Utopia (8): Can bribery work in open Open Society?

I started to drink third beer when I asked what new brought Karl Popper into the Open Society model.
- "Hm," Paul was obviously prepared. "Popper was thinking about the OS in a more political fashion. For him OS was political model. Democracy is open society by his definition. Reeves was already dead when Popper became well-known philosopher yet his pupils or followers didn't agree with Popper terminology. And yes, we're educated in world of Reeves' Open Society world, not in Popper's one. But both were important - of course. Now - the differences. Reeves defined OS model as something for people in any scale and on any level of society. Of course - it's hard to talk about open society between two people. There were many friendships that already satisfied rules of Open Society model. But that's not enough, small group is not the proper scale for OS to show its potential. It's about talking the truth, about communicating a lot, about creating communities - and of course also about respect when you don't like someone. Tolerance or what." Paul took another sip of beer.
- "Ok, I might not understand it fully," admitted I, "but I think I know what you mean. Now that Popper versus Reeves difference."
- "Yeah, so that was Reeves. Popper focused more on a political model. And he defined it like that when you can change the government without a blood-shedding it's more or less open society. Democracy is open society for him. There's nothing wrong on that. For him open society is better than a closed one. That's good. Democracy is still the best known type of government. We - however - divide democratic countries to those with OS model adopted and those without it. Sometimes it's called 'closed open society' and 'open open society' with some irony involved of course."
- "Mhm, I guess I understand," I nodded. "In our world Popper said more or less the same. Now I can't know if there was some Reeves - but he just didn't become famous - or there was none."
- "Yeah, hard to tell now. :-) We mentioned Russia moment ago - it's a typical democratic country - constitutional monarchy - but with closed society. They have some problems with bribery, not so low criminality and so... but their direction is right and they will adopt Open Society I guess. They just need the time."

- "And here is no bribery and criminality?"
- "Hm, hard to tell. :-) You might just not know it, right? But I guess that bribery is not working here. At least not in that scale. You know - you can give someone a chocolate and he might be better to you in the future. It's not problem to be better. Problem is if you can achieve your goals only with bribing. That's bad. Ill society with ill motivation for people. About criminality - yes, there is some here. You can't stop it completely. You just can do the best for those who are better to the other people."
- "Why do you think that you can't bribe someone here?"
- "Well, you can! I didn't say you can't. It's just quite useless. Tell me those examples when bribes become handy."
- "In our world... in my country the health care is awful. If you want to be given better care, you have to pay someone. Or there is a chance to test some new medicine (you know - when you can test it on people after all those tests before) and director tells you that you have to pay in order to be allowed to do it in his hospital. Although it's absolutely no burden for him."
- "Ah, yeah, I've heard about such things... again, it works like this in Russia - and many other countries around the world. Problem is that when you say a word about it, it ends like word against word, right?"
- "Exactly! Sometimes it's even better to say nothing, because you would be forced to communicate with police with the expected result - nothing!"

- "I understand. Here the presumption of innocence is not useful, right? :-) But don't worry - we guarantee the presumption of innocence here. Now tell me one thing. Why that man that is accused of accepting bribe (or at least of requesting them) still works in his office?"
- "Hm..." easy question, difficult answer. "Well, there is that presumption, right? I can't accuse him just so easy. I have to prove it or unsay it. In that moment the guy is clear again."
- "And if another similar case arise?"
- "Then the situation repeats if the other people can't prove it too. :-) Ok, they can tape him, but that's not legal too. We use a role of 'agent provocateur' for this also. Some cases are solved after all."
- "Ok, that's better. But there are many other that are not solved - that were not even solving because you didn't call the police, right?"
- "Right."
- "Well, here the accusation itself is not exactly delict. I never thought about it - but it's quite important when I look at it now. For me it was just the fact. I can say something about you - and you can say something about me. Now that's the word against word - and we are where we already were, right?"
- "Looks like... :-) Where's the point?"
- "The point is that if there is another word against word where you are involved - again - you are in trouble. Can you see it?"
- "Not exactly - not in our world."
- "Not in yours but you are here. I said you wanted to bribe me, he said you wanted to bribe him. You reject both accusations. Well - it's not good for you. :-)"
- "Well, but you can ruin one faithful man with two false ones... ?"
- "Not exactly - this is just a minimal model. It's up to you to read your environment, you can check what people say about anybody. On the net for instance."
- "Ok, so if the two were wrong?"
- "If the two are really wrong and many people know you as the right man you might be still cool. If they try to accuse more than two other people, the math is suddenly against them."

