My post got deleted since links are not allowed, I copy paste instead but I hope you won't this time consider it's too big or something:
Hello, for years I wrote ideas for a book I planned to write and for some reason I stopped it. I wanted to have your opinion about how much success it could have had. Thanks.
"Since I'm french, some things may not apply in every modern countries or maybe only apply in France, otherwise everything there is universal. Remember that it's just a sum up so there is more in each theme and I don't argue much. It's not exactly in the order of what I care the most:
- I don't see why people put aesthetics everywhere and buy things that cost more just because they are more "nice" etc, for me it's just exactly the same. This includes the "beauty" of people (including hair, clothes...), personally I'm already starting to have baldness and I don't care while some others make a complex of it or at least would prefer if they could not have this, me I actually like it since I have less to shear.
- I don't see too why when most do something, others feel like they have to do it too, like in my school buying an eastpak bag, ipod, quite often converses despite being anti-ergonomic (I mean, they're not annoying, just ultra-basic) yet having an higher price than ergonomic shoes thus actually more expensive to create than converses, etc. Following this idea, idem for long hair/handbags/earrings/heels etc for girls/women. I easily imagine people telling me that it's not for this reason that they do this: so a lot would have done all this too if most girls weren't doing this ? That's what I mean.
- Most people are selfish, I have a lot of examples about it but like, most people striving against racism are blacks or people who have black friends etc, those against antisemitism are jews, same for homosexuals etc, I don't criticize this, what I mean is that you don't see much people caring about the problems of others even if those are sometime more fair and it's thus why, despite being totally fair, there isn't much striving for euthanasia despite that in some cases it definitely should be allowed. Yeah, people are more striving for what they want than what's the most fair, and since the power obey more to things that most want and not what's the most fair, things like the legalization of euthanasia won't happen, like the legalization of abortion would never have happened if only a few people strived for it despite having good reasons to be allowed, like in case of rape. It's idiot to be selfish this way because if you are a real selfish one, you would actually not be selfish because this way everybody, you too, would gain by helping others.
By the way, furthermore, people don't strive for euthanasia because they don't realize that a situation where they would want to be euthanized could happen, so you see some persons that never cared about this or cancer etc and when it finally happen to them they start asking people to support this and donate for it, while they never cared about it before despite the many people that asked them.
- When people say they love someone for feelings etc, the thing is, in most cases they wouldn't be with him if for some reason the person couldn't have sex, etc. Since they are like they are and unfaithfulness or the desire to be unfaithful often happen, at least those who don't want children and young people probably are monogamous just because they just see monogamous people.
- A lot of people are not sure if god exists or not because they can't prove that he doesn't, it means that I can invent anything no one can prove, a lot of people will doubt about its existence. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate people who believe in god.
- Mass media probably shouldn't encourage their sport team, it makes people continue to think that there is any reason to support people they have no reason to support, they do it for an idea that they represent their country, it's stupid, especially since a lot of players are bought from other countries.
Also, just the idea of a "national sport" disturbs me, there is no reason for someone to like a sport more than others just because most others here play it, if it was for an idea that you can't play something else because you won't find someone playing it, but no, they really like it, for example soccer video games work a lot in europe while they don't exist in usa and vice versa, which doesn't make sense since it has a different gameplay of the real soccer anyway, stupid marketing and people who follow it...
- There probably shouldn't be attorneys, I don't like the idea of paying someone to defend you, especially since you're not good enough to defend yourself and even if you are, you don't have the choice not to take one in some cases. I also find stupid that you can appeal, getting a second trial roughly the same that can have a different conclusion despite there is no new elements between, what does it mean, that one of the two courts is worse than the other one ? That you may prefer to poorly defend yourself in the first instance to better defend yourself in the second and prevent the opponent to appeal ? It's better to have 1 best possible trial than 2 not good enough, well I guess they try their best in both, but then it's useless to do it again and may be unfair. And the biggest issue is: the justice is supposed to be blind, then what's the point of paying an expensive attorney if it can't change anything to justice, sometime even paying multiple ones ? Rich people aren't that equal against justice, especially with another point: the fines are a fixed number, they should be in proportion with the means/income of the person, that is, it's here to dissuade people to do something, while it's severe with poor people, rich ones don't have to bother for what represents not much for them, they don't even have to go to their trial, they send someone for them. One good example of that is the removing of the driving license, they just take another driver and being rich they don't even need to work much anyway so it's not like they absolutely need a car, money in % or jail if needed, would have a better effect. We are all supposed to be equal at least about the law, in fact not even with this.
