thoughed at first this was an article
about an enlightenment wm release? heck they even used the icon of e1[67]

Yes, but

[Goonie]

Mr Wilson has clearly given a lot of pleasure to many Slashdot readers. So, as a thank you, some of them might wish to ensure that his last few months of his life more comfortable.

If you're looking to do the most good for the most people per dollar, money invested in, say, vaccine distribution or malaria prevention is always going to outweigh helping anybody living in the West. And that includes US Army veterans and sick kiddies (in fact, the treatment of Western children with life-threatening illnesses is arguably the single most overfunded branch of the medical profession). But it's only human to want to help out those who we feel a connection with in some way. And Mr. Wilson's work has made a connection with many Slashdotters. I'm not among them, I haven't read it. But if, for example, Linus Torvalds or Joss Wheedon turned up destitute on my doorstep, I'd help them out (even though in both cases them ending up destitute would indicate some very poor life decisions), to thank them for what they've given me.

Re:Yes, but

[SvnLyrBrto]

> But if, for example, Linus Torvalds or Joss Wheedon turned up destitute
> on my doorstep, I'd help them out (even though in both cases them
> ending up destitute would indicate some very poor life decisions),

THAT'S what's bugging me here. I know it sounds horribly insensitive. But the man *was* a bestselling author for many, many years... there's hardly anyone I know who doesn't have at least a handful of his books in his collection. That's the sort of career success that leads to quite a large bit of wealth. And the cynic in me has to ask what sort of horrible life decisions did RAW make that led him to piss away all that money? And why should I subsidize that sort of irresponsibility?

Not that the above rules out my chipping in. The article says he's ill, and in the US, that certainly bleed even a reasonably wealthy family dry. But I think the question does have to be asked.

Plus there're also the questions of WHO exactly are Douglas Rushkoff, Dennis Berry, and Futique Trust; what is their relationship to RAW, where is the transparency and how do I know any money I might chip in actually makes it to RAW; and, for that matter, how do we know RAW's even in need? All we have to go on, is the word of some blog.

cya,
john

Re:Yes, but

[chiphart]

I'm curious to learn how/why you think "the treatment of Western children with life-threatening illnesses is arguably the single most overfunded branch of the medical profession."

As a matter of dollars-spent (total or per-patient), I'd suggest that the money spent on Western adults is far greater and to no surprise. Last I read, children represent 50% of the lives on Medicaid, for example, yet make up only 5% of the inpatient dollars spent. Not proof, I realize, but telling.

Further, I'd consider money spent on children a potential investment while the money spent on dying adults to be potentially wasteful.

Re:Yes, but

[Knuckles]

And the cynic in me has to ask what sort of horrible life decisions did RAW make that led him to piss away all that money?

He lived in the US where health care is a cover for organized crime.

Re:Yes, but

[kennygraham]

But if, for example, ... Joss Wheedon turned up destitute on my doorstep...

Marti would take over paying the bills, but paint the house black.

Re:Yes, but

[Goonie]

I would agree that we also overspend on treating adults in their last months of life as well. My point was mainly in regards to research into things like childhood cancers, which are statistically very rare but because people feel they are so tragic they receive disproportionate amounts of research funding instead of less politically saleable things like medical mistake reduction (which kills more Americans than car accidents).

The reason why children make up a relatively small part of health spending is because they don't get seriously ill very often.

i'm all for...

[thedrunkensailor]

i'm all for helping him out. but instead of doing it because he wrote some geek trilogy, why not because thats what people should do. i happen agree that had he been employeed previously with a steadier job, he might have the money saved to pay his rent, but most of the time i wish i had nothing to do with organized work too.

so, i say give your money to him, but do it for the right reasons. if you wouldn't have given it to anyone, than you're a hypocritical a$$hole

Re:i'm all for...

[DrJimbo]

thedrunkensailor said:

i happen agree that had he been employeed previously with a steadier job, he might have the money saved to pay his rent, but most of the time i wish i had nothing to do with organized work too.

I don't think RAW was allergic to work as you seem to imply. The man spent his time writing books that I happened to really enjoy. His writing has enriched my life. Our totally fucked up health care system severely punishes people who choose to contribute to society in creative ways such as RAW has done.

I'm extremely grateful that he didn't get a regular job and instead spent his time and energy challenging us with his writing. That's why I'm chipping in. Please feel free to call me any names you want. Any name you call me because I'm helping out RAW in his time of need, I will consider a badge of honor.

Re:i'm all for...

[thedrunkensailor]

i'm not attacking, i was [am] simply saying that someone having written a book (or series of books) is not reason in its own to help them. i reccomend helping them because they are a person and that is the right thing to do.

Please feel free to call me any names you want. Any name you call me because I'm helping out RAW in his time of need, I will consider a badge of honor.

i was not planning on calling anyone any names, but now that you mention it you are a self-proclaimed-honorful-RAW-helper

Key word: Consider

[gentimjs]

Key Word: Consider.....

Who's fault is it?

[lixee]

An excerpt from "Wealth of nations" by the father of capitalistic economics, Adam Smith.

"Wherever there is great property, there is great inequality. For one very rich man, there must be at least five hundred of the poor, and the affluence of the few supposes the indigence of the many. [. . .] It is only under the shelter of the civil magistrate [read, the police] that the owner of that valuable property, which is acquired by the labor of many years, or perhaps of many successive generations, can sleep a single night in security."

No comment.

Re:Who's fault is it?

[Criceratops]

Reminds me of a scene from Illuminatus!, where the Discordian hero, Hagbard Celine, is still in law school... paraphrasing here, don't have the book handy (in middle of a move)...

The law professor asks the class, "So what is the core purpose of the legal system?"

Hagbard answers, "To protect the rich from the poor."

He gets thrown out of class, predictably enough.

RAW changed my life.

[LazyPhoenix]

My first exposure to RAW was through the Principia Discordia and the Illuminatus! trilogy, but it was his other books that changed the way I think about a lot of things, Cosmic Trigger and Prometheus Rising especially. Quite honestly, I consider him a great influence, and I suspect there are a lot of others like me. That is why this call for help is meaningful here and elsewhere, and why I'm sending a donation.

Those of you who haven't read any of his work and also feel some sort of strange self-righteous lack of human kindness to the point of telling a terminally ill man to "get a job at Wal-Mart" might do well to never grow old, sick, or widowed.

Re:RAW changed my life.

[Anonymous Coward]

But most of those people who are old, sick and widowed aren't famous. So if you're old, sick and widowed and you need some help, just be sure to get famous first.

Re:RAW changed my life.

[lordmage]

Man Wrestling shows must really have gotten good for WWE RAW to change your life. In love with John Cena are we?

Good Heart, So What.

[Matt McIntyre]

I dont know why there are so many out there who could care less about helping others. I think that your careing about someone elses problems says something good about you. But I am in agreement with the others. Why the hell did you waste a perfectly good posting space? You could have put it in a sidenote on something that the others would actually care about. Or even had a web site link to more info if the reader cared about finding out more about it. I say next time think before you post and thanks for letting me know I do like those books as well.

Re:Good Heart, So What.

[Anonymous Coward]

I dont know why there are so many out there who could care less about helping others.

Seriously, what's wrong with so many of you?

testimony blah blah

[Mr. Underbridge]

"Another testimony to how our society refuses to reward those who enrich it."

Society votes with it's wallets, and deems itself insufficiently enriched.

Re:testimony blah blah

[rolandzebub]

This society values Paris Hilton more than Robert Anton Wilson, so that's no reflection on how he has enriched us. I remain confident RAW will be remembered and valued long after she, you and I are forgotten piles of dust...

"Compassionate Conservativism"

[gentimjs]

A compassionate conservative sees a man and his family eating grass on the side of the road. The CC pulls over and asks "what are you doing?" the man replies, "we are too poor to eat, and cannot find work because of ethnic and religious discrimination". The CC tells him "thats terrible, hop in my car" so the man and his family joyfully get in the car hoping for a hand-up for a job offer of some kind.

After driving a ways, the man asks the CC "So where are we going? Do you know where I can find work?" to which the CC laughs, and says "Oh no heh, I dont have a lawn mower, and the grass is much taller in my yard."
..........
They never understand.

Veterans are worthy actually

[jeffs72]

Soldiers are there to defend the country. It's not really their fault if some jackass president wants to send them half way around the world to take out the guy that tried to assassinate his daddy, is it?

I was in the Army, mainly to turn my life around and get some direction and focus. College wasn't an option for me at the time. My brother hates standardized education and wanted to do something besides work at a McJob so he joined the Maries. My uncle joined the Navy during Vietnam so he could learn to fly planes. My grandfathers both fought in WWII against Nazi Germany. My Great Grandfathers found in WWI against the evil huns. Further down the line my family served in the American Civil War on the side of the North. Another offshoot of my family happened to have founded some of the concepts of modern calculus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Gabriel_Stokes

Does that make my family a bunch of thugs?

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[GigsVT]

Yes.

I don't see how training to be able to commit mass murder of hundreds of people you don't know is somehow "turning your life around". If anything it's giving in to your base desires to be a sick fuck.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[killproc]

"my family served in the American Civil War on the side of the North. Does that make my family a bunch of thugs?"
Yes.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[Threni]

> Soldiers are there to defend the country.

Attacking civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam etc is defending your country?

> It's not really their fault if some jackass president
> wants to send them half way around the world to take out the guy that tried to assassinate his
> daddy, is it?

"Just following orders", huh?

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[jeffs72]

You clearly speak as someone without the ability for complex reasoning, so I'll explain it for you.

I wasn't trained to commit mass murder, I was trained to decontaminate people (military and civilian) in the event of an NBC attack. These skills directly translate to emergency response work (chemical plant fires, train derailments, etc).

In conclusion, you=stupid.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[jeffs72]

Following orders is how it works. If the American people don't want our soldiers there, they have the tools at their disposal to fix the situation. The soliders are there at the will of the civilian government.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[Aim Here]

FYI, that's NOT how it works. Bone up on the Nuremberg trials, from which the legal principles spring from. Obeying orders to commit war crimes (and invading another country is the supreme international crime) is a war crime, no matter if the government approves or not.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[meburke]

I'm glad someone thinks so. The VA doesn't care too much, and all the administrations have tried to reduce healthcare for Vets at the VA. In Houston, we have one of the best VA hospitals in the nation. The digital communications and computer-supported diagnostics and care were top-of-the-line when it first opened. Digital imaging meant that your X-rays were immediately available to any clinic in the hospital, and the record-keeping was superb. Unfortunately, since then they have replaced most of the IBM systems installed at the outset with Dell computers. There has been some turnover, and the replacements aren't as competent to run the systems. And they hired a lot of refugees from New Orleans who are still lazy and technically incompetent a year later (but they are keeping them). It has taken me 10 months to finally get an appointment for diagnosing a case of polymyalgia. (We don't know for certain, I need a muscle biopsy to check, but it's taken 10 months to get this far?!!?) If I could work enough to earn the money I'd opt away from the VA and go private. Which I will do as soon as I find a way to control the pain and stiffness.

I'm a Vietnam Vet. When my Dad came back from 44 months in Japanese prison camps after WWII, they decided that he was 100% disabled. Does that mean that he got $100% disability? NO! They decided he was 50% disabled from starvation. Then they decided that his shoulder wound was a 25% disability, but since he was now only 50% of a soldier, it came to an additonal 12.5%. And so forth down through the rest of his wounds. (So instead of getting 100% pay for his disabilities, he ended up with about 71%.) To make matters worse, the cancer he died from in 1970 is significantly high in the survivors of the Nagasaki blast (fairly close to where my Dad was imprisoned). In a fair world, my mother would have been granted his back pay as a Major back to the time of his death, but instead they threatened to keep her tied up in courts if she sued for back pay rather than accept survivor's benefits. (She was in her late 70's at the time.)