- "And is it just the question of math?"
- "Not exactly. It's even possible that you have credit in some groups and you are not trusted in others."
- "Well - I thought I can understand it, but I'm getting lost now. :-) Where is the difference then? What about politicians and that aforementioned hospital director?"
- "There is too much information widely known about you when you're a politician or hospital director - and that makes the judges about you more precise, more useful and that's enough for most cases. If you're not trusted by enough people, you can't lead our country, you can't lead no hospital... in smaller scale it's the question of smaller group than. You can't be squad leader, you can't... you know, but this world is not about what you can't. It's about what you can. Just be good to people and they will support you. You can damage things, you can do bad things not on purpose, just be straight and honest and it will pay off."
- "That sounds easy."
- "It IS easy! It is supposed to be easy after all!"

We all know how sensitive is the question of privacy in our world and I was pretty curious about that. Because to know a lot about someone might be taken as an interference with one's privacy. I noticed before that Paul indicated that the privacy is not so overrated here because they don't need to hide so many things we like to keep secret. So now I'll finish the third beer and I ask him about this right away.

Iceweasel, Firefox 2 and the others...

Ok, this will be nothing long - just few semi-angry lines. ;-) I was pretty surprised when I saw Iceweasel first time in the title bar of my updated Firefox. Then I recalled that I heard previously about dispute between Mozilla Foundation and Debian. You can read about it here (Mozilla's point of view) or on InternetNews.com or you can check Iceweasel on all-encompassing Wikipedia. Ok... this is not a problem, right? Fox or Weasel - who cares?

After that I noticed that most important difference for me - close button on every tab. "Why?!" I cried. I remember some browser (was it Galleon or some older Mozilla?) that used the same solution and I never liked it. However - it's not just the decision made I don't like. I especially don't like that it's change from A to B and I couldn't find "use A style close button" anywhere in the configuration. Not to mention another "feature" - and that's Backspace malfunction!

Now I remembered that great fast light weighted Galeon browser again. Because of its story. It was amazing until one special moment. When Galeon was updated for GTK 2 (Galeon 2) it somehow lost all the magic, half of the functions and I stopped to use it completely. No - Firefox (or IceWeasel when I'm in Linux ;-)) is not in this position. I need to say that I never realized how good is to write blogs. Or at least to read them and Google from time to time - but I started to Google my problems just because of this post. ;-)

Well, now it's time for unravelment. I found out that I'm not the only one with Close button problem (I was sure of it after all). And I also found the solution... and yes, it's blog again. Actually - I also found the solution for my backspace problem (and learned that it actually worked somehow but I never realized because I was still on the top of the page when I used it ;-)).

I promised semi-angry short post... and now it's kinda happy-end semi-short post.

And so I became happy Firefox user again! (I know - many people made it without need to write a blog post.) I even discovered that Firefox 2 has great Undo Close Tab feature - what gives me good argument for another time when my colegue will try to convince me to switch to the Opera. Great! :-)

Cesta (2): The Ecstasy Of Flight (I Love the Night)

Chris De Burgh: The Ecstasy Of Flight (I Love the Night)

