Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Old and New Technology in the Land of None

Posted by michael on from the mosquito-coast dept.

ninthwave writes "The Guardian has this article on the adventures of piano tuners in the Amazon. I think it is a nice lesson in the age of technology to see the perceived hardships of using technology in areas where the natives are quite happy without. More impressive is the old wooden piano seems to survive better than the new synth but that is horse of a different colour."

97 of 227 comments (clear)

  1. Piano in the amazon? by itallushrt · · Score: 3, Funny

    Who in their right mind needs a piano in the amazon? I'd be concerned with bug repellant than hearing Mozarts 5th.

  2. phew by grub · · Score: 4, Funny


    I almost didn't get to read this story on old technology, one of the tubes in my computer died.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  3. What needs tuning... by craenor · · Score: 5, Funny

    The piano? Or the guy who delivers a baby grand piano into the Amazon...

  4. Not exactly apples to apples.. by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    "More impressive is the old wooden piano seems to survive better than the new synth but that is horse of a different colour."

    I found this statement a little lacking in depth. The 'synth' isn't there to replace the piano specifically, it's there to provide a wide range of sounds. The keyboard interface is a very practical one for a classically trained musician to pick up and play. If it were here to replace the piano, it would have to not only faithfully recreate the sound, but it'd also have to provide the same feedback a piano does. When you play a piano, you can feel the hammers hitting the strings. This kind of feedback make it more natural to play. That's why it still has it's place.

    Sorry for the rant, I just found the comparison a little silly. Kind of like comparing an alarm clock to the clock in Windows.

    My comment about the 'keyboard interface that any musician can pick up' reminded me of something kind of interesting. Have any of you seen how the sound for the Simpsons is mastered? The sound guy has a guitar hooked up to a computer. He uses it to time when sounds take place. I thought that was a very unusual use for a guitar, but that's what he could play! I thought that was pretty cool.

    1. Re:Not exactly apples to apples.. by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 3, Informative
      The sound guy has a guitar hooked up to a computer. He uses it to time when sounds take place. I thought that was a very unusual use for a guitar...

      Not at all. I have a guitar synth myself, a Roland GR-50. It has a special pickup that you can attach to pretty much any steel-string guitar; it figures out what string and note is being play and uses that to control the synth and to generate MIDI events.

      I've also seen a MIDI "wind controller" that played like a saxaphone, and MIDI "drums" - both standard kit and hand-drums. Each of these input methods has different nuances - for example. with the guitar synth you can only play 6 notes at a time, as opposed to 10 for a keyboard, but bending notes is much easier.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    2. Re:Not exactly apples to apples.. by pogen · · Score: 5, Informative
      When you play a piano, you can feel the hammers hitting the strings.

      Actually, you can't. The hammer loses contact with the rest of the action before it hits the strings so that it can bounce back and allow the strings to resonate. Otherwise, by holding the key down, you would also be holding the hammer against the strings, giving you a nice "thud" sound.

      But I'm just being pedantic. Yes, the action has a certain feel that is lacking in most synthesizers. There are a few, though, that have come reasonably close.

    3. Re:Not exactly apples to apples.. by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2

      "Not at all. I have a guitar synth myself, a Roland GR-50. It has a special pickup that you can attach to pretty much any steel-string guitar; it figures out what string and note is being play and uses that to control the synth and to generate MIDI events. "

      That's pretty cool! Wish I had something more insightful to say than that, but I don't. It's starting to become clear that musicians have a broader toolset on the PC than most people are aware of.

      Anybody else know of some cool input stuff like that? I've been looking for cheap ways to capture data like that (such as a music keyboard), I want to do a form of motion capture so I can animate stuff in Lightwave more naturally. It beats manually creating keyframes!

    4. Re:Not exactly apples to apples.. by The+J+Kid · · Score: 2

      that played like a saxaphone

      Sweet! But, ehm, it's Saxophone.

      Each of these input methods has different nuances [..]

      What are the nuances of the "wind controller" then? Only 1 note a time thus no cords...hmmm

      --
      Moderation: +4. Modded 70% Funny and 30% Overrated. 100% Saturated.
  5. In other news... by EvilAlien · · Score: 3, Flamebait
    ... cameras steal your soul.

    Anyways, I might as well try to say something half-ways intelligent...

    We often take technology for granted, assuming that lack of understanding is some sort of mental or cultural deficiency, whereas our general and almost complete in ability to survive if left in the middle of a rain forest without help is somehow a noble mark of civilization. Those who hunt and provide for their own food are somehow throwbacks in a technological society.

    To ensure that this ties into News for Nerds, I'd like to point out that the juxtaposition of high and low technology is one of the central concepts to Firefly. I find it funny when people complain about the rediculousness of low-tech firearms on a spaceship... on the frontiers of civilization.

    --
    perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
    1. Re:In other news... by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Funny
      I find it funny when people complain about the rediculousness of low-tech firearms on a spaceship</quote>

      Low-tech or not, it'll kill ya, and dead is dead.