The Government is NOT your friend. Ask any soldier who has been to war. It's a necessary duty, but once they don't need you anymore they resent you for having to meet their contractual obligations.

RAW's predicament is a simple function of income not stretching to meet the needs. You will be seeing a LOT of this in the near future as my generation gets older. Social Security and Medicaid represent about 10 Trillion dollars of unfunded, off-balance-sheet liabilities. The Government will undoubtedly inflate the money and raise taxes to cover the costs, but this is not the same as providing services. If you are young and in the tech field, NOW is the time to start putting assets aside, increase your earning power, and fund your own medical and retirement.

I am glad to see that people were able to come to RAW's aid. Personal charity is good for us all.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[jeffs72]

If war crimes are actually being committed, then the UN should step in, defuse the situation, and bring those who committed said crimes to trial. The universal code of military justice gives clear guidelines that make it extremely clear that soldiers cannot commit war crimes. Any solider is allowed to disobey an order if obeying the order would result in the commission of a war crime.

I don't disagree at all. I also think that building car bombs to kill civilians and killing civilians based on their religion is a war crime. Do you? Where's your outrage for the guys in Iraq killing Iraqis because they aren't sunni or shiite or whateverthefuck version of Islam?

Thats, ok, I'm sure it's all fault of the $20/year grunt.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[Nimey]

Pretty much. He and the other guy probably don't know any military people and so it's easier to stereotype than think. I know many military people and they're human just like you and me. There are always the bad sort (see My Lai), but most are just trying to do the best they can, given the circumstances.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[Nimey]

The Government is NOT your friend. Ask any soldier who has been to war. It's a necessary duty, but once they don't need you anymore they resent you for having to meet their contractual obligations.

You said it. Recall that just after the current hostilities started Congress and Bush decided to cut veterans benefits, but IIRC restored them after sufficient outrage. Recall also the incident with the Bonus Army during the Great Depression.

On the other side, there's the GI Bill.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[GigsVT]

At the cost of Godwinning the entire thread, the same can easily be said of good people of the third Reich army. They were human, and the large majority of them were probably decent guys, trying to do the best they could, given the circumstances.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[corbettw]

If war crimes are actually being committed, then the UN should step in, defuse the situation, and bring those who committed said crimes to trial.

You mean like they did in Rwanda and Lebanon?

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[passthecrackpipe]

My brother hates standardized education and wanted to do something besides work at a McJob so he joined the Maries.

The Maries? is that some sort of trans-sexual branch of the US Army? Trained to rain chaos on paris and milano?

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[Threni]

> I also think that building car bombs to kill civilians and killing civilians based on their
> religion is a war crime. Do you?

No, that's a crime, not a war crime. Was Timothy McVeigh a war criminal?

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[Mr. Slippery]

The universal code of military justice gives clear guidelines that make it extremely clear that soldiers cannot commit war crimes. Any solider is allowed to disobey an order if obeying the order would result in the commission of a war crime.

That's the theory.

The reality is that an soldier who says "This invasion of (insert nation here) is a crime and I will not go", will be convicted of desertion.

Where's your outrage for the guys in Iraq killing Iraqis because they aren't sunni or shiite or whateverthefuck version of Islam?

While I am outraged at Iraqis killing Iraqis, they don't claim to be acting on behalf or in my name. Americans who are killing Iraqis do claim to be acting in my interests and name. On a personal level, that makes it more outrageous.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[Anonymous Coward]

Your comparison is way off and you need to study your history. I cannot even believe you tried to compare the two together; that is why we had war crime trials after WW2. Swear some people just have the worst comparisons possible when trying to relate modern times to the all of WW2; open your eyes and you will see the massiveness of that war.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[Threni]

> The reality is that an soldier who says "This invasion of (insert nation here) is a crime and I will
> not go", will be convicted of desertion.

So what? That's the choice you make when you join the army. I have nothing but admiration for the courage and bravery of those who stood up to Hitler, for instance, in the second world war, or who were conscripted into armies in, for instance, the first world war. But there's something of a moral difference between those poor individuals and the current batch of soldiers (American or otherwise) who are occupying countries where they have no business remaining.

Re:Veterans are worthy actually

[Anonymous Coward]

something tells me someone is taking this whole thing out of context...

just so you know, RAW was never against the common soldier. You should try reading up on the SNAFU principle sometime. If it doesn't strike a chord with you, well, we must have served in 2 completely different forces.

Damn...

[$1uck]

That man is one of my few heroes. Normally I'm of the opinion that I'm doing the world a favor/all the charity I can afford if I'm taking care of myself and not sponging off others. Call it low self-esteem, call it selfish-loutish or anti-social behaviour. I think I'll have to go and order what few books of his I don't have, maybe buy a few I already have and make them this years xmas presents.

Discordianism

[jbdaem]

Seriously, give the man a break.. This man brought me to the great religion of discordianism brought me to the fold, and reminded me of.. of... dammit, lost my train of coffee... But folks, he really is a great thinker, worth the few pennys, cents, tuppance, whatever, you can toss him. A lot fo his fans (read, me) can't afford to, seeing as we aren't even online as far as finances are concerned.... {they're tracking me, you know}

Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Almost every fringe-geek worth their salt has read 'The Illuminatus! Trilogy,' or at least the 'Principia Discordia,

And it's right about there you lost my interest.

not so simple.

[Anonymous Coward]

Comment:
Not everything he wrote was golden. The biggest problem is that he doesn't consider the advance of technology to lift everyone up.

Sure there are poor in america - but the 'average poor' is about a thousand times better off than the poor of his day.

Economics is not a zero-sum game. Wealth is not in the holding of money but in the speed at which our money circulates. Imagine an economy of two people, and there are 10 dollar bills between them. What is the maximum annual income either can hope to achieve? The answer is that it's only limited by the practical rate at which they can complete transactions.

bah humbug.

Re:not so simple.

[Anonymous Coward]

There is most definitely not wealth in money circulation! Economic is a non-zero sum game because natural resources with little use are made into usefull things, money shifting shemes are not productive.

After having read these post and the article...

[StressGuy]

I'll comment:

Some of the post here state that, there are people who are worse off and less well known and perhaps such support would be better directed toward them.

Other post questioned why he was receiving private care when he could go to a state hospital.

These are valid points, no argument from me...largely because I don't know much more about him other than he needs help.

However, I'm having difficulty seeing how it follows that it is "morally wrong" or "hypocritical" to provide assistance to someone when:

1) You know they need the help

2) They have, in some way, help you or otherwise enriched your life in the past

3) Maybe you just simply admire them.

If you are moved to help this guy, do so and don't let anyone here call you a "hypocrite". If you're really curious, perhaps use this to learn more about his particular afflicition. Who knows? Someday there may be a fund in his name for this very purpose.

Lance Armstrong's got the "Livestrong" foundation...I wonder what his would be called?

Re:After having read these post and the article...

[Megane]

Lance Armstrong's got the "Livestrong" foundation...I wonder what his would be called?

[badtaste] Diescordian? [/badtaste]

It looks like he got enough fnords sent to him for now. I'll keep a watch for a second wave of requests. No need to stuff his PP more now and either get it shut down for "fraud" or to attract the unwanted attention of a Three Letter Agency.

Speaking of which, just what kind of problems does he have with the IRS anyhow? The Wikipedia page doesn't mention it, other than them being a bit more real than the Tooth Fairy and harder to get rid of.

Re:After having read these post and the article...

[Rydia]

The fund would be called "universal health care," and would come about when we realize that: a) our health is too important to trust in the hands of a for-profit organization, b) "voting with your wallets" is nice romantic nonsense, but betrays the fact that we as a public have extremely little control over said corporations (as opposed to a government which can be moved if need be... see 1994), and c) insurance works by insuring as many people as possible, to counter claims at one point with non-claiming members at another. Modern American insurance is trying to weed out those likely to make claims... which is what makes insurance expensive, since you are either in a high-premium insurance if you're at any point at risk, with rates going up if you run into something chronic, or a healthy person in a cheap plan with generally thin coverage. A universal system (think France or Japan, not Canada) makes the entire country part of the group, which would skyrocket the healthy/not-healthy ratio to the point where the system becomes very economically efficient.

As for personal pleas for money, I feel bad, but my personal values (and my personal catholicism) actually do say that it is wrong to specially help one person with money to aid their symptoms without doing anything about the cure. In this case, the cure needs to be systemic, and a few bucks to him won't really help anything.

Re:After having read these post and the article...

[Moofie]

"a) our health is too important to trust in the hands of a for-profit organization"

But you're going to trust it to Congress? Yeah, that'll work.

What's Steve Jackson chipping in?

[Anonymous Coward]

He's the one who really owes RAW.

Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[OakDragon]

God bless the poor guy, and I do feel sorry for him... But I own a copy of this trilogy, and honestly, I tried to read it and couldn't. It was just crap (my opinion, obviously). So I was a little surprised to see so many people here who admired it. Is there anyone here who found it unreadable, like me?

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. You're honestly the first person I've ever heard of who tried to read the Illuminatus and didn't like it.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Cuppa 'Joe' Black]

The book is a little like martial arts - it comes at you with kung fu kicks. If you don't learn a little kung fu it will kick your ass. This ain't no spoon feed session.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Nimey]

I had to read Illuminatus! 2-3 times before I started to Get It, and now I've read it 5 or 6 times and it's maybe my Favorite. Book. Ever. The first read-through was pretty difficult because of all the jumping around and obscure jokes, yes. Try reading it again and see if you like it any more.

PS: Yes, I'm Discordian and was starting on that path when I first read it.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[autophile]

I've been trying to read it. Each time I get a little farther, probably due to all the jumping around. At times I laugh out loud. So yes, I enjoy the parts that I've been able to read, but no, I haven't enjoyed the whole book. Yet.

--Rob

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Anonymous Coward]

You weren't stoned. Or drunk. Obviously. :)

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Anonymous Coward]

I read it in high school and most of it was probably over my head. I didn't especially care for it. I've tried to start it again, but it's just too out there. I can read two full pages of Neal Stephenson describing how to eat Cap'n Cruch and I'll enjoy it, but this, I can't get into.

I don't care for Douglas Adams either, and it's important to realize Illuminatus! is much more a comedy than a real conspiracy book. You have to like comic sci-fi to like this, I think.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[nCorax]

It is simultaneously unreadable, and a work of genius.
Not as much as say, _Finnegans Wake_, but maybe in the same category of things.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Illuminatus!" is not supposed to be good literature in the normal-person sense.

It is just several thousand pages of inside jokes, or not even that -- just references to inside jokes, jokes that are "inside" to sci-fi and fantasy readers and conspiracy theorists. The kind of people who grew up reading Lovecraft in the 50's as misfit teenagers, spent their college years not quite cool enough to consume enough '60s style quantities of drugs but on the fringes of the culture, and spent way too many late night bull sessions discusing the assassinations of JFK, MLK, Bobby Kennedy, Wallace (attempted), the military-industrial complex and the vietnam war, etc. There is no plot or character development or anything like that. Immagine two geeks in a basement somewhere saying "You killed my father!" *snort* "Rats of unusual size!" *snort* "You keep using that word, but . . ." *snort* *snort* *snort* That's what the book is like, but different "jokes".

To enjoy the book, you have to immagine what the kind of people who spend all night quoting "The Princess Bride" to each other and only laugh by snorting inward through their noses would have been doing in 1976.

Once you get in the frame of mind, it's worth reading, I guess, as long as you don't have something important to do, like wash your car.

I still believe, however, that all people who laugh by snorting inward and like "The Princess Bride" should be taken out in the woods somewhere and shot. I'd schedule the event to co-incide with one of the big Ren Faire's and round up that crowd too. We could use the list of donors to this rent fund as a starting point for the list.

Then on the other hand, I guess fat chicks have to get laid somewhere. Maybe we'll keep them around. They're fairly harmless so long as you don't let them start installing shit on your computer.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[petronivs]

True, it's not for everyone, but it's not crap. You want crap, read John Norman's Gor books.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

It was just crap (my opinion, obviously). So I was a little surprised to see so many people here who admired it.

