At some point and time I would really like to talk to Divis Mal. Anyone else?

I am sure hearing it from the horse's mouth would be much more to the point and clear.

Neil:Ditto.

Neil, Alchemist,and Wearer of the Cross, I would love to have the power to have you speak to Divis Mal. I do not think you would enjoy, or understand him. He most likely would be far to alien to you for your comfort or understanding.

Would he be kinda like you are with typos?

Ashnod, I apologize. You also answered my question. The Teragan, or at least you, do not plan to force conversion on any of us. That is good to know.
Should I take it your view allows for multiple nova societies?
I will also ask you this: How do you know the actions of yourself, and the other terats, are the right course of action?

Slattern, it would be an act of war because while it is presumptious for us to believe that said alien race not only has a social structure, but the reasoning ability to comprehend that another sentiant would probably have the same. Based on that, since they have entered our culture, it behooves them to understand our culture and conform to it as much as they can while they are here.
Laws are fluid. I see that as a reason for hope, as we can adjust our laws to conform to new social issues. Laws were not made specifically for novas in mind, but there exists the possibility that mutually-acceptable laws could be made for us all, or for the majority of novas, anyway.
The anarchy proposed by the Null Manifesto has a dedicated endpoint, true, but there is no empitus for novas to pursue it (nova government). Paraphrasing Ashnod, better the anarchy we know than the governance we have yet to create.
What do you see as a catalyst for a nova government?
Why do you believe all novas will lose the ability to interact with baselines? The progression of aberrancy and taint is not consistant, nor do we necessarily accumulate more taint.
Taint will become more of a problem for novas, as I see us distaining the caution necessary to progress without risking it.

I understand what you mean by difficulties in inteactions, but like everything else, it is something that can be dealt with if one truly desires to. I do not mean dorming, but the development of the empathy and direction necessary to not bend people to your will. Geisha somehow gets by without the effects you and the Count engender.

Life can be many things. If you chose to look at only your own life, then it can be come what may. If you chose to look at oneself as part of a far greater whole, you take into consideration the impact we have on our total environment.

It would be of great help if any terats would tell me the personal reasons you became terats, what teras means to you, what you see the Teragen as, and what direction do you see the Teragen going.
The same goes for any who follow a Transhumanist creed.

Preston, this is what I am hearing. If this is not what you are trying to communicate please correct me:

Aliens should respect our law because our law is ours and it is right.

and

Our law is fluid and ever changing.

So, "right" is only a momentary condition?

The approach of 'laws were created for baselines and thus do not apply to novas' is overly theoretical. In practice, the laws are created to govern a geographical area - nothing more arcane. If you're a nova in that area, you are just as subject to the relevant laws as anyone else. Why? Because they will be enforced against you whether you think they should or not.

Now, granted, 'anyone else' isn't superhuman, and thus doesn't have access to a variety of ways of circumventing said laws. You, Slattern, presumably don't get arrested much, regardless of what you do. Likewise, any illegal activities which I may or may not be involved in wouldn't even register on police radar (they just wouldn't - I'm special that way). Still, this is no different than anyone else in history with a way of getting around the law - it just operates on a different scale.

You can certainly argue that human law shouldn't apply to novas, but the fact remains that it does - check the books. And arguing philosophy with a police officer/Directive agent usually won't get you anywhere.

Oh, I don't know about that. Most of these laws and legislation were passed before the advent of novakind. They were written not taking "anyone else" into consideration, Alex. Whether the law enforcement and governments now state that they apply to anyone regardless of whether they're human or not is a different matter; there simply wasn't any way to predict previous to 1998 that a new species would walk the earth. But they were written with baselines in mind.

I do agree that if you're going to live somewhere you do need to obey the laws and respect the citizens, and you should expect the police departments and governments to treat you like any other citizen. I don't agree that laws have any real application to our species unless we chose to live by them, though.

Like we were discussing at Mr. Bailey's conference, all of this is part of social contract . You obey the laws and norms and the government is obliged to protect you. You can chose to reject that social contract and suffer the consequences if you'd like.

On another note, whether or not the "books" say something means very little. Many things which are in print and accepted as truth are patently false. The intent behind the creation is very important - all the anti-gay legislation in the Unites States, for example, serves no real purpose except to deny benefits to non-heterosexual individuals. The intent behind the creation of this type of law doesn't have the benefit of the people in mind, rather it's fueled by a religious belief and a desire to feel righteous in the face of a perceived adversary.

