As you may know, the .nu in this site’s address [before 2011 Mar 28] refers to Niue: one of a number of tiny states – most of them in the Pacific Ocean – that bring in the odd shilling by renting out name-space. (When I wanted a domain, Niue happened to be cheapest.)

Now it appears that its link to reality may become even more tenuous.

Niue’s status as a nation is under question after the cyclone that hit the tiny Pacific nation, causing more than $50 million damage.

In the aftermath of the storm, some island leaders are calling for a return to New Zealand governance, and expect the population to fall from about 1200 native Niueans to an unsustainable 500 people.

Such a drop would likely render the nation unviable. Niue currently receives $8m in aid a year from New Zealand . . . .

One wonders how often that “nation” became “unviable” during its first thousand years of habitation; and in what sense a “nation” so dependent on foreign charity is considered “viable”, whatever its size.

2011: The link is dead; the story has been copied here and there, e.g. Sophont blog.

Mike Lorrey reports:

. . . the Vermont town of Killington, VT is considering the possibility of seceding from Vermont . . .

Well that’s a relief. If the Michigan town of Killington, VT were to debate seceding from Arizona, that would be silly.

Clayton Cramer reminds us that almanac is an Arabic word. Aha!

puzzling choice of words:

It wasn’t long ago that Apple was considered an also-ran, a niche company with Golden Delicious products but Granny Smith sales.

Golden Delicious is one of the blandest apples, so I wouldn’t be surprised to learn it outsells Granny Smith – but wouldn’t the metaphor make more sense with Granny Smith on both sides?

Mary Sue arrives at Hogwarts

I did the philosopher quiz again and some of my scores shifted sharply from two years ago:

• 1.00 John Stuart Mill (same)
• .96 Epicureans (was .76)
• .95 Rand (was .44)
• .94 Noddings (was .44)
• .88 Hobbes (was .34)
• .82 Cynics (was .30)
• .77 Sartre (was .63)
• .74 Nietzsche (was .22)
• .72 Kant (was .65)
• .68 Bentham (was .82)
• .63 Spinoza (was .41)
• .60 Hume (was .25)
• .60 Prescriptivism (was .44)
• .58 Stoics (was .22)
• .51 Aristotle (was .51)
• .48 Aquinas (was .55)
• .29 Augustine (was .31)
• .19 Ockham (was .26)
• .07 Plato (was .16)

(Summary of the 19 positions.) The results page says:

The results are scored on a curve. The highest score, 100, represents the closest philosophical match to your reponses. This is not to say that you and the philosopher are in total agreement.

So absolute comparisons are less meaningful than one might prefer.

Cato: How FDR’s New Deal Harmed Millions of Poor People. (Yet another link from Rational Review News Digest)