29/7
V svetlách veľkomesta sa stáva noc jasnejšou. Letné noci sú krásne kontrastné - tmavomodrá až čierna obloha a jasne žiariace hviezdy. Svetlá noc také čaro nemá. Noci sa nebojím... ak je tmavá. V tme totiž nik nič nevidí. Tma je bezpečná. Noc veľkomesta isto nie. Doba pokročila, napadlo ma, či už nie je "zajtra".
Zotrvačnosť mnou trhla - stojíme. Vystúpili sme na nástupisko a zistili, že okrem nás a ľudí z autobusu tu žiaden život nie je. Barboru striaslo, noc bola chladná - noc pred dažďom. Nechcel som sa v meste dlho zdržať, ale na dážď sa lepšie pozerá z okna budovy ako zo stanu kdesi v horách, ktoré sa rysovali na obzore, aj keď ten sa teraz dal len tušiť. Keď sme bývali neďaleko, chodil som práve do tohto mesta na školu. Ale nevyznal som sa tu až tak dobre, aby som vedel, kde sa nachádza objekt, ktorý sme hľadali.
"Prosím vás," oslovil som najbližšieho seriózne vyzerajúceho človeka, "neviete náhodou, kde je ***?"
"Nie som síce tunajší, ale náhodou to viem," dotyčný sa na chvíľu dôležito odmlčal a dôležito sa popritom aj tváril. To som si mal koho vybrať, napadlo ma. Ak sa čosi dozvieme do rána, budeme isto spokojní. No tváril som sa trpezlivo. Konečne sa chlapík rozhýbal a dlhými vetami nám opísal vskutku zložitú trasu (dve stovky metrov a dve zahnutia). Vo výraze jeho dôležitosti som si spomenul, že som sa stretol s podobnými pedagógmi, preto viem, ako ťažko sa s takými ľudmi vychádza.
Izba bola malá, ale na prespanie stačila. O tom, že budeme spať v jednej izbe, rozhodla Barbora. Išlo o finančné dôvody, samozrejme. Na pravú mieru uvediem fakt, že som do nej zamilovaný. Nebol som do nej v pravom slova zmysle "buchnutý", ako sa sluší na šestnásťročného chlapca, bolo to čosi iné. Nedalo sa to nazvať platonické. Stretol som ju náhodou, bola to čistota charakteru sama, aspoň sa mi tak zdalo, ale nepoznal som ju tak dobre, aby som ju mohol jednoducho "zbaliť". Iný na mojom mieste by to isto urobil, ale iný na mojom mieste by tu s ňou takto nebol. To mi nedávno sama povedala. Mal som ju rád ako dievča, ktorému som mohol zatiaľ povedať čokoľvek a vždy to bolo pochopené a neprekrúcané, ako dievča, ktoré si sebou bolo dosť isté, ale nikdy to nezneužívalo, ako dievča... skrátka ako žiadne iné.
Celá cesta bola šialeným podnikom, ale stála za to. Sú však dve veci, ktoré limitujú všetko - čas a peniaze. Blížil sa koniec júla; takže hodnotiac to podľa času, sme v polovici. Po stránke peňazí, na ktorých ale až zas tak moc zavislí nie sme, je to podobne.
Tma v izbe sa postupne zmenila na až moc svetlé šero. Rozpoznával som v okolí každý detail. Digitálky pípli celú hodinu, isto bola jedna. Vedel som, že Barbora nespí, zvykli sme si po nociach ešte chvíľu rozprávať. Pozrel som sa von oknom... tam niekde za svetelnou clonou a za všetkým tým smogom isto boli hviezdy. Aj keď schované za mrakmi, vedel som, že tam budú. Hviezdy - to je jedna z vecí, na ktoré keď pomyslím, hneď mi je lepšie. Ak mi totiž nad hlavou svietia, stále je prečo žiť. Ja mám svoj život až moc rád, ale nebojím sa oň. Myslím si, že prílišné lipnutie na ňom je skôr nebezpečné.
"Ako len ten čas letí," ozvalo sa z tmy. Nevedel som, ako to myslí, a tak som bol ticho. Keď to trvalo trochu dlho, zamumlal som čosi ako "mhmm", aby vedela, že som napätý a pripravený ju počúvať.
"Vieš, ten ani nie celý mesiac ubehol dosť rýchlo," prehodila akoby mimochodom. Ženská ti v živote nepovie, čo vlastne chce, napadlo ma. Často si žena uvedomí, že hovoriť narovinu by nebolo tak zaujímavé. Aspoň si môžme vybrať, čo robiť, aj keď je takmer isté, že to nebude "to, čo som práve chcela". Ale fakt je ten, že je to takto lepšie. Jeden môj známy prehlásil, že "ženy sú potvory, od Evy po dnešok", ale nemyslel to zle. Zaujímave však bolo, že jeho priateľka mu to smrteľne vážne odsúhlasila. Neviem si predstaviť poriadnu ženu, ktorá má viacej logiky ako emócií. Isto by nestála za toľko, čo napríklad Barbora.
"Ale bol vychutnaný," poznamenal som na jej skeptické konštatovanie.
"To hej," súhlasila, "bol to krásny mesiac. Taký som asi nezažila, a aj keby - žiadny nemal taký charakter. V tomto smere to bolo čosi... jedinečné."
"Pamätáš sa na začiatok našej cesty?" spýtal som sa, aj keď som ešte len slabo tušil, čo tým dosiahnem. Ja som si osobne všetko vybavoval veľmi podrobne, ale prišlo mi to, ako keby ma od našich prvých chvíľ delili roky. Čiastočne aj preto, lebo sme sa k sebe viac priblížili. A ten posun bol pomerne veľký.
"Na tú chvíľu, čo si ma oslovil dokonale, ale inak len tak hmlisto," odvetila váhavo.
"Takže sa ti to zdá dávno?" otázka bola skôr sugesciou, viac konštatovanie než otázka.
"Fakt je ten, že mi to pripadá pomerne dlhá doba," usmiala sa, mohla tušiť, že som to chcel počuť.
Zdalo sa mi zaujímavé, že občas hovorila o veciach relatívne. Nerobila to vždy; znamenalo to, že dôkladne vyberá slová. Isto nie nerada nechtiac priznala, že vlastne máme ešte dosť času.
"Myslíš, že aj ten druhý bude taký?" opýtala sa. Najprv som nevedel, čo myslí, až potom mi došlo, že sa pýta na druhý mesiac.
"Ten bude úplne super," odvetil som jej, lebo som si bol istý, že to bude stáť za to. My to ešte roztočíme, len počkaj. A to som sám netušil, ako.
Na vonkajší parapet zabubnoval dážď...