The intent behind baseline law was for baseline social contract. It can only really be accepted as such. Saying that it applies to "everyone else" is incredibly arrogant on the part of humanity who didn't have anyone other than baselines in mind when crafting it until after N-Day.

The Zurich Accord then tells us that we're human, which fits us into the social contract by default. We either then conform, or risk persecution. We've never had that option of collectively deciding what we want or need, and most of us just accept the default. It's easier and less messy, but is it right? I don't think so.

I, for one, refuse to believe that no middle ground is possible here. Why can't a nova nation exist on this planet? Why does it have to be that we follow baseline law or risk threat of war?

There has to be a peaceful solution that doesn't involve us just conforming, or leaving the planet.

Don't know about this whole idea of the laws not applying to us. All I know for sure is the UCMJ still applies fully to me as I was reminded of last weekend.

Quote:

Violette 'V' D'Aronique: Most of these laws and legislation were passed before the advent of novakind…. But they were written with baselines in mind.

Granted, and also granted that there have been cases where the law either doesn’t apply (and as such is irrelevant) or could be read to apply in such a way to be extremely burdensome on novas.

That is a case for changing the laws. But this isn’t a new thing. Society has changed before, especially with increasing technology, and laws have had to change to follow.

Quote:

Violette 'V' D'Aronique: I don't agree that laws have any real application to our species unless we chose to live by them, though. … Like we were discussing at Mr. Bailey's conference, all of this is part of social contract . You obey the laws and norms and the government is obliged to protect you. You can chose to reject that social contract and suffer the consequences if you'd like.

There are larger problems that goes beyond the issue of “novas interacting with the police & government”. Those issues are “novas interacting with each other” and “novas interacting with baselines”.

No social contract quickly degenerates into “might makes right”. This then either leads into oppression or lots of dead people. But you have a different social contract in mind, then by all means step forward.

Quote:

Violette 'V' D'Aronique: The intent behind baseline law was for baseline social contract. It can only really be accepted as such. Saying that it applies to "everyone else" is incredibly arrogant on the part of humanity who didn't have anyone other than baselines in mind when crafting it until after N-Day.

What specifically do you object to in that social contract? You aren’t someone who leaves dead people where ever you go. Other than not being consulted by the UN, what exactly is your issue?

Quote:

Violette 'V' D'Aronique: …We've never had that option of collectively deciding what we want or need, and most of us just accept the default. It's easier and less messy, but is it right? I don't think so.

What specifically do you want or need that isn’t or couldn’t be part of the default?

Quote:

Violette 'V' D'Aronique: I, for one, refuse to believe that no middle ground is possible here. Why can't a nova nation exist on this planet? Why does it have to be that we follow baseline law or risk threat of war? There has to be a peaceful solution that doesn't involve us just conforming, or leaving the planet.

Because no one has managed to come up with “nova law”, and the ones who consistently try typically don’t have problems with “baseline law”. The opposite is also true. The novas who are generally up in arms about “baseline law” normally have no suggestions or ideas of alternative laws.

A long time ago (before eruption) I need to make a resume. So I copied someone else’s. Or course I changed the name, and the experience, and the background, and everything else for that matter, but it was still much easier than creating my own from scratch.

The issue is less with “baseline law” than it is with “law” in general.

IMHO much of the rejection of “baseline law” mostly comes down to two camps. Camp one doesn’t want any law at all because they know darn well what they do would be constrained under any system of law. Camp two doesn’t want baseline law because the baselines came up with the sane ideas first and we didn’t. The ideas are sound but they don’t like the author.

Again, I'm not making a point of whether baseline law is theoretically valid when applied to us. All baseline laws (in UN nations) apply to us because the Zurich accord says we have no special rights/responsibilities. That's the inarguable up and down of it. I'm not talking philosophy, I'm talking law.

There's the whole pile of ideas about baseline law not being written with novas in mind, the impossibility of creating legal systems for baselines and novas together (even the impossibility of creating legal systems for novas in general), etc, etc, ad infinitum, but when you get down to brass tacks you will still be prosecuted if you are caught committing crimes as described by baseline law.

The law isn't intended to be philosophically sound. It's intended to preserve order (or, more cynically/realistically, the status of those who make the laws). This is the flip side of the social contract - ignoring it doesn't let you out of the system, it just means that the system does its damnedest to cut you off at the knees.

Understood.

While on this earth, yes. It is a matter of respect for one's fellow sentients. Working on the assumption they are as socially capable as we are, why would they assume they could ignore our laws and customs in our own domain?