- The vote system to elect the president has issues, if 60% of the population always want a person of one of the big 2 parties, there will be next to 100% of the time a president of that party. Either the condorcet's method (actually I learn the term for this after I thought about it myself, I don't wanna brag, just to let you know, but I think more about an improvement of it of putting numbers in front of the candidates by order of preference, it would just have to be scanned by machines) or an idea of having like 40% of the time a president of the other party (if people didn't change much their mind between the years of the first president term so this only apply in a very stable country), should apply, in both cases there wouldn't be anymore the tactical voting thus the untactical voting which prevent candidates that could be president to become it and makes people think that 2 persons are really liked while all the others have next to no support, because right now it really doesn't make sense that some % people vote for someone knowing that he has no chance just to show that some people support him. I also speak about a lot of other stuff about this.
- That's a waste of money and time and often annoy the local population because of the space taken by the followers and the security measures, that when there is inundation/a big accident etc, a minister or the president come there, there is nothing he can do/learn more by coming than by just being informed of the situation and telling what he wants about it to journalists, and people who like when one come are stupid because they can come to be like they care even if they actually don't while they could stay where they are for the reason I said and yet speak about it and really care. Another big example is when two presidents meet each other, just to speak or give a paper, can't they just use phone or webcam if needed instead of using a lot of their time in the travel (they don't spend their time working in the travel) and a lot of kerosene that people pay ? Everyone else do this and it's actually way faster. Sure without this we wouldn't even notice a difference on the public taxes, yet that's not a reason, can I ask 1 million and get it because people won't notice it ? Of course not, it wouldn't be fair. Long time ago there was good reasons to do this: phone didn't exist and when it did it could get hacked easily, but now that's totally ridiculous. It also works for big white-collar workers.
- Presidential pardon shouldn't exists, actually I first though I didn't had to explain why because I think it's kinda obvious but the fact is that it still exists and people don't complain about it, so: justice spend a lot of time with a lot of people to judge someone, one person in a short time decides to let him leave jail. Really, I don't realize much why I have to write this and while this still exists in 2010, this thing probably was first created when the king had all the powers but since...
- I hate politicians because sometime someone in a party do something bad that has nothing to do with politics and everybody in the opposite party say that it's a shame, that he should quit while everybody of his party defend him and when it's someone from the other party it's the exact reverse, proving that it had nothing to do with an opinion but just opportunism.
- There should be other real ways to become known quickly in politics other than running for the presidency knowing that for now (and probably forever but you do it to get positions in the national assembly at the election of deputies) you have no chance to get elected, which shouldn't be a way.
- The one that get elected shouldn't act like he "won", how "won" ? You don't vote for someone so he "win", you vote for someone so your ideas get applied, he should more act (because of how he shall be, the different rewards (salary etc) that should be lower, medias that shouldn't too say that one "won" etc) like a union steward, like "ok, you guys think I'm the best to do the job so I will do it, thank you for believing in me".
- Electoral campaigns shouldn't cost millions, even if the only one paying this would be the party of the candidate (yeah the fact that it's the people who pay it is even more unacceptable) because it still would mean that those with the most money have more chance to be elected. What's the point of all this money, giving more advertising to people so they hate even more politicians ? Giving information ? Not even this, to know this, people look their program on internet or on some paper, which cost next to nothing compared, no, this money is mainly used for "meetings", which are about regrouping some thousands people to prove how awesome your party is if you're able to regroup that much people, telling things you told already at other meetings, always in a ultra-populist way by yelling etc.
- The idea of the empty chair protest should never have exist (i.e., people shouldn't consider it as a protestation when someone does this), it's like being 6 and telling your mum that if she doesn't give you a candy you will stop asking her, it definitely is an incoherent way to protest.