Utopia (7): Their amazing history

- "So as I said, I see first War as a history split point," I'm starting next round with their history. "So tell me some outline."
Paul looks at Caren with question who would start. I noticed that Brian (or whoever is that guy next to Caren) and two people across the table are listening our conversation too.

- "Well," Caren starts. "I'm no historian but I can handle the outline. ;-) Our Western civilization is strongly influenced by Open society model which really got some twist after the War. It wasn't elaborated into its current state though, however it was great time to gain new people. And because leaders like Wilson, General Pershing or Lloyd George were Open society advocates it was quite easy. They did not educate us in OS principles on their own, but they promoted those who were behind Open society from the start - mainly Bergson and Reeves. Many contributed to OS theories - either on the political field - like Karl Popper - or on the field of math theory - like von Neumann or Nash. However Reeves is the key person I think."
- "Well," I used a pause in her talk, "I know at least Popper, von Neumann and Nash. At least if the first one wrote something about democracy and open society, the second one invented that computer architecture and the third one was that schizophrenic who worked on game theory."
- "Yes... that fits."
- "At least something. :-) However I know nothing about Bergman or Reeves."
- "Bergson... whatever... :-) Reeves was the most procreative in his times. He wrote many books from ... I'm not sure, but let's say from 1900 to 1930. It was very inspiring for many politicians - especially in the America. Reeves was English by the way, he was a Cambridge professor. But now the main history line, ok?"
- "Ok, I'm curious to death. :-)"
- "Wilson took the major role after the War was over. France and UK supported Wilson, because he helped both them a lot during those three years America was in war."