Correct. A body of laws is a growing and evolving thing. At its best, we improve it and make it as equal and fair as possible.

Correct. At one time slavery was legal in my country, being homosexual was not only against the law, but also accepted as a psychological malady, and the right to vote was restricted to property owning males.
These things were "right", but are no longer so. Slavery is now illegal, voting is open to all citizens 18 and up (with exceptional exceptions to be sure), and while certain bigotry and discrimination still exists, it is not impossible to hope one day we will be a far more open-minded and tolerant society.

Following up on the present arguments, it is correct to assume that laws created before N-Day did not specifically have novas in mind when they were made.
The consensus at the time was that since novas came from human stock (the state of unerupted novas not being explored yet), laws and rights created and applicable to novas before their eruption still applied.
The assumption was that we were still human, thus the laws applied. If you are a nova who think you are human, there is no controversy.

Of course if you believe, like I do, that novas are not human, there is a question that needs to be addressed:
Why do we now assume that the laws do not apply to us?
Because the lawmakers at the time had no idea there would be novas, we were not taken into consideration?

As to the matter of a nova nation, the country of Singapore is a good example of how a state can come about without bloodshed.
Another way would be for a nova to come to power legitimately with a pro-nova agenda. They could invite other novas to come to this country and obey its laws. As time progressed, the country could develop nova specific laws to deal with nova specific problems. It would evolve into a nova-specific state.
I find it depressing that with the depth and breadth of our power, we can not figure out how to make something like this a reality.

Ms. D'Aronique, it is good to hear from you again. While we were not consulted on the Zurich Accords, we retain the capacity to work toward a nova nation legally. We can gather and attempt a consensus.
Novas can travel most places on the earth freely. We can and do gather in considerable numbers when we desire. The main roadblock to a consensus on a nova nation seems to be our diversity, to put it politely.

We remain a race were novas like Tarot are more the norm. Wether or not they care about a nova nation, or even their status as novas or human, they are not actively working toward a political solution. They do not care enough to do anything about the situation.
I believe the politically and philosophically minded amongst us will have to be patient for a while longer.

I with my great nova abilities can produce enough of key heavy metal, and gems to make entire international industries crumble. Seeing as there is no law that is written to stop me from doing so, should laws be written just to suit my abilities? Should the maters of laws just assume that do to my nature I would not crash the world wide diamond markets?

We live in a small world mister Craft; a world that is ever so fragile and neither the law nor the people who enforce them have the power to force a civil or orderly society onto novas. So, be thankful for that small grace that lives with all the novas that could do unimaginable damage to the world. For that small grace is all that stands between life, as we know it and a war that may well be the war to end all wars.

I am doing very well by working within baseline society. I use my powers for the greatest benefit of all and am rewarded commensurately.

I take responsibility for my actions, being well aware that I could deconstruct a person's psyche in about three minutes and make them a gibbering wreck or sublime egomaniac if I so wished. But I do not, instead choosing to use my talents in forensic psychology, preventing riots and international diplomacy.

It's called self-control, self-responsibility and self-knowledge.

I have observed these traits in certain Terats and whilst I disagree with their belief that novas are not human, I applaud them for their restraint and discipline. But I have seen too many more who have joined the Teragen because it gives them the moral latitude to do whatever they want, just because they can.

This behaviour crosses the line between self-centered and selfish.

People here spend too much time talking about silly things. There are important things out there to do. Important things that need to be done.

And by all means if you do "bad" things and are a nova you must be a terat? We do not turn away our brothers and sisters because some document said they did something wrong. Rowena would you turn over your family to authorities because they did not wear the parties colors?

No. I have known Utopians who have abused their positions and have brought them to justice.

I would turn my family over to the authorities if they broke the law.

Actually, you're talking about enforcement of the law, which is a different matter. You can say whatever you want, but it's what you do to back it up that changes words into effects.

Humanity could have laws that state it owns the planetary land of Mars and Pluto and that all UN laws apply there. But that doesn't necessarily apply if someone else gets there or is there first.

Even if said law was to return someone to slavery? All laws are mutable and not all unjust things break the law.

Troll:

No social contract quickly degenerates into “might makes right”. This then either leads into oppression or lots of dead people. But you have a different social contract in mind, then by all means step forward.

Well, I'm not in favor of simply eliminating social contract. But what I would like to see is enough novas speaking with a united voice calling for changes to the current system so that a new social contract developed.

What specifically do you object to in that social contract? You aren’t someone who leaves dead people where ever you go. Other than not being consulted by the UN, what exactly is your issue?