If I recall it won quite a few awards and was very popular. Anyway, I loved his work because it went beyond being just a story and was truly a literary attack on our culture. When you stuff your work with that much obviously ludicrous conspiracy theories, but support them with an array of completely true, but unusual facts mixed with both outrageous and plausible fictions the reader simply does not know how to process it. I had to meticulously research everything in the books, simply to comprehend what he managed to put together and even now I occasionally hear some fiction from it presented as fact, or conversely some fact from it dismissed as fiction. 1984 painted a terrible fiction that has influenced our culture as an example. The Illuminatus trilogy, invaded our culture and subtly rearranged some of the furniture. Sorry you did not like it, it is one of my favorites.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Tony]

I still believe, however, that all people who laugh by snorting inward and like "The Princess Bride" should be taken out in the woods somewhere and shot.

Phew! I'm safe. I love _The Princess Bride_, but I laugh long and loud and clear. Especially loud.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Simulant]

It's a magic book that's different every time you read it!

But seriously if Illuminatus is to much (and I agree it's dense and hard to read) try one of his others... especially Cosmic Trigger.

Bob is a wonderful guy. May he pass in peace.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[TheoMurpse]

In a semi-related vein, I have never read any RAW, but I just cannot get through a Neal Stephenson book. There are so many people who love his work, and I've often wondered if there is something wrong with me. I've read LotR, Gone With the Wind, Anna Karenina, etc., and I'm in law school right now, so obviously it is not the length of the books that bothers me. The pacing just seems off to me.

Does the fact that I love Nerdcore make up for the fact that I cannot enjoy Cryptonomicon? Please advise!

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Anonymous Coward]

Snowcrash is painful to read, basically utterly horrible and not worth the time. You are not alone.
That being said, I'm posting as AC to try to avoid having my geek license revoked.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's what they all say.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Pootie Tang]

I hated it too. And I read the whole thing anyway. Since so many people seem to like it so much, I figured eventually the liking it would kick in, but it didn't.

I have to say, the suggestion to try re-reading it sounds intersting. I might very well like it better the second time. But no fucking way am I going to find out, I *really* hated that book. If not the, at least the second least enjoyable book I've read (by choice, reading assignments in school don't count).

At the same time, I did find it a bit expanding. Well, a little constricting too, I hate Ayn Rand by extension despite having read nothing of hers. But I found myself interested in learning about more religions (which lead to The Varieties of Religious Experience by William James, that's the one that competes with Illuminatus as least enjoyable read ever, though I got a lot more out of it. It's just very academic and I found that dull).

I did go on to read Promethus Rising. Didn't hate it, but didn't really accept what it was saying either.

I did like the fnord concept, that was cool, and hearing about fnord was how I first heard of Illuminatus. However, even if it really is good and it just takes a couple of reads or the right mindset or whatever, it still suprises me that the opinion is so overwhelmingly favorable. How many people are willing to give a 1000 page book a second chance? Maybe I'm just particularly literature lazy.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[gad_zuki!]

I am/was a big fan and felt the sameway about the trilogy. Its amusing but felt like 100 pages of comedy stretched out to 500 pages. To each his own of course. I find his non-fiction incredibly compelling and consider Cosmic Trigger a must-read for anyone who wants to grok the late 60s/early 70s counter-culture.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[budword]

Cryptonomicon is amazing. There isn't something wrong with you, there must be many things wrong with you. Snow Crash is good too, and well, it does go a little down hill after those two, but not by much. Cryptonomicon is Art, the rest is just a damn good read, which is good enough for me. 90% of fantasy or sci-fi is unreadable. ALL of Stephenson's stuff is readable. And you really have to love any publisher or editor who let him go on and on for 3 pages on Tom Howard's letter to penthouse, the captain crunch bit or the charts and equations of Waterhouses code breaking effectiveness (and the reasons for it. :>)). They had to take a bit of a risk there, and I think it worked out for them. He includes real perl code for a crypto system in the book, you can't get more geek than that. I had heard of linux before I read Cryptonomicon, but he really sparked my interest in it, AND it's damn funny. Ok...enough sales for today...... Please don't mod me OT for this, the record needed to be set straight.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[TheoMurpse]

He includes real perl code for a crypto system in the book, you can't get more geek than that.

For fairness's sake, I could write an entire book in Perl, but that doesn't make it good.

The only part I really liked about the book were the scenes involving Turing (one of my idols). I will be honest in admitting that I enjoyed the early passages with Turing and his German "colleague" -- kind of a geeked out fan fiction (isn't all fan fiction geeked out, though?).

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[Damek]

1984 painted a terrible fiction that has influenced our culture as an example. The Illuminatus trilogy, invaded our culture and subtly rearranged some of the furniture. Sorry you did not like it, it is one of my favorites.

Surely there has to be some threshold number of people to have read something or to be aware of it before anyone can claim it's "invaded our culture." I only ever meet "freaks and geeks" (and I don't use those terms disparagingly; I consider myself one) who have even heard of it, let alone read it. Unless by "our" you mean "the Slashdot demographic." Then, yes, I would agree it's somewhat part of that culture, although even less so than, say, Douglas Adams. And he's not a big blip on the culture meter.

Re:Is there anyone here who hated the book?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Surely there has to be some threshold number of people to have read something or to be aware of it before anyone can claim it's "invaded our culture." I only ever meet "freaks and geeks" (and I don't use those terms disparagingly; I consider myself one) who have even heard of it, let alone read it.

Well, it was a bestseller, but I don't think the number of people who read it is as important as the observed influence. As I said, I've heard a number of people cite things Mr. Wilsons' books "informed" the user of as background info and which were spread by word of mouth. Some of it is true, some of it is fiction and much of it is wrongly depicted as the other by those who cite it as trivia or support. It influenced a lot of literature that came after it. And, as I said, I believe it had a much more subtle effect upon our culture than a normal work of literature. Most of the people who have bits of it wandering around their brain have never read the book and would have no idea that was the source of their mis-education through the grapevine.

Refuses?

[Anonymous Coward]

Another testimony to how our society refuses to reward those who enrich it...

Isn't copyright supposed to serve that purpose? If life+decades of copyright isn't enough of a reward maybe we should really toss it...

Scam?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd very much like to give RAW something back for all the pleasure I got out of his books.

BUT: Does anyone have even marginal prove that the money to that rather strange paypal account actually reaches an actually ill RAW? Reputation of these sites?

At first glance it triggers all my SCAM sensors.

So, please convice me with an independend opinion!

Re:Scam?

[DagdaMor]

It's RAW's paypal account, its even listed on his own website.

Re:Scam?

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks, found it and donated.

Recognition. for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Where people recognize that it takes not only time and effort to create something new,* but that nothing is ever completely new and that we all stand on the shoulders of the giants who have come before us?"

Well first of all, it's not so much "giants" as it is many midgets. Second you trivalize the fact that that body of contributions was built from many, many people all getting rewarded (and in some cases, not) over time. And by rewarding him the process continues. Trying for "completely new" not only is unnecessary, but wasteful (Linux vs Hurd).

"You mean the very same slashdot where non-traditional methods of compensating creators are constantly under evalluation and up for debate?"

More like thrown out there (and constantly repeated) and expecting people to adopt their "new and improved" business model, while they sit back and take no risks.

*And a bigger body of posts that refuse to recognize that fact. That regularly complains about actors, sport figures, and managerial salaries. That complain that people don't spend money on their favorite subject instead of sports.

Yes, very naive.

Re:Recognition. for his copyrighted work?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

More like thrown out there (and constantly repeated) and expecting people to adopt their "new and improved" business model, while they sit back and take no risks.

Said the AC...

Re:Recognition. for his copyrighted work?

[Anonymous Coward]

"More like thrown out there (and constantly repeated) and expecting people to adopt their "new and improved" business model, while they sit back and take no risks.

Said the AC..."

Well since I'm not the fool going around denigrating present methods, what exactly is your point?

RAW's Life After Death

[Jon Luckey]

Robert Anton Wilsons autobiography is titled Cosmic Trigger. There were several updates/sequals including Cosmic Trigger III: My Life After Death

What the subtitle refers to is the false stories that he was found dead in his home on February 22, 1994 that propagated on the internet and the insights he had from watching the situation unfold.

I really hope that again the current story is also unfounded. But I am afraid its not, so I will be sending a check.

For all those 'the hippy should gedda job' folks, they might be interested to know that RAW was a (little l) libertarian before it was cool. It fact he was probably one of the seed crystals that fostered the 'coolness' on the internet back in the day.

Re:RAW's Life After Death

[revscat]

What the subtitle refers to is the false stories that he was found dead in his home on February 22, 1994 that propagated on the internet and the insights he had from watching the situation unfold.

Yeah, that was me.

I was bored, and wanted to cause a bit of a stir in alt.discordia. I was a huge Illuminatus! fan, and figured if anyone could handle the joke, the Discordians could. So... being 20 years old I dreamt up the idea of a fake obituary, posted it to alt.discordia. I didn't make it too long, because while he's known, he's not famous. Worthy of inclusion in the LA Times, but not national news. All the bio info I gleamed from his books and "About the Author" stuff."

I come back the next day and there's a HUGE stink about it. People looking for confirmation, wailing and gnashing of teeth, etc. In short: success! A few days later I got an email from RAW's publicist telling me that it was a good joke and that RAW got a chuckle out of it.

One of my prouder moments, honestly. I only received a couple of flames about it; after it all blew over everyone was in good spirits about it.

Now, having said that I did feel like a complete ass when just a couple of months later Robert Shea really did die, and no one would believe it at first. Unintended consequences... Yin/yang.

Re:RAW's Life After Death

[Anonymous Coward]

> For all those 'the hippy should gedda job' folks, they might be interested to know that RAW was a (little l) libertarian before it was cool. It fact he was probably one of the seed crystals that fostered the 'coolness' on the internet back in the day.

Reading RAW's Telemachus Sneezed excerpts in Illuminatus! made Atlas Shrugged a lot more enjoyable. Or was it the other way around?

Illuminatus! itself can be viewed as a parody of (or homage to, and is there really any difference?) Atlas Shrugged. I mean, a guy in a submarine who goes around the world, helping to restore human freedom by looting from the looters. Crazy stuff.

Conspiracy theory for the day: Alan Greenspan hung out with Rand in the 60s and 70s, and his writings appear in Rand's anthologies of non-fiction essays. Maybe Greenspan's spent the past 20 years playing the role of a real-life Francisco "Fnord" D'Anconia. (About as likely as me being the the fifth Illuminatus Primus... at least... after RAW retires from the position.)

Also: Former "Playboy Advisor"

[joe_n_bloe]

R.A.W was an editor at Playboy for several years - his name was on the masthead. Somewhere I have some of those issues. The letters he read must have been great inspiration.

Schrodinger's Cat and The Trick Top Hat were two of the funnest/funniest books I read in my late teens. The Illuminatus Trilogy didn't do much for me, but I do make jokes about the Dog Star from time to time.

Now, I'm going to go Burger.

The story icon threw me

[dustwun]

Might be offtopic here, but when I first saw the icon used for the story, I thought to myself "Holy crap E17 released finally! Then I realized that it wasn't an E17 story, and that it also wasn't April first...

I feel I've been wronged in some fashion I can't properly explain.

Call the RIAA!!?!!1 FTW!

[Anonymous Coward]

Another testimony to how our society refuses to reward those who enrich it...

Dude, those songs belong to me by rights! Information wants to be free! Just because an artist makes something he has no right to it, he should have to tour to make cash...

If you people can't see how this relates than you're nothing but a bunch of simple minded assholes.

Degenerate case

[istartedi]

In a degenerate case like this, theory breaks down. In an economy of two, say, travelers stranded on a desert island, money is unecessary. If they were Adam and Eve, and had children, that would be radicly deflationary unless they had a printing press too. Even then, they wouldn't have a need for money as we know it until they had managed to populate the island to some critical number.