- The vote at the national assembly is not anonymous, there is some reasons to this but this cause problems, one can't vote for his conviction if their party is against something without being annoyed about this after, and sometime one party ask to the other party to not all vote the same and vote for their conviction instead while asking their party to do this. Voting like the majority of its party instead of what each think is stupid because if everyone vote for his conviction you will roughly get the same result but in a more normal way.
- Demonstrations and strikes shouldn't exist, not because people should always be happy of their conditions but because the system should be different, mainly thanks to internet. Some centuries ago there was real reasons to do this, the crowd of people went somewhere in order to attack some buildings, now they don't annoy the persons responsible of their problems and annoy people instead, I can understand that, for example to threat of death someone elected by the people is all but good (and people strived millennia for this not to happen anymore) but others shall not be annoyed too, and I'm gonna explain how because now, thinking about it, it's just ridiculous, the only point of this is to show how much they are to think something, can't an online petition with specific arguments do the same ? And anyway, it's not because a lot of people think something that it makes it more fair, what does it mean, that if something fair is wanted by a few they won't get it while if a lot want something unfair they will get it ? The government has an issue about this if so. Furthermore, I just hate the fact that the police and the organizers have a way different number of participants, how ironic, they demonstrate saying that it's to apply the democracy, they show themselves as the good people against the unfair politicians and they claim that a lot of people were with them while they weren't (I don't think much that the police has much to gain to say that there was less people demonstrating than there was). There was an idea of using satellites to count them using the large crowd of people but they didn't want it, of course, they couldn't claim that a higher number of people were with them.
Strikes also shouldn't exist for a reason that apply to both: the idea always is "if you don't cancel your reform, we will strike at such high level", here should be the solution, not days after once it happened, here the government should either cancel their reform immediately or say "even if you do this we will let it", in which case people should then say "if we do it they will let it so let's not do it, it's useless" which means that in any cases, there isn't strike, people should just not try to bluff the other like by saying that they will strike while if it's left they won't anyway or telling that they will let it if there is a strike while they would have cancelled it if it happened, but this seem to be impossible because people are selfish and they would often lie.
- The public taxes are sometime abusively used, like the salary of the ministers/presidents who get everything they need paid anyway, or the free housing that an ex-president get despite not having much to do in the capital city anymore, yet actually people are stupid about this, this happened before the subprime crisis for jacques chirac thus no one complained, someone got one after the crisis, one that cost way less and that was planned (anyone could know it), people complained, people really don't think much about their future... One other example is what you have in the government buildings: is stylized chairs, gold clocks etc really needed ? It shocks me when at an interview they say that people will have to work more etc because of the subprime crisis, while you can see this in the background.
The reason of the fact that they get more than they should is simple: people elect some people who take the decisions, of course those don't want much to take bad decisions against themselves, there is a problem with this because of the conception of the democracy, definitely other persons should decide for them about this.
- St valentine, christmas gifts, birthdays etc were created to make people buy things they wouldn't have otherwise, and sometime they buy something the other don't like, thus they can't think that because someone bought them something they wanted they're not gonna buy it anymore, instead they still will buy it and that's twice money for the sellers.
- People don't have to pay that much for their dead, I can understand a gravestone but coffin and flowers is pointless and the fact that some people live because of this makes me uncomfortable.
- Television license fee shouldn't have to be paid for people that have a tv just for video games since they think that most tv programs nowadays are stupid.
- It shouldn't be allowed to honk hours in the night "because" one football team that concretely has nothing related to them, won a match. Actually I think there shouldn't too be concerts right in the town, what's worst, I mean, what's the least moral: a lot of people that have to use their car to attend to something they want to that is next to their city, or more people that don't want to assist to it and can't sleep, furthermore not always the saturday night (which is not acceptable too though).
National education has multiple issues:
- The students I saw are always happy when one of their teacher isn't here, seriously, if it happened, were you happy when you learned that one hour to get your driving license was cancelled ? Well, one may argue that here it would get adjourned, well for school, if it doesn't or if you don't learn by yourself somewhere else, it should do the same as if the one for your driving license isn't adjourned: it will be harder the day of your test, which shouldn't makes you happy. I also see them trying to leave the classroom some minutes before the end of the hour etc.
- you need a random diploma to be able to do something that has nothing to do with it then like musicology. It's stupid because definitely, some people could directly go there after our equivalent of the middle school, and succeed there while here people learn so much about motors etc for example, just to be able to go there then since they absolutely won't use this after.