That I don't like being told by another species what I am, and that this is way I'm supposed to act and behave. I'm all about peaceful co-existence, but I'd like my species to have input on how this co-existence happens. For the most part, everything's been one-sided and I don't approve of that. I know many of us like things the way they currently are, and I don't really think that a new social contract is going to radically alter the way we live. I'm not looking for baseline oppression or novas ruling over baselines in a mostly benevolent manner.

The truth is, though, they aren't our equals, and we can't continue to pretend that they are forever. I know that's not a nice thing to say, but the truth sometimes hurts. I have significant advantages that only another nova can have. I'd like us to work alongside each other and build a better future for everyone while recognizing that we aren't the same.

What specifically do you want or need that isn’t or couldn’t be part of the default?

Can I ask why you feel so strongly that the default is a good thing?

The issue is less with “baseline law” than it is with “law” in general.

I don't think I fall into either of the camps you mentioned.

"Actually, you're talking about enforcement of the law, which is a different matter. You can say whatever you want, but it's what you do to back it up that changes words into effects."

Actually, no. I'm talking law. Enforcement is where it falls apart - examples of myself (able to evade system) and Slattern (socially untouchable) already given as two drastically different examples of that. Throw in Geryon (really dangerous) as a nice third option, and Prodigy (hermit) as a fourth.

We all break traditional enforcement, but that's not something restricted to novas. Think Al Capone back in the Prohibition days - evaded the law for years, and they only ever pegged him for tax evasion. We just do it much better, because the means of enforcement hasn't caught up with us.

The laws (or, at least, the laws that people generally take seriously) define what we are allowed to do within the social contract - they aren't just someone talking big. If you violate them, that changes how you interact with society. You have no part in determining whether a certain law applies to you - it's all in how the law thinks of your actions.

The argument that keeps coming up here is that human laws do not apply to novas. That, however, is nonsense because we don't get to choose whether that is the case or not. That's not how it works. You can choose whether you want to obey those rules or not, but the law is the law, and it applies to everyone it says it applies to.

I'm not arguing the suitability of human law to novas. What I'm saying is that bringing law into a philosophical discussion (which happens quite often here) is ridiculous. Laws are ink and paper directives - that's all.

"Humanity could have laws that state it owns the planetary land of Mars and Pluto and that all UN laws apply there. But that doesn't necessarily apply if someone else gets there or is there first."

Yes, but you'd still be breaking the law if you murdered someone over there. It wouldn't be traditionally enforceable, but you'd still be breaking the letter of the law. That's really kind of my point - the law is a very simple thing, which is completely independent of you or the ease with which you can be punished.

If you can't be brought in by the local law enforcement force, that isn't a problem with the law, per se - it just means that enforcement of the law needs to improve. I guess it really comes down to the tendency of many folk around here to decide that human laws don't apply, and humans just need to suck it up.

That's not even remotely accurate. Creating entirely separate systems of law for humans and novas is fairly meaningless. Turn the issue around. Say we get a nova society with its own laws (including one against killing novas), and a human comes along and kills a nova. Is it reasonable to say that the human ought not be punished because nova laws don't apply to him?

'm not arguing the suitability of human law to novas. What I'm saying is that bringing law into a philosophical discussion (which happens quite often here) is ridiculous. Laws are ink and paper directives - that's all.

But that's my point. It's just words on paper. It doesn't apply to anything. It's just an idea. It applies to something because someone says it does, and then enforces it to give it application. By itself, it's nothing but words and words don't apply to anything without power to enforce them.

I find it odd that I'm agreeing with that statement.

Thing is, I seem to be better at debating untill I'm blue in the node than actually being the "nation building" type.

Laws tend to benefit when the governed derive some good from the laws in question. Painful implements wielded by the enforcers are, perhaps, best backed up by painful implements happily wielded by most of the citizens. Note that, ideally, these painful implements are mostly metaphorical.

...

A laptop in a vacuole produces good multitasking capacity.

...

Regarding productivity: Does anyone want to start a (possibly ill-conceived) attempt at a test-nation? A fiction of a nation to play with ideas, rather than a real nation where bad ideas are more concretely bad? ... If there are good enough ideas some nation-land can be annexed later maybe.

...

That last sentence was probably a joke.

Why? He is only one nova. Only one out of thousands. Yes he is powerful but is he not usually quiet? He did one broadcast and he beat up one silly looking man in silly looking clothes. Does that sound like he is really that important? The novas here from the Teragen chatter more than he does. Talk to them.