I'm not disagreeing with your main point though. I'd much rather be a trailer park resident in the modern US than a king in medieval times.

The Justified Ancients of Mu Mu

[ettlz]

I call upon Drummond and Cauty to come forth. The KLF once burnt a million quid made with the indirect help of this mythos.

Re:The Justified Ancients of Mu Mu

[easter1916]

KLF... uh-huh!

The KLF were a seriously fascinating bunch. Didn't they also shoot a load of cash out the turret of an armoured personnel carrier (painted bright yellow) 'doon North' in Scotland somewhere? I was off my head on E at the time so my memories are sketchy...

Re:The Justified Ancients of Mu Mu

[ettlz]

Something like that. They nailed forty grand to a board for art (which I how I'm thinking of paying my brother's tuition fees); later gave away a considerable portion of that to what they considered to be the worst art of that particular year. "Kick out the JAMs, motherfucker."

Re:The Justified Ancients of Mu Mu

[Salsaman]

ISTR they also hung a dead cow outside a shopping mall.

I think they decided to take it down though when they realised the public health problems (cows stomachs tend to explode from fermentation after they're dead).

What goes around comes around.

[Anonymous Coward]

How delightful to see such open-hearted responses to an appeal to help a wonderful old man with a great canon of work who is terminally ill in hospital.

Fuck the lot of you cynical, small-minded, heartless bastards. Enjoy the society you are breeding that will treat you the same way financially and spiritually, sooner or later.

Mod me what you like.

Humanity

[certain death]

I did not get that the article was, or the comments were saying that the guy is owed something. How about just showing a little humanity and helping out a fellow human being? People now adays have become so cross and disbelieving that it is hard for them to accept the fact that someone might be down and out, and need help...HONESTLY. This person just happened to write books that influenced several generations, take that away, and you still have a human being who needs some help. What say we declare a national "show some damn humanity" day, hell, we have a "Talk like a Pirate" day. Just for the record, I DO NOT give spare change to bums on the sidewalk, nor do I usually fall for the people who are standing along side traffic with a sign that says "Disabled Vetran, Need Help, God Bless". People who genuinely need help, those are the people who I try to help, use your head, and you can usually tell who they are without a lot of strain.

$23.00 Donated

[Stonyman]

Despite the fact that I've never met the man, and probably never will, Bob has been a great friend to me. I've received enjoyment from his books, I've taken comfort from his ideas and I've spent many hours pondering his philosophy. Now my friend is in need, so I sent him some cash. Perhaps it wasn't much, but it is an amount I know I can afford and since I'm not the only one who counts him as a friend, it'll be multiplied many times over.

Could my donation have done more good if given to a charity? Perhaps so. But I've made donations to Greenpeace, Amnesty International, The St. Vincent DePaul Society, Second Harvest Food bank and others in the past, and I'll continue making such donations.

Ultimately, though, even if I had made no other charitable donations in my life, I'd probably still have donated to help Bob, just because I value what the man has given me and the world. It's worth it to brown bag it for a few days to be able to help Bob out in this small way. If anyone doesn't like that, tough. They have no say in how I dispense my charitable contributions. I wouldn't try to persuade them to donate to Bob against their wishes, so why should they try to persuade anyone not to donate? That so many have tried to do so strikes me as small minded and mean spirited on their part.

Re:$23.00 Donated

[Derek Pomery]

Nice charity list, except for Greenpeace.
GMO food isn't exactly corn with teeth. Is saving lives and reducing human impact on the environment.
Hell, plants swap genes all the time. Virally and through cross-breeding.
And humans have been manipulating plant genes since early history. We've just gotten better at it.
Their focus on this issue is harming their other efforts, and one reason I will not support them financially.
Just like the Boy Scouts - which are a good concept, but a christian right hijacked agenda.

Re:$23.00 Donated

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget the Sierra Club. Anyone with half a brain knows those loonies do more to hurt "the cause" than to help it.

Re:$23.00 Donated

[h4rm0ny]

Nice charity list, except for Greenpeace. GMO food isn't exactly corn with teeth. Is saving lives and reducing human impact on the environment. Hell, plants swap genes all the time. Virally and through cross-breeding.

Well they don't often swap them with catapillars in order to produce their own insecticide. But that's a minor point. Do you really want foodstuffs that are patented and owned by international corporations so that farmers are unable to grow crops without paying for the privelage to do so? Do you also want crops that are engineered not to reproduce naturally so that farmers are unable to save seed from this years crop and must re-purchase new seed each year? Do you also want that situation to magnify economic or infrastructure problems into a situation where food cannot be planted in many areas? Would you also like a situation where genetic diversity is radically reduced by the homogenity of GM crops resulting in the "eggs in one basket" situation that would make the Irish Potato Famine look like skipping lunch? Where one new blight will take down vast swathes of the World's staple crops? Do you also want a situation where genetically modified crops allow unprecendented quantities and strengths of herbicides and pesticides to be deployed on farmland with the corresponding run-off into rivers and lakes and the increasing decimation of wildlife? Do you want the forces pushing this technology to be ridicuously rich and powerful corporations like Monsanto that can bring unbelievable incentives and pressures to bear (including buying government policy) to force this situation on most of the Third World? Do you want these same corporations to take advantage of the ridiculous system of the US government using your tax dollars to subsidise US agriculture to produce food that is then destroyed because it isn't wanted in order to promote GM crops even in North America where there is no need at all?

I mean... just hypothetically. I mean you can talk about it not being corn with teeth if you like, but that is, if you'll pardon me, a strawman argument.

And as to the real need for it in Third World countries, well taking an example like Monsanto's "Golden Rice" which is enriched with Vitamin D, you'll find that historically people in many now malnourished regions actually ate a very balanced and nutritious diet. It was international economic pressure that forced them to swap growing a variety of crops to mass-producing single staples such as rice in the first place and brought about the resulting deficiencies. You know, if you're repeatedly hitting someone on the head with a plank, you don't make things better by taping a pillow to their skull. You stop hitting them. We are capable as a species of feeding ourselves sustainably with existing technology. We don't need the GM crops and the problems they bring make them a very bad move.

Re:$23.00 Donated

[Derek Pomery]

As a matter of fact, cross-species gene transfer virally does in fact occur. That's what I was trying to anticipate with the viral thing.
No, I don't think foodstuffs owned by large corporations is a good idea. If Greenpeace was focusing on the theft of traditional medicines and "ownership" of gene sequences that would be a completely different matter.
As for genetic diversity, that is rapidly shrinking, whether GMO is used or not. Take the banana predicament. That is simply farmers choosing what works best. GMO may actually alleviate this, by bringing in more efficient crossbreeds. Seed banks will help a lot though.
In many cases GMO allows reduction in herbicide use, so that one also has little bearing. Herbicide resistant crops resulting in polution increases is an issue of farmer education and government/private protection of our common resources.
The point about Monsanto and other companies screwing with third world economies is also not germane to the GMO issue.

Corn with teeth was an image directly from a Greenpeace protest float in new york.

So. You have half-problems of stupid U.S. patent law (which other countries are beginning to see the light on) and half non-problems.

GMO crops allow increased efficiency in use of farmlands which will result in less agricultural land needed. This is important if folks want to try growing biofuels, or just to reduce human usage of natural lands.
As for the diet of traditional people, that's frankly laughable. Even before "economic" pressures traditional diets often were lacking in vitamins and trace minerals. The noble savage in tune with nature is a pathetic modern myth.
And even if it wasn't, we need to address the problems *NOW* as in what the world is like right now. Which means reducing birthrates *and* feeding the people already inhabiting this crowded planet.

But of course, all this has been hashed many many times before. What pisses me off about Greenpeace is that instead of focusing on fighting the evils of patent law and corporate meddling in government they decide to try and eliminate GMO entirely.
Norman Borlaug at least knows better.

I think not

[Anonymous Coward]

He wants money?? Hell, I want the four days of my life back I wasted reading his crappy trilogy. Psychic zombie Nazis imprisoned in Lake Geneva? WTF??? The part about fnords was reasonably funny, but everything else was just the psychotic ramblings of someone who's overindulged in illegal substances. These are books everyone pretends to like, just so they have some more geek cred.

I started reading the Illuminatus! Trilogy a...

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

...few weeks ago. After about 200 pages I gave up. I never give up on books. Well, almost never. But this was the worst written crap I have ever read in my life. I was so let down. This book is a modern icon that has had so many cultural influences. I've had the book on my shelf for many many years. But it was unreadable. It was so bad I could't bear to keep it around the house and sold it again. So here's my recommendation: the idea of the Illuminatus! Trilogy is wonderful. Whatever you do, don't ruin the idea by actually reading the book.

Besides being bad literature it does a terrible job of building up a believable conspiracy theory. This book may have helped create the conspiracy theory genre, but later authors have done so much better with the idea. Even Dan Brown's writing looks good by comparison.

Re:I started reading the Illuminatus! Trilogy a...

[nuxx]

Ah, you didn't read far enough... After ~250 pages you'll suddenly get it.

Re:I started reading the Illuminatus! Trilogy a...

[Oligonicella]

Assuming you weren't joking, that statement is enough that I shan't read it. No worth my time.

The facts.

[Anonymous Coward]

For people too busy to RTFA as usual.

Bob is dying from post-polio syndrome. He contracted polio as a child and its effects are destroying him.

He is doing so at home, being cared for by family, friends and volunteers.

He is broke and therefore can't afford to pay the rent.

Before you suggest he gets a job in Starbucks et al, bear those facts in mind.

Some of you really need to grow a fucking soul.

Never read his books, so...

[Bob Cat - NYMPHS]

Anyone have a torrent?

Re:Never read his books, so...

[Frodrick]

Anyone have a torrent?

Very funny. Buy a copy - then RTFA.

less platitudes, more action

[nowonmai]

pathetic donation made...

Re:less platitudes, more action

[Anonymous Coward]

thats better, $50 for 'bob eris and robert' - once I figured out that javascript blocking screws up paypal.

There used to be this guy

[Anonymous Coward]

whose paintings didn't sell very well. His name was van Gogh. Mozart died penniless.

Let's not pretend. Most good art is too smart for the public to understand anyway. What purpose does it serve, then? Well, somebody must be the forerunner, since the average Joe would be happy sitting in front of his TV looking at whatever everyone else dumb enough is also watching. Today, most of the money is made by exploiting stupid people. It's so uncreative.

Re:There used to be this guy

[91degrees]

Mozart died penniless.

But that was because he was an idiot. Not because he was unsuccesful.

Re:There used to be this guy

[Schemat1c]

Mozart died penniless.

But that was because he was an idiot. Not because he was unsuccesful.

You're calling Mozart an idiot?

Priceless.

Re:There used to be this guy

[91degrees]

You're calling Mozart an idiot?

In certain respects. He was also a genius, I'm sure.

I bet even Einstein was capable of impressive stupidity outside the realm of Physics.

Re:There used to be this guy

[Anonymous Coward]

You exhibit impressive stupidity outside the realm of your own head. Within your head you are living the pattern of an average capitalist-megalomaniac.

Re:There used to be this guy

[rolandzebub]

Oh, you're sure he was also a genius? Well, thanks for confirming that for us, dude, your comments are so enlightening...

Re:There used to be this guy

[91degrees]

Woah Dude. What are you doing inside my head? Get out now. Weird things happen in there.

He's a Discordian right?

[Mr. Muskrat]

If so, he should embrace the disharmony and chaos that has been set upon him. Evidently he has had too much order in his life.

Re:He's a Discordian right?

[Anonymous Coward]

too bad you have no idea what you're talkinga about. disorder != chaos, order isn't always constructive and disorder isn't destructive.