- some subjects definitely should be optional like art or music but even the second modern language like spanish or german.
- if philosophy is really needed despite having nothing to do with your future job, then why isn't it before being 16 years old to prevent some students not to have learn it ?
- there shouldn't be blinking/moving advertisings on the internet, the ads totally lost their goal, today they are saw as a nuisance, there are anti-ads programs etc, this is stupid, people are supposed to WANT to see them, they are happy to learn that a good thing they want just came out, they just don't want to see an ad for the 1000th time about something they don't want or they already bought.
The worst are the ads for glasses, those are about all except the quality of the glasses.
I don't find normal too that so much ads take advantage of the man nature, putting half naked girls to present a product that has nothing to do with that.
No matter how the product is shown, people should not buy it more because of that, even if on a gold table with two naked girls, the product stay the same.
The slogans they use sum up their behavior that I find abnormal, they don't want to fill a need, they want to make money, furthermore those slogans are usually clearly made for stupid people, I mean, really, if you think about it those kind of sentences can't makes you more want to buy this thing and actually makes you less want to buy it because of its annoyance.
- automatons shouldn't cause the problem of creating unemployment, imagine a planet fully automated, you would normally be happy, no need to work for food, water, energy, and instead, next to the whole world would be poor except some people who would have thousands of billions $, despite they didn't participated much to create those automatons while some of the poor people did ? It wouldn't make sense, but that's a bit what's happening now and that's why there was demonstrations when supermarkets started to exist for example, it's supposed to be better but the way it's made cause this problem.
It's like if people who make razor blades would have found a material that doesn't cost much and would be that resistant that as a razorblade you would never have to change it, and if they didn't released this because they would put themselves to unemployment, there is a huge problem in the society if like this. My solution would simply be that people would continue to pay those people one bit less, people would have to pay less (and have a bit less annoyance to change their razorblades/buy new ones) and while the makers would gain less they wouldn't have a problem for this since they have to work way less now, actually if they wouldn't have to work at all anymore they would use way less gasoline and thus actually gain money. This idea has to be the same for automatons.
I also wrote things I would have put in my preface or whatever I would have called it, that I could have criticized but didn't for reasons I explain:
- (23/11/10 I didn't realized when I wrote this one that I already wrote it in the beginning, it's probably because I wrote this weeks after) I find that often and for everything, nearly everybody is so unsmart, that's okay because it's not their fault but sometime it nearly makes me wanna cry, but maybe it's me who's really smart after all.
- the people of my age when I started to write this book (and up to at least 21) and I already though it years before this, are even worse than others for so much reasons. I don't speak about it because, let's admit that they are not yet very finished in their head, otherwise I would have done it because while it's a minority, it really goes far and it's what everybody was before and their parents are supposed to teach them what's good or not.
- things that only a minority does, because this book was meant for most people and thus they would have agreed with me and probably would have find it boring, like reading someone that say that racism is a bad thing.
- things about video games because it concerns a minority too, otherwise, since it's my passion, I would have said a lot, that today a good video game is made by some developers, 100 designers, scenarists, musicians, everything but gameplay is important, just another fps identical to the others in term of gameplay is sold a lot while something original and interesting and even free sometime, no one cares if it has bad graphics, actually on the video games boxes you NEVER see the interface, all you see is the world, the graphics, but you can't have any idea of how you play in this game. Trailers are even more meant to do this, they go even further.
You make a good game, you let jayisgame etc speak of it, next to no one will care despite there should normally be a viral effect due to people speaking about your game; you do a totally awful game, you put it on steam/apple store/xbox live/facebook etc, you get thousands of dollars (and let those people that just host your game get a commission), that's the video game world of today. Portal is not an exception, people don't like this game for its originality, it's more about "the cake is a lie", the cube-like theme, "Still alive" and the fact that it was released on steam, next to no one cared about narbacular drop that was made way before and had the same gameplay.
- the french language has so much insane problems, it makes me think to a wheel that has thousands patches instead of changing it once and for all. English isn't perfect but is way better (though that's the only thing I prefer of england/america, otherwise, every norms there are incoherent or inconvenient, only sometime it's just equal despite being different)."
