Thanks for the myth=mithya reco, will check it out.

Re: old threads… I guess it is part of the constantly shifting sands of our modern 2.0 “blogosphere of record.” I have no problems reviving threads, but chances are the old conversationalists would have gone by then. Gregory (@gregorylent, if you want to contact him) for instance, was an avid reader at one point, but hasn’t shown up much lately. At the time, I didn’t have the ‘subscribe to comments to this article by email’ option.

I suspect though, that blog posts, as opposed to wiki articles, are fundamentally time-sensitive with greater/lesser time constants. Even the most timeless piece will likely be difficult to revive. Wikis though, often have flare-ups of renewed debate. My colleagues over at PARC actually built a tool to visualize wiki editing/debates: wikidashboard… it hosts a restricted copy of wikipedia with the dashboard enabled on each page. Historically contentious articles show patterns of editing.

Venkat

@vgr I made a note to recommend myth=mithya to you, especially when I saw his frequent usage of the words “narrative” and “metaphor” His TED video has been a popular forward amongst assorted desis. It is a rare combo of an Indian with content, style and humor (contrast with Nilekani’s TED speech that has some content but…).

Quite a few times commenters have drawn my attention to some of your early posts and until now, I had a vague hesitation in joining older threads. I suggest a post in 2010 about this phenomenon of very delayed reaction that revives a conversation deemed to have ended (assuming you read and choose to respond to some). What if a popular blogger comments and tracks back to an old post, especially if your views on the subject have since ‘matured’ in a different direction, and which then leads to higher traffic than your Gervais post? Would you be happily irritated?

I am linking to this article in an upcoming blog posting.
All the best,
Warwick John Fahy
The One Minute Presenter

Did you use “think” and “know” just for the sake of not repeating words or are you of the opinion that it cannot be done, just that women think otherwise while men are already aware of the truth?

the quick example, patanjili’s yoga sutras, third chapter, all the siddhis, the powers, that consciousness has …. and it doesn’t take much insight to see that, hey, that is what technology is doing out here in the real world … so, then, the question could come up, if you know consciousness, can you know technology? not the coding, but where it is going to, what it is in emulation of?

and then there are scientists, who seem to think that consciousness comes from meat, bio-chemical events in the brain … yogis say the opposite, matter comes from consciousness …

and how to integrate these views from different arenas of investigation is something i am interested in, simply because it seems a need of the times…

anyway, thanks for your time, enjoy, gregory

I do have more of a tamas-rajas-sattvik approach to this stuff, but even that’s likely too conceptual for you gregory!

One day, fortified with rum and coke, I’ll probably take a stab at an advaitist treatment.