Choices in life, errr blogs

[soloes]

ok There were about 100 diffeent comments here i wanted to reply to, so i just decided to combine it into one comment of my own:
I have not read his books, but I kow a lot of people who have. many of them are /.'ers. I actually just opened this article to see if it mentioned more about his writing since he came so highly reccomended. I never perceived this article as asking me for money. It is letting those people who have read his works or who hold some respect for him know that he needs help. I am not one of those people so I do not see this article as asking me for anything.
There is no reason to get offended by something you CHOSE to read. There is no reason to announce that we dont know this guy (though I am currently basically doign that hehe).
It is a good service to let the people who would want to know that this man needs help. Those of us who have not been influenced by him can A) wonder why so many were and go read his books and maybe join their ranks, B)move on to other more flamable threads like HP eavesdropping, or C) sit here and bitch about something that really has absolutely no effect on us at all.
I think I will mix a little of A and B together myself.

Re:Choices in life, errr blogs

[bhsurfer]

Try his Cosmic Trigger series if you're looking for a place to start. I thought Cosmic Trigger II was incredible. Maybe you will too. One nice thing about them (and a lot of his other stuff) is that you don't have to read them in order. Much like his hero James Joyce he deals with fragmented thoughts that aren't necessarily linear, so one won't be a spoiler for any of the others.

Had me there for a minute.

[Kadin2048]

I'm sure you over in the USA don't have standards of governance all that far behind the rest of the western world.

God, you're funny.

Must be that dry European humor that I'm always hearing about. I almost couldn't tell that you were joking.

You do what you want, we'll do what we want

[spun]

No one is forcing you to do anything. We are pressuring you. There's a difference. We are playing on your compassion for other humans. Sick, I know, trying to get you to care about others, what's wrong with us? Don't we understand what America, the free market, personal responsibility and Social Darwinism are all about? This man is sick. Society doesn't value him, he deserves to die.

Okay, enough sarcasm. Here's the deal. We live in a free country. You are free not to help this man. But we are free to call you an asshole to your face. You can't shut us up. You can feel motivated not to help when someone asks for money, and the rest of us will feel motivated to point at you and say, "Look at the poor crippled human, isn't it pathetic, it lacks empathy and compassion and it lives in a hell of its own making because it can not connect with other human beings on a deep and meaningful level. How sad. Glad I'm not like that."

I met Robert Anton Wilson at a conference I was helping give a presentation for in 2000, called Disinfocon. It was put on by disinfo.com, "The yahoo of the weird and unusual." He is a very nice person, very smart, and his books are not garbage. He gave a presentation on the book "Saharasia," by James DeMeo, a student of Wilhelm Reich, which explains the origins of human violence. Very interesting.

You seem to think that because he is poor now, his books must not of sold well. They were on the NY Times best seller list. They are very popular, and every real geek I've ever met has read them. Even if you have not read his books, if you have read any books in the last thirty years chances are you read someone who was deeply influenced by his writings.

I'm truly sad for you. You are obviously missing something which most of the rest of us find to be one of the most important parts of being human. If sharing compassion and empathy were as easy as sharing money, I would give you some of mine.

Re:You do what you want, we'll do what we want

[somersault]

handing out money is hardly connecting on a "deep and meaningful level". I don't think I'm not an asshole for not contributing, and yeah I've not read many books recently other than Discworld novels (and no, I dont watch TV, though I do watch movies, work, and use my computer for communication and the more and more occasional game). If this guy hasn't read any of this guys books then what's wrong with him being cynical about handing over money, and also the fact that this guy probably had more money than most of us makes it a weird idea that we should send him money. I have no problems with people being compassionate, but presumably some people on slashdot have other causes they'd like to put their money towards than (and this is just a mean and blunt way of putting it) someone who's already lived what sounds like an interesting life and is about to die. It's great that his fans are so appreciative of his work, and willing to help him out this way, though. It almost makes me interested in reading one of his books, though at the moment I have better things to do in my life than be bothered by occupying my mind with conspiracy theories etc. I don't see why to be a 'real geek' you have to ascribe to a set list of books to read etc, though admittedly since leaving high school I've realised I'm less geeky than I expected (I even have a girlfriend, imagine that!).

I kind of agree with you, but your tone is just so patronising that I feel offended even though your comments aren't directed at me! And I can't be bothered ordering my previous ramble right now. I really do wonder about reading one of these books though, if I could find the time :S.. *starting to feel more insecure in his geekiness*

Re:You do what you want, we'll do what we want

[spun]

It's meant to be patronising. It's absolutely flamebait, and I really hope I pissed off WhyAmIHere and raised his blood pressure at least a little bit. The guy offended me with his callous attitude towards someone I've read, met, and deeply respect. You aren't sending money, and I have no problem with that, because you didn't try to justify it in a disgusting social darwinist kind of way. Hell, "I don't feel like it" is more acceptable than the way WhyAmIHere put it. And I doubt someone like that is giving money to anyone but his sad lonely self.

Handing out money is not connecting on a deep and meaningful level. I never said that. I connect more meaningfully with homeless people when I look them in the eye, smile, say "I'm sorry, I really don't have anything to give right now," and move on than when I drop a quarter in their hands without so much as glancing at them. But from what I've seen, social darwinists with an attitude like WhyAmIHere think the world is a cold, hard place where everyone is out to screw everyone else all the time. That's just sad. People like that never have real friends, they have, at best, temporary allies who they feel may turn on them at any moment, and of course that justifies them turning on their allies pre-emptively, too. If I had to live in a world like that, I'd slit my own throat.

Re:You do what you want, we'll do what we want

[somersault]

I think of the world in general as being of the 'social darwinist' persuasion as you say then, or at least see business and government operating on that level, but I guess that's different. I do think some people are just out to get what they can get, but I guess you're right in that some people are decent and worthy of love and trust. Personally if I'd read the guy's books I wouldn't have a problem donating.

It's probably because I'm used to free health care over here, my first thoughts were that if this guy has no money, he really must have squandered it, and doesn't deserve to just be given money for 'nothing'. I still don't know whether that's the case or not, as he probably did have quite a rich lifestyle at some point, but by the sounds of it he's being screwed over by the system he's made money his living off of (by writing fiction based on politics etc).

Re:You do what you want, we'll do what we want

[spun]

Over here, people like writers who have no company health plan must spend a fortune on health insurance. Then, if you get really sick, the insurance companies screw you over with huge thousand dollar deductables for every procedure, and every little thing is its own procedure so you end up paying for your own health care anyway, even though you thought you had insurance. It's not uncommon for people who are really sick to burn through $50,000 or more in a year.

I wish I lived in a less barbaric country. Unfortunately, I don't have the cash to move anyplace else and I can't find any companies in other english speaking countries who will say they can't find anyone local with my skillset (Linux, IBM BladeCenter, VMWare sysadmin) So I'm stuck here.

Hope I don't get really sick. Dying destitute in a gutter some place would suck, don't you think?

Re:You do what you want, we'll do what we want

[Anonymous Coward]

We all hope you get Parkinson's and die destitute and alone in a ditch.

Re:You do what you want, we'll do what we want

[TCaptain]

Don't we understand what America, the free market, personal responsibility?

I find it extremely unlikely that american (indeed western) society even comes close to understanding personal responsibility just use google a while using "lawsuit" as a term and you'll see what I mean. As for free market? I seriously think that most people THINK they know what it means, but actually don't.

Re:You do what you want, we'll do what we want

[yusing]

Bravo. Well put.

RAW may not have been a skilled businessman or investor. Many creative people aren't. It's fantastic that his contributions are remembered and appreciated by so many ... who are caring enough to part with a little scratch to make his last days better.

Thanks, those of you who are caring. You've made my days better too.

Can we trust this info?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems like it could be a global conspiracy to me.

Come on, people!

[v1x]

Most of the arguments here are whether or not this person is worthy of receiving such donations. Considering that disease & death will spare none of us, and that bad things do happen to good people, how many of us can say with utmost confidence that such a thing will *never* happen to them? I've never read any of his books, but then again, to say that he does / does not deserve anyone's help based on that is just plain callous. Helping, like many other things in life, is not about you. If you are able & willing to help, kudos to you; and if you are not, the least you can do is not to try & discourage those who are.

RAW's paypal account: olgaceline@gmail.com

[Mateo_LeFou]

Pay him directly for his contribution. No intellectual property regime needed
olgaceline@gmail.com

200 pages?

[Frank Sullivan]

And you tell me the conspiracy theory wasn't believable?

Heck, you didn't make it past the INTRODUCTION. You couldn't have even met all the major player characters that far in. You have NO IDEA how utterly flabbergasting it got.

For many years, I made a point of reading Illuminatus! at least once a year, just to keep my head on straight. Any time I started taking life too seriously, that trilogy was the fix.

Re:200 pages?

[Dan Hayes]

How ridiculous... if a book is unreadable after 200 pages, why should I bother carrying on? There's plenty of books out there that are good from the start all the way through.

Re:200 pages?

[Knuckles]

This must be the most stupid comment I have ever read. Newsflash: not all books are there to entertain. Some are fucking hard. This does not mean that they are not worth the effort, on the contrary.

Re:200 pages?

[Dan Hayes]

So you're saying that the Illuminatus trilogy isn't meant as entertainment then? It's actually an informative exposition on... well, what? I think you're perhaps assuming that the word "entertainment" automatically implies "fun", "shallow" or "vapid", whereas I was merely meaning in the term of a good read. Why should I bother to read something that I don't enjoy reading?

Re:200 pages?

[Knuckles]

Sorry for being unclear, I talked about literatur in general, not Illuminatus! in particular, see the other reply I got.

What I meant to say is that readability is a stupid measure to judge a book's quality as you did, "if a book is unreadable after 200 pages, why should I bother carrying on? There's plenty of books out there that are good from the start all the way through." Many of the best works in literature are very hard to read. Joyce's Ulysses or Beckett's Waiting for Godot certainly are not easy reading. Neither are Thomas Mann's Zauberberg or Rober Musil's Mann ohne Eigenschaften, to take some examples from German which I am more familiar with. And this is not only true for 20th century authors either. Dante or Shakespeare might be even harder for someone not used to their use of language.

Should we not bother because it's hard?

Re:200 pages?

[Dan Hayes]

No, but I'm still not going to read something that doesn't grip me in any way, no matter how "worthy" a read it's supposed to be.

Email to the Universe?

[Fujisawa Sensei]

I guess Email to the Universe didn't sell very well.

can I become a communist now?

[Frank Sullivan]

Did you know that Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than the United States?

I didn't think so.

Re:can I become a communist now?

[Undertaker43017]

So they bring more people into one of the poorest countries in the world, if you think its so great, go live there.

Re:can I become a communist now?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you know that Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than the United States?

Did you know that the birthrate in the US is measured differently that in Cuba?

Neteller

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone get a note out to open a Neteller account as well as the Paypal account. A lot of people, like me, use Neteller but not Paypal.

Illuminati?

[H8X55]

Anyone else read the title and immediately think, "Illuminati?!?" Why do they need my help? Those bastards have been keeping me down for years..."

Medicare kinda sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

The closest we have to national health care is Medicare. It is actually pretty well liked by people who have it but it does have some glaring flaws.

For example, I'm on Medicare and my doctor wanted me to have a colonoscopy. As a cost cutting measure, the government decided to stop paying for the anesthesia for this procedure. Talk about a government being a "pain in the ass". This simple procedure cost me about $1,000 instead of $15,000 if I paid for it all myself.

I'm on Medicare because I'm disabled and on a fixed income. It's pretty clear that if I needed a real operation (even just one), I wouldn't be able to afford it even with the Medicare.

And BTW, hell yeah, I'm sending money to RAW. If you think he's a nut or if you don't like his works, please feel free to not help him out. I've got no problem with that. On the other hand, people posting derogatory comments here have been displaying the very worst the human soul has to offer and I feel saddened and a little ashamed that we are members of the same species.