Hello, for years I wrote ideas for a book I planned to write and for some reason I stopped it. I wanted to have your opinion about how much success it could have had. Thanks.
"Since I'm french, some things may not apply in every modern countries or maybe only apply in France, otherwise everything there is universal. Remember that it's just a sum up so there is more in each theme and I don't argue much. It's not exactly in the order of what I care the most:
- I don't see why people put aesthetics everywhere and buy things that cost more just because they are more "nice" etc, for me it's just exactly the same. This includes the "beauty" of people (including hair, clothes...), personally I'm already starting to have baldness and I don't care while some others make a complex of it or at least would prefer if they could not have this, me I actually like it since I have less to shear.
- I don't see too why when most do something, others feel like they have to do it too, like in my school buying an eastpak bag, ipod, quite often converses despite being anti-ergonomic (I mean, they're not annoying, just ultra-basic) yet having an higher price than ergonomic shoes thus actually more expensive to create than converses, etc. Following this idea, idem for long hair/handbags/earrings/heels etc for girls/women. I easily imagine people telling me that it's not for this reason that they do this: so a lot would have done all this too if most girls weren't doing this ? That's what I mean.
- Most people are selfish, I have a lot of examples about it but like, most people striving against racism are blacks or people who have black friends etc, those against antisemitism are jews, same for homosexuals etc, I don't criticize this, what I mean is that you don't see much people caring about the problems of others even if those are sometime more fair and it's thus why, despite being totally fair, there isn't much striving for euthanasia despite that in some cases it definitely should be allowed. Yeah, people are more striving for what they want than what's the most fair, and since the power obey more to things that most want and not what's the most fair, things like the legalization of euthanasia won't happen, like the legalization of abortion would never have happened if only a few people strived for it despite having good reasons to be allowed, like in case of rape. It's idiot to be selfish this way because if you are a real selfish one, you would actually not be selfish because this way everybody, you too, would gain by helping others.
By the way, furthermore, people don't strive for euthanasia because they don't realize that a situation where they would want to be euthanized could happen, so you see some persons that never cared about this or cancer etc and when it finally happen to them they start asking people to support this and donate for it, while they never cared about it before despite the many people that asked them.
- When people say they love someone for feelings etc, the thing is, in most cases they wouldn't be with him if for some reason the person couldn't have sex, etc. Since they are like they are and unfaithfulness or the desire to be unfaithful often happen, at least those who don't want children and young people probably are monogamous just because they just see monogamous people.
- A lot of people are not sure if god exists or not because they can't prove that he doesn't, it means that I can invent anything no one can prove, a lot of people will doubt about its existence. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate people who believe in god.
- Mass media probably shouldn't encourage their sport team, it makes people continue to think that there is any reason to support people they have no reason to support, they do it for an idea that they represent their country, it's stupid, especially since a lot of players are bought from other countries.
Also, just the idea of a "national sport" disturbs me, there is no reason for someone to like a sport more than others just because most others here play it, if it was for an idea that you can't play something else because you won't find someone playing it, but no, they really like it, for example soccer video games work a lot in europe while they don't exist in usa and vice versa, which doesn't make sense since it has a different gameplay of the real soccer anyway, stupid marketing and people who follow it...
- There probably shouldn't be attorneys, I don't like the idea of paying someone to defend you, especially since you're not good enough to defend yourself and even if you are, you don't have the choice not to take one in some cases. I also find stupid that you can appeal, getting a second trial roughly the same that can have a different conclusion despite there is no new elements between, what does it mean, that one of the two courts is worse than the other one ? That you may prefer to poorly defend yourself in the first instance to better defend yourself in the second and prevent the opponent to appeal ? It's better to have 1 best possible trial than 2 not good enough, well I guess they try their best in both, but then it's useless to do it again and may be unfair. And the biggest issue is: the justice is supposed to be blind, then what's the point of paying an expensive attorney if it can't change anything to justice, sometime even paying multiple ones ? Rich people aren't that equal against justice, especially with another point: the fines are a fixed number, they should be in proportion with the means/income of the person, that is, it's here to dissuade people to do something, while it's severe with poor people, rich ones don't have to bother for what represents not much for them, they don't even have to go to their trial, they send someone for them. One good example of that is the removing of the driving license, they just take another driver and being rich they don't even need to work much anyway so it's not like they absolutely need a car, money in % or jail if needed, would have a better effect. We are all supposed to be equal at least about the law, in fact not even with this.
