Reverting once more to the issues I was thinking over in Tuesday's post -
- and there was definitely something for me about magic bullets and quick fixes and be careful what you wish for in that posited question.
I'm not saying precisely Monkey's Paw territory, but definitely maybe Unintended Consequences, and there are various versions of this ( Read more... )

Spotted on Twitter: RT if you would absolutely, in a heartbeat, give up your savings/discretionary income/wealth if it meant you would solve/end world hunger and poverty.
I dunno: this sounds to me a bit like the 'if you could do [desirable thing] by pressing a button which would kill a complete stranger a long way away from you, would you?' thought ( Read more... )

Letter in today's Guardian Weekend, which I am unable to find in order to link to it, in which someone whom we presume a scientist or an engineer claims that arts graduates find employment in 'politics, journalism and managing, often badly, organisations where science graduates do the actual work', and that after the shitstorm created by arts ( Read more... )

Reading these very thought-provoking posts by oyceter and coffeeandink I was struck by the underlying notion that they are arguing against, that there is a quick fix for [problem] in the form of a magic bullet or set of rules or clearly labelled boxes to put things in, and once you've got that sorted, [problem] is no longer a problem because you just follow the ( Read more... )

Billed as libido in an atomiser, PT-141 will finally offer women the chance to turn on their sexual desire as and when they need it. Or so the science says.

Because, as eny fule no, women are always the ones that need fixing, right? Mightn't it be just as much to the point to invent something that would turn men's sexual desires off, so that, oh, ( Read more... )