Agreed

[Anonymous Coward]

I read several of his texts back in college; I felt that it didn't explore any of its proported subjects at all well (in many cases it simply ignored obvious facts and inferances), was not well written, and was largely written to get a reaction out of the reader. Perhaps his other books were better, but I'd put his works in the bottom 10% of SF authors I've read.

In any event, I am sorry that he's having difficulties. I hope that he fully recovers, and comes back to write a book that will make my above paragraph seem trite and snippy.

Look what happened to Nikola Tesla

[netglen]

For such a brillant inventor, he died penniless in the gutter at 86.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

Perhaps the 'nothing to see here' error...

[rthille]

could be changed to fnord...

I'm glad I'm not the only one who hated it.

[Valdrax]

The Books-a-Minute summary of the Illuminatus! Trilogy really sums up the impression I got of the book before I gave up and put it down in disgust.

The Illuminati are a secret society that (DRUGS SEX DRUGS) control everything in the world (SEX DRUGS SEX) including all governments, financial institutions, and (DRUGS SEX DRUGS) intelligence agencies. No, they're not. Well, yes they are but not really. (SEX DRUGS SEX) They originated in Bavaria in 1776 (DRUGS SEX DRUGS). No, actually they go all the way back to Atlantis. No, (SEX DRUGS SEX) Atlantis never really existed. Yes it did. It's not just one society (DRUGS SEX DRUGS), it's a whole bunch of them (SEX DRUGS SEX) together. No, it's just one, and they go all the way back to Atlantis, which never (DRUGS SEX DRUGS) existed, oh yes it did. They've had an uninterrupted existence since 30,000 years ago (SEX DRUGS SEX) -- no they actually only go back as far as the 1800s (DRUGS SEX DRUGS). Fnord.

Really, the scene where the hanged corpse starts ejaculating was where I gave up. I was expecting surreality, humor, and clever cultural mish-mashes, but I wasn't expecting so much freakish porn and drug culture. Actually, I could've handled the drugs, but the bizarre, "gratuitous" sex imagery got to me after a while, and I gather than it never really stops.

It's also hard to follow the prose; it's deliberately written in a very disjointed style. Its's not "A Clockwork Orange" hard, but it's not nearly as rewarding either. I was incredibly disappointed. So much geek humor revolves around the series, and I kind of wanted to be in on the joke, but it just isn't worth it. I had a friend who loved the trilogy who I thought a good bit less of after I borrowed it from him and tried to read it.

Re:I'm glad I'm not the only one who hated it.

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

I reached the ejaculating hanged corpse. I thought that bit was mildly entertaining, at least compared to the rest of the tedious 200 pages I read.

Actually there was one bit that made me laugh. It perfectly encapsulated the sort of thing you might believe when stoned - the way certain things suddenly cohere together and make perfect sense in a eureka! moment. But I can't actually remember the line. (No, this isn't meant to be a joke, I really wish I could remember...)

Sad News

[kruhft]

This is unfortunate that such a great man can fall to such a level after creating so many important and influential pieces of work in his lifetime. RAW is a genius, and his books, of which I owned almost every one, have been a great influence on my life (sometimes to the detriment, but I've always recovered, somewhat ;-) and he is considered on the the greatest "pop" philosophers of our time.

We live in this time of great wealth for some, but in turn, the creators and artists of our world live in squalor; we appreciate and love the work they create, but refuse to give payment, even when it is asked for in great need for help. I know there comments posted here are from the type of people that generally help those in need; I hope that an 'angel' that has been influenced by RAWs work in the past sees this story, investigates, and can give real help to a man that has touches so many lives and minds. I hope to be one someday, it is just too soon for me to be that way, but I plan on it.

Creators do not deserve untold riches for their works, but they do deserve some treatment so that they can survive into old age comfortably. Artists, by nature, are not the most capable of planners, as intelligent and creative as they are. The need to create often succeeds the desire to plan; some get lucky and live well, others not, as we can see here.

I have never met RAW, and unfortunately, may never get to. But I hope such a brilliant man finds the help that he needs to die in comfort and peace. He deserves that.

Re:Sad News

[Anonymous Coward]

"We live in this time of great wealth for some, but in turn, the creators and artists of our world live in squalor; we appreciate and love the work they create, but refuse to give payment, even when it is asked for in great need for help."

I wonder how many of them are the same ones who "would have never bought it, so I'm not hurting anyone"? Attitudes seldom stay confined.

"Creators do not deserve untold riches for their works, but they do deserve some treatment so that they can survive into old age comfortably. Artists, by nature, are not the most capable of planners, as intelligent and creative as they are. The need to create often succeeds the desire to plan; some get lucky and live well, others not, as we can see here."

Lifetime plus copyright. The only part we don't know is how well he managed those rights.

Re:Sad News

[kruhft]

I wonder how many of them are the same ones who "would have never bought it, so I'm not hurting anyone"? Attitudes seldom stay confined.

True, but I'm not sure what I can say about that.

Lifetime plus copyright. The only part we don't know is how well he managed those rights.

Generally the copyright is sold to the publisher and beyond that it's out of his hands. His works were published by smaller, underground book houses, and where the royalties have gone, if there are any anymore, I have no idea. I'm sure his sickness has taken a fair share of his earnings, and also from money he can make for doing appearances, since he has been confined to a wheelchair for years.

The idea of being famous and rich seem to go hand in hand in our society; I think we should all wake up and realize that they have nothing to do with each other, and that sometimes, even though one is famous, they need some help too. This should not be looked down upon, but as a request for help from a brilliant man. He gave us much and deserves it. Obviously copyright isn't helping him out any, and he is the type that it was designed to protect.

Emperor Norton

[Anonymous Coward]

Reminds me a bit of the true story I learned from RAW's books about Emperor Norton in California. People were kind to him because he deserved it. RAW deserves it too.

I found the Silmarillion unreadable at first ...

[DrJimbo]

... but finally after three or four tries, I had developed enough context so that I could read it all the way through and I found it to be magnificent.

Unlike The Silmarillion, I think The Illuminatus! Trilogy, was designed to expand the mind of the reader. I first read it when I was in grad school and living in the most "alternative" house off campus. One person had a copy and all the guys in the house were reading it, one after the other.

I think the need and ability to have one's mind expanded tends to decrease as we get older. I think this is related to the general rules of thumb that say physicists and mathematicians tend to do their best work before they are 25 years old.

I recently bought yet another copy of The Illuminatus! Trilogy. It sits by my bedside unread. I really don't know if I'm going to be able to read it again or not. But I'm sure going to send some money to RAW to help him in his time of need. His books broadened my mind and changed my life.

The predicament of the American Artist...

[MsGeek]

Not everyone can be Stephen King. The Bestseller List is a zero-sum game...there are only so many slots and there are a buttload of writers out there. And the Bestseller List is not the place where the cream floats to the top...it is often the place where the familiar trumps the artistic.

Another thing people seem to be having trouble with is the concept of Post-Polio Syndrome. It's a real malady and it's a real mutha to have to deal with. RAW was born before the Polio vaccine. RAW had Polio as a kid, and he got hit with PPS several decades later. He didn't ask to get Polio as a kid, and he didn't ask to get PPS as an adult.

Usually, authors don't get health insurance through their publisher. Authors have to get insurance through providers that deal with individuals, and individuals get hammered in the free market. And if you had Polio as a kid, it is IMPOSSIBLE to get that individual health insurance. Those who live in countries where health care is treated as a public utility instead of a business subject to the laws of the marketplace rightfully look at the American system and go "huh?"

The writing game is a lot like other entertainment games in that only a limited number of people can live on it. The rest have to get crappy day jobs and struggle and eke out as much time as we can to do our art. RAW didn't ask for his predicament. It is probably likely that, as a genre writer, he hasn't made a hell of a lot of money from his work. The man is also fucking DYING, folks. I am fucking ashamed at my fellow Slashdotters today because a lot of you are getting all Republican on his ass. It is a goddamn shame that someone with such skill and has given people so many cool ideas and laughs has to beg at the end of his life. It's an indictment of the system and an indictment of YOU, dammit.

Re:The predicament of the American Artist...

[ezeri]

getting all Republican on his ass

What the hell does that mean. This is exactly in line with conservative philosiphy, screw the government as a middle man, and give care dirrectly to those who need it. You realy think the Government would do anything to help this guy or others like him? No, so why should we entrust it with care. Local charities and individuals deserver our support dirrectly, not watered down by buricratic waste.

"I haven't read his books... but...."

[gd23ka]

I haven't read any books by him, so maybe I'm really missing out on something. But instead of sending him money, I'd rather send him a letter advising him on how to live a better life throw a steady income job.

Doubtlessly a whole bunch of people told you up front that he's in a wheelchair and suffering from extremely agonizing and immobilizing Post-Polio Syndrome, the aftermath of being exposed to the Poliomyelitis virus. I'm going to go one step further
and tell you that you are one dumb piece of shit.

You aren't familiar with his work, you know jack about his life and your head thrust deep into the reality tunnel of the
upper-prole / lower middle-class serf.

Enlightenment topic?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there a new build for E17? Is E18 out? Change of direction? Douglas Rushkoff is Rasterman's real name?

I Don't Know, Man-Health Accounts.

[Anonymous Coward]

"But I can budget for my routine medical expenses, and insure myself against expenses outside of my bugdet, just like I do for my car and home."

That's what I like about health accounts, limited though they may have been. Pre-tax dollars going into a health fund. Even better if that fund could generate interest, but not necessary for it to work. Applied to health costs that insurance didn't cover. The other nice thing about the plan was that health care costs weren't hidden like in the case of insurance, and made them subject to market forces. The only downside (presently) is that you had to use the money within a year, or lose it. OH, BTW you all know you can borrow against the value of a life insurance policy and not pay it back (but I recommend you do). Great for emergencies.

fiction, fact or satire?

[stock]

Although i never heard of RAW, i see he was the hero during the New Age era, where
he mixed rare known facts about the Illuminati, with fiction and occasionally added
some jokes. I guess in the heydays of his work he was very popular amongst people
who knew something about this cult.

However things have changed, This Illuminati, Kaballa, Mason stuff has turned out
to be not fiction or satire but the scary truth. Just remember Hugo Chavez's
recent appearance inside the U.N. What happened at the U.N. is of major importance.
Hugo Chavez steals the show at the U.N. quoting from Noam Chomsky latest book
"Hegemony or Survival" [1]. Although wearing a normal suit, he did a almost genuine act
of exorcism from behind the council speakers table:

http://www.niburu.nl/showarticle.php?articleID=143 86
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/9/23/213219/ 005/59#c59
http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_ 23036.shtml
http://www.counterpunch.org/chavez09202006.html

"The devil is right at home. The devil, the devil himself, is right
in the house.

"And the devil came here yesterday. Yesterday the devil came here.
Right here." [crosses himself] "And it smells of sulfur still today.

Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, from this rostrum, the president
of the United States, the gentleman to whom I refer as the devil,
came here, talking as if he owned the world. Truly. As the owner of
the world."

The real media file can be found here :

"Hugo Chavez, Venezuelan Pres., at U.N. General Assembly"
rtsp://video.c-span.org/project/ter/ter092006_chav ez.rm

Recently Greg Palast did a exclusive interview with Hugo Chavez from
his home in Venezuela :

"Hugo Chavez: An Exclusive Interview with Greg Palast"
http://www.gregpalast.com/hugo-chavez-an-exclusive -interview-with-greg-palast

pnm:rm.bbc.net.uk/news/olmedia/1985000/video_19856 70_ven22_palast_vi.rm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/ar chive/1985670.stm

So why is this a important breakthrough? It seems the tide is turning.
If Bushes hegemony was a reality, Hugo Chavez would never been able to
make this speech. Also remember that the President of Iran recently
made his heroic appearance in New York. The crock hunter may have died,
but here's the real hero :

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/iranian-presid ent-steals-the-show-in-new-york/2006/09/22/1158431 902380.html

As the plot is folding, the analogy with Tolkiens trilogy, The Lord of
the Rings, is certainly there. "The Evil Eye" on top of the pyramid is
evident. The analogy with the Ring to rule all others Rings may not
seem so straightforward. It seems that this Ring is commonly known as
the holy grail, but the holy grail is a hoax in itself. So what is the
holy grail in fact? Chris Everard from EnigmaTV made a serious attempt
[2] to explain things. He claims that the full knowledge and
understanding of a scripture called The Cabballah is what ordinary man
can give ultimate power with the culmination in power the capability to
kill someone with a

Re:fiction, fact or satire?