- The vote system to elect the president has issues, if 60% of the population always want a person of one of the big 2 parties, there will be next to 100% of the time a president of that party. Either the condorcet's method (actually I learn the term for this after I thought about it myself, I don't wanna brag, just to let you know, but I think more about an improvement of it of putting numbers in front of the candidates by order of preference, it would just have to be scanned by machines) or an idea of having like 40% of the time a president of the other party (if people didn't change much their mind between the years of the first president term so this only apply in a very stable country), should apply, in both cases there wouldn't be anymore the tactical voting thus the untactical voting which prevent candidates that could be president to become it and makes people think that 2 persons are really liked while all the others have next to no support, because right now it really doesn't make sense that some % people vote for someone knowing that he has no chance just to show that some people support him. I also speak about a lot of other stuff about this.
- That's a waste of money and time and often annoy the local population because of the space taken by the followers and the security measures, that when there is inundation/a big accident etc, a minister or the president come there, there is nothing he can do/learn more by coming than by just being informed of the situation and telling what he wants about it to journalists, and people who like when one come are stupid because they can come to be like they care even if they actually don't while they could stay where they are for the reason I said and yet speak about it and really care. Another big example is when two presidents meet each other, just to speak or give a paper, can't they just use phone or webcam if needed instead of using a lot of their time in the travel (they don't spend their time working in the travel) and a lot of kerosene that people pay ? Everyone else do this and it's actually way faster. Sure without this we wouldn't even notice a difference on the public taxes, yet that's not a reason, can I ask 1 million and get it because people won't notice it ? Of course not, it wouldn't be fair. Long time ago there was good reasons to do this: phone didn't exist and when it did it could get hacked easily, but now that's totally ridiculous. It also works for big white-collar workers.
- Presidential pardon shouldn't exists, actually I first though I didn't had to explain why because I think it's kinda obvious but the fact is that it still exists and people don't complain about it, so: justice spend a lot of time with a lot of people to judge someone, one person in a short time decides to let him leave jail. Really, I don't realize much why I have to write this and while this still exists in 2010, this thing probably was first created when the king had all the powers but since...
- I hate politicians because sometime someone in a party do something bad that has nothing to do with politics and everybody in the opposite party say that it's a shame, that he should quit while everybody of his party defend him and when it's someone from the other party it's the exact reverse, proving that it had nothing to do with an opinion but just opportunism.
- There should be other real ways to become known quickly in politics other than running for the presidency knowing that for now (and probably forever but you do it to get positions in the national assembly at the election of deputies) you have no chance to get elected, which shouldn't be a way.
- The one that get elected shouldn't act like he "won", how "won" ? You don't vote for someone so he "win", you vote for someone so your ideas get applied, he should more act (because of how he shall be, the different rewards (salary etc) that should be lower, medias that shouldn't too say that one "won" etc) like a union steward, like "ok, you guys think I'm the best to do the job so I will do it, thank you for believing in me".
- Electoral campaigns shouldn't cost millions, even if the only one paying this would be the party of the candidate (yeah the fact that it's the people who pay it is even more unacceptable) because it still would mean that those with the most money have more chance to be elected. What's the point of all this money, giving more advertising to people so they hate even more politicians ? Giving information ? Not even this, to know this, people look their program on internet or on some paper, which cost next to nothing compared, no, this money is mainly used for "meetings", which are about regrouping some thousands people to prove how awesome your party is if you're able to regroup that much people, telling things you told already at other meetings, always in a ultra-populist way by yelling etc.
- The idea of the empty chair protest should never have exist (i.e., people shouldn't consider it as a protestation when someone does this), it's like being 6 and telling your mum that if she doesn't give you a candy you will stop asking her, it definitely is an incoherent way to protest.
- The vote at the national assembly is not anonymous, there is some reasons to this but this cause problems, one can't vote for his conviction if their party is against something without being annoyed about this after, and sometime one party ask to the other party to not all vote the same and vote for their conviction instead while asking their party to do this. Voting like the majority of its party instead of what each think is stupid because if everyone vote for his conviction you will roughly get the same result but in a more normal way.