Better yet. Stop talking about silly things and accept that you have a place in the world. Stop healing those that should not be healed and help those that should.

Violette 'V' D'Aronique: Well, I'm not in favor of simply eliminating social contract. But what I would like to see is enough novas speaking with a united voice calling for changes to the current system so that a new social contract developed.

Again, “united” for change into what?


Violette 'V' D'Aronique: That I don't like being told by another species what I am…

Stripped of the emotional baggage, what species you are is a scientific determination and not a political one. Science says you are a nova. No one on any side of the argument disagrees with that. The term “human” is sufficiently ill defined that I ignore that issue as grand standing. If "human" can be applied to someone without all the normal chromosomes, or to someone without a functioning brain, then I see no reason it can not be applied to sentient computers, biologically engineered life forms, etc.


Violette 'V' D'Aronique: I'm all about peaceful co-existence, but I'd like my species to have input on how this co-existence happens. For the most part, everything's been one-sided and I don't approve of that. I know many of us like things the way they currently are, and I don't really think that a new social contract is going to radically alter the way we live. I'm not looking for baseline oppression or novas ruling over baselines in a mostly benevolent manner.

So you don’t mind living peacefully, but you mind very much being told you shouldn’t kill?

Or is someone forcing you into behavior that you don’t like? The closest thing I can think of would be an arranged marriage (putting you in a social contract not of your own choice) but I doubt that’s relevant.


Violette 'V' D'Aronique: ...they aren't our equals, and we can't continue to pretend that they are forever. I know that's not a nice thing to say, but the truth sometimes hurts. I have significant advantages that only another nova can have. I'd like us to work alongside each other and build a better future for everyone while recognizing that we aren't the same.

So you want to be paid more than the run of the mill baseline? That’s normally how modern society recognizes in equality.

Or did you mean something like every baseline to kneeling and groveling in your presence?

My neighbor’s cat doesn’t grovel in my presence but I view myself as superior to him. But then he probably views himself as superior to me so I guess we are even.


Violette 'V' D'Aronique: Can I ask why you feel so strongly that the default is a good thing?

Because the default is what is on the table and can be evaluated for it’s advantages and disadvantages. The other option sufficiently on the table for evaluation is Anarchy/War. Just saying “I want to re-write the social contract” isn’t enough information. What specifically is it that you want?

The ability to call yourself “not human”?
Free speech says you already have that.

Recognition for having powers and abilities far above normal humanity?
You’ve got that too.

So what is in your new social contract that isn’t in the current one? You don’t want a license to kill.


Violette 'V' D'Aronique: I don't think I fall into either of the camps you mentioned.

Agreed. Would that more were that way.

Troll:

Because the default is what is on the table and can be evaluated for it’s advantages and disadvantages. The other option sufficiently on the table for evaluation is Anarchy/War. Just saying “I want to re-write the social contract” isn’t enough information. What specifically is it that you want?

So basically, the devil you know opposed to the devil you do not?

Is there anything you would choose over the current system. If so, what would it be?

Or is that you simply like the current system enough that you don't desire change? I'm honestly curious, here.

Violette 'V' D'Aronique: So basically, the devil you know opposed to the devil you do not?

Why the word “devil”?

Ignoring the UN (which I assume you don’t normally deal with), and the word “human”, and who created the system, you still haven’t identified anything you dislike about the current system, and what you would change.

After you figure out what you don’t like about the current system, think hard about what you would like to replace it with, then we can plot a course from where we are to where you want to go. The various courses will have various costs, and at that point we can try to judge whether the price is worth it.


Violette 'V' D'Aronique: Is there anything you would choose over the current system. If so, what would it be?

Sure, I am not happy with the current system’s “elite” phenomenon. It’s the number one killer of novas and should be treated like such. (As opposed to my neighbor's cat...)

The solution is to crack down on the employers of elites. Bring sunlight into their affairs by opening everything to public scrutiny. Elites (mostly) are government agents. As such the governments that hire elites should be responsible for their activities.

This identifies where we are, where I want us to go, and even how to get there.
My solution isn’t perfect but would lessen the level of blood being spilled.

Troll:

Why the word “devil”?

Because that's the standard turn of phrase when one prefers the current known variable to the unknown variable?

Sure, I am not happy with the current system’s “elite” phenomenon.

That's actually a change to the current system, not something you'd chose over it, which was my question. Wasn't inquiring about what you'd like to improve about the way things are.

I'm still formulating a response to your other questions.