[geekoid]

"This Illuminati, Kaballa, Mason stuff has turned out
to be not fiction or satire but the scary truth."

now if I only had a decoder ring, I could get in!

relly, your paranoia is unbecoming.

The conspiracy that occasionally happen are always from a small group of people in power. So the all seeing all influancing group idea is false.

As evidence, I present the fact that these group tend to fall after a short time, and that there is always a leak.
See the recent Page scandal.

Re:fiction, fact or satire?

[stock]

"relly, your paranoia is unbecoming."

Who said i was paranoid or scared? Maybe you got a little
paranoid yourself.

All what i wrote down is my interpretation of what has recently
happened, and what can be found inside books. by numerous authors
who are dead serious on the matter. And yes the books of
RAW sadly enough, i think, were for the sole purpose to prevent
New Ager's to really find out was was going on.

If there's a nasty truth due to come out in the open, what does
the establishment tend to do? They create comic books about the matter,
extend it into the absurd by adding fiction, and launch some braindead
video games about it. Capice?

Robert

Re:fiction, fact or satire?

[Anonymous Coward]

modded +5 Insecure.
modded -5 IQ

Re:fiction, fact or satire?

[Oligonicella]

Hence his statement about your paranoia. Your last to paragraphs here only cement the idea that you are paranoid and out of touch with reality. Stan Lee is a government shill?

Re:fiction, fact or satire?

[stock]

Stan Lee is a government shill? How should i know that? He sure boosted Marvell Comics
to Corporate adulthood. Is such success just pure luck which can happen
to anybody? I used to believe that though, it was called the American Dream.
Today I don't believe that careers or success just happen out of the blue.

Why don't you listen to George Carlin :
http://crashrecovery.org/George_Carlin.mp3

Cheers,

Robert

Why do peope continue to think that

[geekoid]

if you raight some books, you deserve to be well off for the rest of your life?

Sheesh.

Now, I hope this man gets they money to live comfortably, and I am always glad to see humans act chartitable, but writing books does not, and should not, garantee income forever.

Yes, I have published stories, poems, and over a million line of code, so I do have an intellectual investment into what I am saying.

Re:Why do peope continue to think that

[wetpantsclub]

'if you raight some books'

I apologize in advance. I do hate people that comment only on spelling but I can't pass up commenting on such a momentous occasion of seeing the most severely misspelled word in the history of the Internet.

Re:Why do peope continue to think that

[fnord_uk]

Comfortably? The article on BoingBoing says "He cannot walk, has a hard time talking and swallowing, is extremely frail and needs full time care that is being provided by several friends-fans-volunteers and family." I doubt if it will make him comfortable, other than that he can avoid being homeless too.

RAW's writings offer real enlightenment. RAW taught us how to hack our brains and detect the fnords in the matrix. There's probably more of interest in the name of his paypal account than there is in your whole post.

RAW received some of my money. You won't! Bye.

P.S. Hope the Vogons like your poetry.

Re:Why do peope continue to think that

[treeves]

Pearhapps e's Oirish, or Scoatish! Ye neverr know, now do ye?

Enlightenment?

[MadDog Bob-2]

Spiritual event or window manager? One of them has a familiar symbol...

But, hey, every story needs an icon, right?

Rent?!

[Anonymous Coward]

He's 74 years old and he still rents? During his whole life and career, he never bothered to put the down payment on a house?

Dear Eldavojohn

[JackBuckley]

I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter. Yours, Milton Friedman

So, taking the beliefs as you stated them...

[StressGuy]

{before I get started, I'm not trying to give you a hard time, I'm just trying to grasp your churches position}

Let's apply what you stated to the parable of the "good samaritan" - I'm sure you know it at least as well as I so I won't re-iterate. The Pharisee's won't help him because their doctrine prevents them from touching anything dead (and, presumably, he was near death). The Samaritan, on the other hand, has no such restriction. Instinctively, he helps the injured man and takes care of him until he is healthy again.

Your church's doctrine sounds like what the Samaritan should have done is taken all of the energy, time, and resources used to help that one man and apply it to supporting local law enforcement so that others would not meet the fate he did.

Is that about right?

Does he have an accountant?

[gknoy]

Tell you what, you provide the proof, and I'll send money. I'll need proof of:
That this fellow is indeed who he says he is.
That he is truely unable to pay his rent. (i.e. open the books up)
List of donations and amounts already received, up to date
Details on how the money is definately going to Robert Anton Wilson and no one else.
Details on any and all "administrative fees" or anything else taken out before the money is put towards the rent.

That's a lot of good information to have, and would help assauge worries that this might be a scam. That said, if I (or family) were very ill, and short enough on money to pay rent, I don't think I would have the resources to hire an accountant or provide this level of detail.

It's prudent to wait for proof. However, in the absence of proof, I'm willing to risk a few dollars (I think I was suckered for 20?) in the interest of being generous.

Pros: If this is true, I've been merciful and generous, and helped someone.
Cons: If I've been suckered, the net loss to me is something I'm willing to lose. (I think I wasted more than that when I forgot to cook some meat last month. :-/ )

I realize that this sort of analysis would also play directly into the hands of a scammer; I just don't care, in this case. I'd rather Do Something and risk being wrong... maybe it's just that I was in a generous feeling mood.

(On a completely unrelated note, how do we do the nifty quoted-text thing, now? =) I'd like better quoting display than just italics.)

Re:Does he have an accountant?

[VWJedi]

(On a completely unrelated note, how do we do the nifty quoted-text thing, now? =) I'd like better quoting display than just italics.)

Enclose in <blockquote> tags. The CSS for the site makes it display like that.

You can figure out "nifty things" by looking at the source.

Re:Does he have an accountant?

[gknoy]

Thanks! I'd wondered if that was the case. Shame on me for not at least trying it, hehe.

Yikes!

[gknoy]

This, and several other posts in similar vein, have made me feel very very vulnerable, and make me want to curl up in a corner and shiver in fear.

Seriously. Scary Stuff. Thanks for posting the eye-opener, I hope you get MODDED UP as far as possible. :)

not all books are there to entertain

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

I'm just hoping that this is a general comment (to which I nod assent) rather than a specific comment about the Illuminatus! Trilogy.

Re:not all books are there to entertain

[Knuckles]

It was a general comment, sorry for causing anxiety :)

I wish...

[mcknation]

I could have donated this auction to him.

He's probably the reason I had the plate to begin with.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=0 20&item=300035037535&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMESE%3 AIT&rd=1

Anti-copyright and free book

[obtuse]

Hey, it's a free book and funny as hell. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tilt/principia/

_Principia Discordia_ was published under an anti-copyright. A few years ago, there weren't that many anti-copyrighted popular books out there. For more on his influence, check out the jargon file entry on _Principia Discordia_. Most of my High School friends read the Illuminatus Trilogy, and he also wrote for a number of magazines like Mondo2000 and other 'reality hacker' type stuff.

Robert Anton Wilson has always been entertaining, surreal and though provoking, although his philosophical ideas aren't exactly terribly sophisticated, they are fun. It's hilariously paranoid; and he introduced a lot of kooky ideas to the mainstream. I don't think the movie _National Treasure_ would exist without RAW's writings in Illuminatus. Too bad he got no cameo or piece of that.

His philosophy is solipsistic, and while I prefer to imagine a real external universe as it has more capacity to surprise and educate me, the flip side of his "you create the universe" attitude is personal empowerment and a real enthusiasm for spontaneity and disinhibition. This is the sort of thing Crowley meant when he said "Do What Thou Wilt shall be the whole of the law" except RAW had a sense of kindness and humor Crowley was sorely missing. With RAW, you could never be certain if he was serious or kidding, and he'd probably insist on both at all times.

He's a great kook, tremendously influential on our geek culutre, and now he is in difficult circumstances.

Unions, markets, and socialism

[Shihar]

"Health insurance" is a misnomer. There are no nations in the world with "health insurance". There are nations with socialized medicine (Europe) and nations with a quasi-market based medical payment plans. I don't think that socialized medicine needs much explanation. The particulars vary, but socialized medicine boils down to that the government redistributes wealth it gets from taxation into government controlled health plans. The American system is much more strange and really is an artifact that unions created.

Basically, in the US you get health insurance from your employer. Further, it isn't health insurance, it is a medical payment plan. Insurance is something you take out incase something unexpected happens. Health insurance in the US is something you get not only for unexpected medical bills, but also expected medical bills (like drugs, regular doctor visits, ect.). Think of it as a quasi-socialist, quasi-market based program.

Now, if insurance had been left to its own market based devices as most things in the US are, the system would look very different from what it does today. You would still buy health insurance, but you would buy it for the same reason you buy car insurance. You don't buy car insurance knowing that you are going to wreck your car. You buy it in case you wreck your car. In the same way, you would buy insurance incase you need a major operation, not to pay for your drugs or regular doctor visits.

If the laws were different, the market would look very different. People in good health would likely pay dramatically less then what they do now. The drugs that they would need would be open to market competition and so would have lower prices. Healthy people would be much better off (pocket book wise at least). People who get catastrophically ill would also be perfectly fine in a market based system. They would have insurance that would kick in when they need a double bypass or a new organ. The people would be in trouble would be people with chronic conditions with expensive treatment. The US would almost certainly need some sort of socialized medical program to take care of such people.

Basically, the reason why healthcare in the US is neither market based nor socialized is because of Union laws. Laws were written in place to force employers to be the primary providers of health insurance. This gave unions another bargaining chip in negotiations and "solved" the healthcare issues at the time. Today it is pretty obvious the flaws in this system. The problem is that Americans are very resistant to socializing medicine simply because they don't trust socialism, and at the same time they have the idea that healthcare is something that you get for "free" through an employer very strongly ingrained in their head. Neither a market based solution nor a socialized social are politically viable in the US... hence you get the current mess where we stick with a bad system that is the worst of both worlds.

'markets' vs. 'socialized medicine' vs. ...

[doom]

This is a pretty good summary of the present situation (though as others have pointed out the world looks different if you're a 'professional' with medical perks).

The next question would be "Why do we put up with this?" rather than go for a centralized, government run medical system. Back in my more libertarian days there were roughly three arguments that I was impressed by:

1. If you artificially reduce prices, demand goes out of control, and you pay for it with long lines (queues).
2. A capitalistic medical system leads to more varied medical research, and should help lead to breakthroughs that will ultimately save lives.
3. You can't reduce medical profits by fiat without reducing incentives for people to do medical work, and you're likely to end up with creeping mediocrity in the medical professions.

If you actually look at what's going on in the world -- something libertarians seem to have trouble with -- you'll see problems with all of those points. There may be longer waiting periods for some proceedures in, say, Canada, than in the US, but the problem is not so bad that the folks who live there are complaining about it. Medical research is often paid for with government funding in any case -- and then the big drug companies are allowed to patent the discoveries made on the public dime. Good people are only loosely motivated by money, and while there are certainly some brilliant doctors in the US, if you're not sure you can get access to them, they won't do you a lot of good.

Just recently I ended up leaving the country to get some major dental work done outside of the United States -- even with my dental coverage plan, it was cheaper to get the work done overseas in Bali than here (including plane fare), and it seemed eaisier to find high-quality dentists to do the work: clearly something is broken in the current quasi/psuedo capitalistic system we have in the United States.

Re:'markets' vs. 'socialized medicine' vs. ...