- Demonstrations and strikes shouldn't exist, not because people should always be happy of their conditions but because the system should be different, mainly thanks to internet. Some centuries ago there was real reasons to do this, the crowd of people went somewhere in order to attack some buildings, now they don't annoy the persons responsible of their problems and annoy people instead, I can understand that, for example to threat of death someone elected by the people is all but good (and people strived millennia for this not to happen anymore) but others shall not be annoyed too, and I'm gonna explain how because now, thinking about it, it's just ridiculous, the only point of this is to show how much they are to think something, can't an online petition with specific arguments do the same ? And anyway, it's not because a lot of people think something that it makes it more fair, what does it mean, that if something fair is wanted by a few they won't get it while if a lot want something unfair they will get it ? The government has an issue about this if so. Furthermore, I just hate the fact that the police and the organizers have a way different number of participants, how ironic, they demonstrate saying that it's to apply the democracy, they show themselves as the good people against the unfair politicians and they claim that a lot of people were with them while they weren't (I don't think much that the police has much to gain to say that there was less people demonstrating than there was). There was an idea of using satellites to count them using the large crowd of people but they didn't want it, of course, they couldn't claim that a higher number of people were with them.
Strikes also shouldn't exist for a reason that apply to both: the idea always is "if you don't cancel your reform, we will strike at such high level", here should be the solution, not days after once it happened, here the government should either cancel their reform immediately or say "even if you do this we will let it", in which case people should then say "if we do it they will let it so let's not do it, it's useless" which means that in any cases, there isn't strike, people should just not try to bluff the other like by saying that they will strike while if it's left they won't anyway or telling that they will let it if there is a strike while they would have cancelled it if it happened, but this seem to be impossible because people are selfish and they would often lie.
- The public taxes are sometime abusively used, like the salary of the ministers/presidents who get everything they need paid anyway, or the free housing that an ex-president get despite not having much to do in the capital city anymore, yet actually people are stupid about this, this happened before the subprime crisis for jacques chirac thus no one complained, someone got one after the crisis, one that cost way less and that was planned (anyone could know it), people complained, people really don't think much about their future... One other example is what you have in the government buildings: is stylized chairs, gold clocks etc really needed ? It shocks me when at an interview they say that people will have to work more etc because of the subprime crisis, while you can see this in the background.
The reason of the fact that they get more than they should is simple: people elect some people who take the decisions, of course those don't want much to take bad decisions against themselves, there is a problem with this because of the conception of the democracy, definitely other persons should decide for them about this.
- St valentine, christmas gifts, birthdays etc were created to make people buy things they wouldn't have otherwise, and sometime they buy something the other don't like, thus they can't think that because someone bought them something they wanted they're not gonna buy it anymore, instead they still will buy it and that's twice money for the sellers.
- People don't have to pay that much for their dead, I can understand a gravestone but coffin and flowers is pointless and the fact that some people live because of this makes me uncomfortable.
- Television license fee shouldn't have to be paid for people that have a tv just for video games since they think that most tv programs nowadays are stupid.
- It shouldn't be allowed to honk hours in the night "because" one football team that concretely has nothing related to them, won a match. Actually I think there shouldn't too be concerts right in the town, what's worst, I mean, what's the least moral: a lot of people that have to use their car to attend to something they want to that is next to their city, or more people that don't want to assist to it and can't sleep, furthermore not always the saturday night (which is not acceptable too though).
National education has multiple issues:
- The students I saw are always happy when one of their teacher isn't here, seriously, if it happened, were you happy when you learned that one hour to get your driving license was cancelled ? Well, one may argue that here it would get adjourned, well for school, if it doesn't or if you don't learn by yourself somewhere else, it should do the same as if the one for your driving license isn't adjourned: it will be harder the day of your test, which shouldn't makes you happy. I also see them trying to leave the classroom some minutes before the end of the hour etc.
- you need a random diploma to be able to do something that has nothing to do with it then like musicology. It's stupid because definitely, some people could directly go there after our equivalent of the middle school, and succeed there while here people learn so much about motors etc for example, just to be able to go there then since they absolutely won't use this after.
