Many apologies. I did e-mail you a missive—at 5 a.m.—but it didn't go through. But you've been chatting away for the both of us. This is more like most Slate Breakfast Tables in that it is now a virtual discussion. By the way, have you noticed how people have stopped using those tag lines? It was only two years ago when everyone was talking about "virtual meetings" and "e-government" and "cybersex." I miss those days, filled with all that energy and optimism … and bullshit. Sorry, virtual bullshit.

I can't say that I am moved to righteous anger by the "Home" section in the way that you are. For that you have to give me Herbert Muschamp, who is single-handedly the Times' axis of evil. If I have to read one more paen to banal modernist boxes. ...

Speaking of evil, let's pile onto Arthur Andersen. I thought it couldn't get much worse for them when, at the Gridiron dinner a few weeks ago, Bush told this joke: "The good news is that Saddam Hussein has agreed to full inspections of all weapons facilities in Iraq. The bad news is he wants Arthur Andersen to do it." But now there's the criminal indictment. While I'm sure there are two sides to every story, I wonder how they explain the fact that their partners ordered the shredding of thousands of documents on a matter that was clearly going to be the subject of judicial investigation. That's not exactly what you look for in an auditor. Imagine the scene. Customer to accountant, "How could we solve this problem?" Accountant, "Well, sir, we recommend shredding all files pertaining to it."

Not to get too grand about this, but I think that the Andersen case reflects the decline of professional guilds in the Western world. Professions like law, medicine, and accounting used to be governed by certain codes of ethics. Over the last 30 years, as they democratized and marketized—opening themselves up to competitors, relaxing their governing rules—they became just another group of businessmen, hustling for cash. All those old-fashioned codes and ethics were cast aside because the competitive pressures were just too great and the old ideals of a profession that judges itself by its own standards were now obsolete. The Wall Street Journal (yesterday) had a great piece on this process at Arthur Andersen, but it's a much wider phenomenon.

Do you remember that we both had a good laugh when the old consulting wing of Arthur Andersen broke off and renamed itself "Accenture" (with a made-up accent to top it off.) It sounded like one of those new car names—Accura, Lexus, Diamante. But they're the ones laughing now. I am told, however, that they will probably be held liable for some of the bad advice to Enron since the firm was one single entity during much of the Enronmania. Perhaps they should confront the problem head on. Do you remember their ad campaign a year ago? They would print a scrap of newspaper with some "news" item, like, "The Web will be Mandarin-dominated by 2020" or "The Internet is bringing democracy to China," and then run their tag line: "Now it gets interesting."

I suggest a new ad: "Our former firm has been indicted on criminal charges. We're pretending we've never even heard of them. Now it gets interesting."

Best Wishes. See you soon. Until then, here's an e-kiss.