[h4rm0ny]

Well my three very quick answers to your points (if you're interested) would be as follows:

1. Sickness is not a regular demand and is not truly tied to availability of care. People want to be well and once a certain level of care is provided you have reached saturation. Demand wont endlessly expand. Nor will reducing availability of care reduce demand. It will just push the negative effects elsewhere, e.g. sick days, increased demand on the well to look after dependents, etc.
2. There is no critical reason why medical research has to be tied to the same principles as medical provision. I.e. DrugCo can still manufacture and sell products while the government runs the hospitals. This isn't to say that I couldn't also argue that state funded research (i.e. through Universities) can't be more cost effective as well, however.
3. The medical profits you're talking of reducing are not those of doctors and nurses (where mediocrity would matter), but of investors who own the business without actually doing any medical work themselves (and often not management work either). How can Operating Costs + Staff Costs + Profit + Taxes be less than Operating Costs + Staff Costs ? If everyone is pooling together to support the health care industry then surely it makes more sense to do this by a means that wont charge extra for investor profits and wont get taxed by the government.

Just some off the cuff thoughts.

Addiction

[Morosoph]

our treatment of addiction as a personal, legal responsibility, rather than a medical problem is indicative of our bias towards personal responsibility.

I get the impression that is isn't addiction that is being tackled, but engaging in socially disapproved activites. Personal responsibility in the case of tacking marijuana consumption, for example, means recognising one's responsibility to conform, not one's ability to exercise sound judgement.

Re:Addiction

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

I get the impression that is isn't addiction that is being tackled, but engaging in socially disapproved activites. Personal responsibility in the case of tacking marijuana consumption, for example, means recognising one's responsibility to conform, not one's ability to exercise sound judgement.

I was speaking of addiction, and thinking in terms of drugs with real, serious, documented addictive effects. Marijuana may be addictive, but if so very, very mildly. I was thinking more in terms of cocaine, opiates, heroin, and the like. In cultures with more bias towards centralized, government run solutions there are free clinics for treatment, and even programs to provide sterile paraphernalia and enough of the drug to keep people from becoming desperate and dangerous. The cost to society of such facilities is generally much smaller than the cost of letting each individual fend for themselves and dealing with the increasing rates of addiction and drug related/motivated violence.

Certainly drug use is disapproved of by pretty much all the cultures I'm describing, to one degree or another. In summary, I'm not sure marijuana clinics where users could go to get their fix without causing a danger to society is really a worthwhile use of tax dollars :)

In defense of urban living (yeah, more OT)

[doom]

Lastly, he's lived in Brooklyn his whole life. Fine. I would like to point out, however, that there are many other spots where rent and living is cheaper. I know quite a few small peaceful towns in Minnesota where rent for an apartment is $200/month everywhere.

And let me point out some things. If you live in a major urban area, you're likely to spend more money on rent, but it also become possible to save money in other areas, most notably: you don't need a car. There's likely to be a wide variety of jobs available -- e.g. a struggling writer might do copy-editing or some such to fill in the gaps. Further, someone with a chronic disease like polio might actually be better off living somewhere where public transit actually works, rather than isolating themselves in a sleepy town where they need to get someone else to drive them everywhere. And finally: people are not interchangeable units that you can unplug from one place and plug into another; associations between people matter; culture matters; and hence places matter -- the idea that someone who's lived in an area all their life should just shrug and go "oh well, the yups are moving in, I guess I better bail, hm, rents are cheap in central Texas...", this is in fact a terrible idea, however "practical" and "reasonable" it may seem to you; this sort of thing is a subtle source of some very real problems in American society (a lack of group identity, and hence civic virtue, among others).

Re:In defense of urban living (yeah, more OT)

[coyotecult]

Not to mention that right now he is being taken care of by family, friends, and fan volunteers. If he moves from Brooklyn, who is going to take care of his basic physical needs?

The Argument's a Little More Subtle Than That

[Morosoph]

It's about how law and technology is being used unnecessarily. Indeed, I have a journal entry about exactly this.

Sharing affects profitability roughly neutrally; we should purchase items as getting an illegal copy is an abuse of trust, rather than because sharing harms the artist (same issue as the GPL). However, the measures being taken are in response to a phantom threat, and the honest amoungst us are having our fair use eliminated, and our freedom to tinker decimated because of this imaginary foe.

You're not alone

[Damek]

I'm sure for people who love in-joke upon in-joke and have spent enough time wading through plethora of conspiracy theories and old sci-fi and fantasy, they're probably a nice romp.

But for me they were just a waste of time, and poorly written even when I was "getting" some stuff.

So, yeah, my opinion was that they were crap, too, and I couldn't finish. I felt I had better things to spend my mind on.

he got copywronged

[teh_chrizzle]

this is a classic example of an artist of no small accomplishment not being taken care of by the industry he sold his work to. much like musicians that make platinum albums or win grammies and end up in debt to their labels. clearly the content industry model works and everyone is adequately protected.

marijuana clinics

[Morosoph]

I'm not sure marijuana clinics where users could go to get their fix without causing a danger to society is really a worthwhile use of tax dollars :)

LOL! I haven't toked for years (though I did inhale).

WRT the rest, I agree with you; I replied not so much to you, but to "the audience".

As an original playtester of Illuminati

[WillAffleckUW]

I think we should all go out and buy a DRM-enhanced set of Illumatus books by Robert Anton Wilson.

That way, the embedded RFID chips can be used to complete the grand master plan by the Eco-Terrorists (my idea) to illuminate the Tri-fold Druidic Path and transform our society into a better one in which writers and scientists are treated as gods and business owners and politicians are those we have sentenced for serious crimes against society to serve in such positions with subsistence wages.

Church of the Subgenius

[thesoffish]

Dunno if this has been posted, but Rev. Stang of the Church of the Subgenius has a writeup about this story: http://revstang.blogspot.com/

mod parent up

[Anonymous Coward]

There's nothing trollish about this comment.

I Don't Know, Man-Save Me!

[Anonymous Coward]

*shrug* The usual flamewar about US medical system vs "the world" has broken out...again. A news program covered this in detail last year but basically a lot of the problems with our medical system can be traced to the "save me at all costs" mentality. It is a very human attitude, and on the surface sounds right, but deeper it's driving the US into a bad situation.

I know what you mean.

[Grendel Drago]

I was the same sort of standardized-test whiz you mention, and I went through a libertarian phase in my teenage years, fueled by barely-sublimated elitism, when I could stomach Atlas Shrugs. But it was high-school angst, and I grew out of it! From what you've said, one of these women was at least twenty-three!

It's like economics, where you take an admittedly flawed model of a complex real-world system, then make predictions from that model. Where the model departs from reality, blame reality. It's a sort of Platonic-ideal thing. Maybe (just making a stab in the dark here) it's caused by being caught up in your head too much, by making a model of how the world does and should work, and never really testing it. Which would explain why shut-in dorks like myself do it.

And that sounds like a nifty psych experiment. Sometimes I wish I'd gone into research psychology, so that I could do that kind of experiment while quietly cackling to myself, "DANCE PUPPETS DANCE!!".

Re:I know what you mean.

[smellsofbikes]

Both of them were only children with domineering, abusive fathers. Eerily alike, as it so happens. The 23 year old, the ultrasupergenius, was a sometime bike racer and had "Who Is John Galt" handpainted all over her bike. Really nice person when she wasn't angry, and obviously really smart.

I think the key part is 'admittedly flawed' -- your analysis is dead on, if the person recognizes that the model isn't perfect and the results should be taken advisedly. There's good stuff in Rand's work, but it's not perfect and people don't all think that way and if you want to actually get along with people you have to take that into account.

Of course.

[Grendel Drago]

But we can still tell him he's being a twit. I don't think anyone's going to go into his house and steal his Hard-Earned Cash Money to give to RAW.

What are the other two?

[Grendel Drago]

What are the other two factors in the US's violent crime? I'd guess the war on drugs is one, but I'd never seen a link shown between socialized medicine and lowered crime. (I'm not saying it doesn't exist; I'm just saying I can't imagine dying cancer patients jacking cars to pay the bills.)

Hmm, perhaps...

[Grendel Drago]

Because he has private insurance?

Because even if these drugs were covered by taxpayer-funded insurance, I don't think he could afford the roughly hundred million bucks in postage to send thank-yous to the entire American workforce?

Because even if these drugs were covered by taxpayer-funded insurance, your share of that would be (back-of-the-envelope calculation here) roughly twenty cents a year, which, while mighty nice of you, doesn't quite warrant a thank-you note?

Please demonstrate.

[Grendel Drago]

I take it you'll be moving to the sunny libertarian paradise of Somalia, then, where freedom runs unfettered by the heavy chains of government? I hear you can buy weapons as easily as you can buy food over there, which must make it the safest nation on earth.

Please read "The Jungle".

[Grendel Drago]

You describe an ideal world with ideal markets. Which would be really spiffy. However, ideal markets require certain things to function, like labor moving as easily as capital does, and perfect information on the part of the consumers. Consider your example of the FDA's review and safety process. You claim that it's unnecessary because consumers will inform themselves, and you handwave into existence a demand for an FDA... but a privatized one. Which demonstrably did not exist before 1906, and likely would not have, simply because private citizens didn't look into conditions in the meat packing industry.

As for your transmitter example... why? What motivation does the owner of a great big transmitter have to allow some pipsqueak startup to start a station? Consider the consolidation that deregulation of the airwaves has brought. (Clear Channel owns more and more stations.) By your lights, this should have resulted in an explosion of local news. But it hasn't. If a little deregulation leads to some consolidation, are you claiming that more deregulation won't lead to more consolidation?

What you're trying to get around is the fact that power accretes. Whether it accretes to a dictatorship, to a representative democracy or to a pack of bloodthirsty warlords doesn't change that fact. If you knock down a representative democracy, you won't get Galt's Gulch; something else will fill the vacuum, and chances are it won't be half as nice to you, all your kvetching and moaning about how oppressive your taxes are aside.

No, he has a point.

[Grendel Drago]

While upper management was tried and convicted of war crimes, the man on the street who polished the gears of the great machine didn't get imprisoned. How could he? They'd have imprisoned millions of people who were just doing their jobs. Even though these jobs were part of a mass-murder machine.

German infantry troops and low-level officials were manifestly not held responsible for their part in what they did. War crimes tribunals were for the men at the top. (In a modern analogy, it'd be like trying Bush, Cheney, Rummy and the CEO of Halliburton. Colin Powell could play the part of Karl Dönitz.)

Cookie chaos?

[Grendel Drago]

Trained to rain chaos on paris and milano?

They rain chaos on cookies?

(Yes, I know it's "Milano" in Italian.)

Thanks!

[Grendel Drago]

Awesome. Bookmarked!

fool

[zerilius]

i waste my time writing a response to your peurile egoistic rubbish of an opinion. you must be a highly principled erudite man, being that you feel that you can best advise another man on a situation you have never encountered. why do you not apply your overwhelming wisdom to your own life situation and leave others to do what they must? what purpose does your comment serve other than to elucidate clearly to all who read it that you are an obstructive jealous fool who obviously feels life is unfair to him? so yes, you are missing out on something and that something is the general enlightening subject matter of wilson's books. possibly, if you were to actually read and comprehend them you might speak more cautiously. what arrogance is in your words. "point out" all you would like to pedantic narrow minded speck of a conscious fool, but i assure you the compassion you lack will dawn on you swiftly when it is your life that is in peril. furthermore, you speak of a man who was able to navigate his way through life without having to depend on such soul sucking parasitic corporations to be his big daddy pimp. so reserve your suggestions for the oppressed minorities who actually believe that a wage paying job at walmart is beneficial to humanity. your time of suffering will come, just as it comes for all and then you remember your words and apply them. it may not be as easy then. for theinterim, continue to enjoy your golden now that you've so wonderfully created through "steady income". you know nothing. you know not even yourself, foolish child. good day.