- some subjects definitely should be optional like art or music but even the second modern language like spanish or german.
- if philosophy is really needed despite having nothing to do with your future job, then why isn't it before being 16 years old to prevent some students not to have learn it ?
- there shouldn't be blinking/moving advertisings on the internet, the ads totally lost their goal, today they are saw as a nuisance, there are anti-ads programs etc, this is stupid, people are supposed to WANT to see them, they are happy to learn that a good thing they want just came out, they just don't want to see an ad for the 1000th time about something they don't want or they already bought.
The worst are the ads for glasses, those are about all except the quality of the glasses.
I don't find normal too that so much ads take advantage of the man nature, putting half naked girls to present a product that has nothing to do with that.
No matter how the product is shown, people should not buy it more because of that, even if on a gold table with two naked girls, the product stay the same.
The slogans they use sum up their behavior that I find abnormal, they don't want to fill a need, they want to make money, furthermore those slogans are usually clearly made for stupid people, I mean, really, if you think about it those kind of sentences can't makes you more want to buy this thing and actually makes you less want to buy it because of its annoyance.
- automatons shouldn't cause the problem of creating unemployment, imagine a planet fully automated, you would normally be happy, no need to work for food, water, energy, and instead, next to the whole world would be poor except some people who would have thousands of billions $, despite they didn't participated much to create those automatons while some of the poor people did ? It wouldn't make sense, but that's a bit what's happening now and that's why there was demonstrations when supermarkets started to exist for example, it's supposed to be better but the way it's made cause this problem.
It's like if people who make razor blades would have found a material that doesn't cost much and would be that resistant that as a razorblade you would never have to change it, and if they didn't released this because they would put themselves to unemployment, there is a huge problem in the society if like this. My solution would simply be that people would continue to pay those people one bit less, people would have to pay less (and have a bit less annoyance to change their razorblades/buy new ones) and while the makers would gain less they wouldn't have a problem for this since they have to work way less now, actually if they wouldn't have to work at all anymore they would use way less gasoline and thus actually gain money. This idea has to be the same for automatons.
I also wrote things I would have put in my preface or whatever I would have called it, that I could have criticized but didn't for reasons I explain:
- (23/11/10 I didn't realized when I wrote this one that I already wrote it in the beginning, it's probably because I wrote this weeks after) I find that often and for everything, nearly everybody is so unsmart, that's okay because it's not their fault but sometime it nearly makes me wanna cry, but maybe it's me who's really smart after all.
- the people of my age when I started to write this book (and up to at least 21) and I already though it years before this, are even worse than others for so much reasons. I don't speak about it because, let's admit that they are not yet very finished in their head, otherwise I would have done it because while it's a minority, it really goes far and it's what everybody was before and their parents are supposed to teach them what's good or not.
- things that only a minority does, because this book was meant for most people and thus they would have agreed with me and probably would have find it boring, like reading someone that say that racism is a bad thing.
- things about video games because it concerns a minority too, otherwise, since it's my passion, I would have said a lot, that today a good video game is made by some developers, 100 designers, scenarists, musicians, everything but gameplay is important, just another fps identical to the others in term of gameplay is sold a lot while something original and interesting and even free sometime, no one cares if it has bad graphics, actually on the video games boxes you NEVER see the interface, all you see is the world, the graphics, but you can't have any idea of how you play in this game. Trailers are even more meant to do this, they go even further.
You make a good game, you let jayisgame etc speak of it, next to no one will care despite there should normally be a viral effect due to people speaking about your game; you do a totally awful game, you put it on steam/apple store/xbox live/facebook etc, you get thousands of dollars (and let those people that just host your game get a commission), that's the video game world of today. Portal is not an exception, people don't like this game for its originality, it's more about "the cake is a lie", the cube-like theme, "Still alive" and the fact that it was released on steam, next to no one cared about narbacular drop that was made way before and had the same gameplay.
- the french language has so much insane problems, it makes me think to a wheel that has thousands patches instead of changing it once and for all. English isn't perfect but is way better (though that's the only thing I prefer of england/america, otherwise, every norms there are incoherent or inconvenient, only sometime it's just equal despite being different)."