- "Three years?! America joined the War in 1917!"
- "Nope... Wilson brought America to War in 1915 and many told him he did it for nothing but I guess it was great move. He went to war only with volunteers and professional soldiers - that gave him some credit in public and the opinion was clearly with him. Not to mention the famous talk about the need to interfere with foreign affairs - even with European ones."
- "Yeah, you mean Concerns Do Matter speech," added someone across the table.
- "Yes, that one. Thanks. :-)" Caren continues: "Then there were Versailles where Wilson put through everything essential - he offered huge help to Europe to prevent victorious powers to rape the Germany after the total war. Not to mention that Germany was torn during the last two months of the war because military took the power. In the meantime Wilhelm and the government were negotiating about peace with Allies."
- "Wilhelm II, thou," corrected the man over the table.
- "What about Austria-Hungary?" asked I.
- "Hm, they finished a little bit sooner if I recall correctly... Martin?" Caren asked that man against me.
- "Yes, they signed peace in August of 1918 agreeing with the idea of successive states based on nations. However Hungary broke away and continued with Germany for the next three months. However... very important for the outcome in Versailles is the first meeting of Allied leaders - the Iceland Conference. Here Wilson introduced his 14 points, Atlantic Charter was signed and George, Clemenceau and L'vov agreed about the need of democratic changes in the area controlled by Central Powers. Wilson, Clemenceau and George had similar goals and even similar ways - because Open society ideas were quite 'in' and it was also time where some change was really needed. L'vov - as a representative of fresh Russia - wasn't so rush for the Open society, however he agreed with the points. Now Germany was not to be humiliated and US promised some financial help in order to assure this. Wilson claimed that Germany can't pay reparations and that Allies should not humiliate the country because public opinion in Germany would be against the Allied Powers to no good for everyone."
- "When was this Iceland Conference?" I was lost because either I didn't remember it from school or it was different in our world.
- "Iceland? 1917, but I'm not sure about more precise date," answered Martin.

- "You mentioned fresh Russia - what was that?" I knew really only a little about Russia/Soviet Union history during the end of World War I.
- "Well," Martin took another breath, "in 1916 Tsar Nicholas II compromised with Wilson and George and he nominated interim government. In 1917 there were few important things - Russia adopted its Constitution and there were free all-nation ballot - that was most important. Tsar advocated for Russia's share in the war and he - and the other representatives - they convinced the public opinion of this. However on November the revolution burst out and Russia split into the reforming one - leading to democracy - and the red one where Lenin was the leader. There were several important things in all of this - Mensheviks for instance supported reforming Russia which might be the key factor that Lenin couldn't take over the whole Russia.
However Tsar had to leave Sankt Peterburg and East front was seriously weakened because Russia had to solve internal affairs. Tsar achieved assurance of help from Allies on the East front - especially when it was clear that Lenin wanted to sign peace treaty with Central Powers. In the next years Russia split virtually into two countries. Reforming Imperial Russia took back Sankt Peterburg and they were holding Far east part, the Crimea and few other territories - while Soviet Russia controlled the central part of the country and Siberia with Moscow as their capital city. Russia civil war continued until 1945 when Imperial Russia definitely retook whole country during the World War II."
- "Whow," I was speechless for a while. "No eastern bloc? No Soviet Union? No communism ruling the east Europe for over forty years?"
- "Well," Martin was obviously unsure what to say. "I'm not aware of such a scenario. ;-)"
- "Amazing..."
There is a break in the conversation for a while - it looks like they let me to realize those things just being said. Although I was lost in that new history anyway. It was just overwhelming to hear about it, I know that I'm not able to remember all those things. Except those key messages.
- "And Russia is Open society now?" asked I at last.
- "Well... not so open, however it's democratic country for many years now. And they still have their Tsar." Martin grins. "The new one of course. ;-)"
- "Of course," tittered I.

So I learned few glimpses of this history and I really can't process more now. However there are still questions about Open society. The mentioned Popper - although he wrote his book about Open society more than forty years after Reeve's first one. At least in my world. And I never heard about some Reeves. So now I want to ask more about this.