      Lets face it, we're still dependent upon the 7 "low-tech" discoveries/inventions of the Neanderthals:

      1. Fire
      2. Farming
      3. Art
      4. Weaponry
      5. Animal Husbandry
      6. Clothing
      7. vi and unix (well, religion, and holy wars in general)
  6. Eww... by Wampus+Aurelius · · Score: 5, Funny

    The case was full of insect eggs; she thought that perhaps cockroaches had done the damage and spent a few minutes chasing one adult through the innards.

    Can you imagine when someone plays Beethoven's 5th?

    DONG DONG DONG (squish)

    1. Re:Eww... by JJAnon · · Score: 3, Funny

      I can see you do not have a classical education :P. The accepted transliteration of Beethoven's Fifth is

      Da Da Da DUM

      So that should read:
      Da Da Da (SQUISH)

      Note the careful use of CAPITALS to emphasize changes in volume.

    2. Re:Eww... by tomhudson · · Score: 2

      That WAS the original way of "debugging" a computer ... taking the moth out that had gotten fried and shorted out a vacuum tube.

    3. Re:Eww... by unitron · · Score: 2
      Actually the insect in question had gotten between the contacts of a relay, causing an open rather than a short.

      It's not that easy to cause a vacuum tube to short internally, although you can bypass it externally with a short, but I don't think a moth with all the moisture cooked out of it could maintain the conduction necessary for a short circuit very long.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    4. Re:Eww... by tomhudson · · Score: 2

      Well, what can I say, it was a Friday ... :-) Thanks for catching the blooper.

  7. Engineering is NOT high-tech by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Engineering DOESN'T HAVE TO BE high-tech.

    It only has to WORK WELL, with whatever is at hand.

    Inuktitut writing looks cryptic. Yet it was devised by whites, and designed to work well with the writing implements available to the inuit: bones and stones. They weren't forced to use the roman alphabet which they could not transcribe properly.

    Good design and engineering works by using what's available, not shoving down foreign and/or scarce technologies.

    1. Re:Engineering is NOT high-tech by cybermace5 · · Score: 2

      I tried to write something in Inuktitut on that page you linked, but I couldn't write "Hello World!" because there is no h!

      --
      ...
    2. Re:Engineering is NOT high-tech by cybercuzco · · Score: 2

      Agreed. The problem with things today is that people thingk that things have to be "thhe latest" or "the highest tech" in order to work well. Case in point: calssrooms could have high tech whiteboards that wirelessly update notes to everyones laptop. Cost tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars, not to mention the cost of the laptops for the students. Or you could use a black board with chalk and have the students take notes. Educational value is higher when people have to write things down themselves, plus you dont have to spend 50000 on a chalkboard.

      --

  8. The depressing part of the story by gosand · · Score: 5, Insightful
    An interesting read I guess, but I never really got the point of the story except that it was a heck of a challenge to get that piano delivered. I found this part of the story to be particularly sad though:

    But if any of us had been expecting half-naked, blowpipe-wielding savages, we were disappointed. The American missionaries who converted the tribe in the 1950s taught them Christian modesty, and they now favour shorts and T-shirts, largely supplied by visitors and aid agencies. The footwear of choice is the plastic flip-flop.

    A tribe that small, in that remote of a location, and Christians still feel the need to impose their religion on them. Quite sad.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    1. Re:The depressing part of the story by sxltrex · · Score: 2, Informative

      Did you miss the part about how the piano was requested by the tribe for their Sunday church services?

    2. Re:The depressing part of the story by dubiousmike · · Score: 2

      Though I am more specifically Catholic than Christian and I have barely been to church in years and thus non practicing, I feel I should mention that no one MADE them accept a religious doctrine. Also, no one made them accept flip flops, t-shirts, ect. They have survived for hundreds of years without Christianity, flip flops and the Simpsons. Though I hear they can't understand why they get to only see the Simpsons once a day and not 4.

      :P

    3. Re:The depressing part of the story by Planesdragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A tribe that small, in that remote of a location, and Christians still feel the need to impose their religion on them. Quite sad.

      Hardly.

      Let's assume, for the sake of understanding the Christian missionaries, that they ARE right, and that life now and hereafter DOES get better if you're a Christian.

      Given _just that_, it makes sense to want to expose as many people as possible to their religion.

      Now, if we discard the "the Christians are right" assumption and simply look at it from a general standpoint, it STILL isn't "sad." It's not like they're requiring them to make pilgrimages to Rome (Muslim tradition) or give up temporal desires (Bhuddism).

      It's a form of charity, which, seeing as most of humanity thinks that clothing is a good thing, can be concluded as more than cultural self-interest and being real honest charity.

      Please, drop your anti-Christian/anti-religion bias. If everyone in the world had computers, you wouldn't call Linux (over BSD or the existing-and-never-upgraded-DOS) advocates "sad" now, would you?

    4. Re:The depressing part of the story by timeOday · · Score: 2

      Sad why?

    5. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      You may disagree with their beliefs, but wanting to share what you think has merit with the distant or marginal people of the world isn't terribly 'sad'.

      It is when the "marginal people" are a primitive, easily-influenced people who accept the beliefs because they hold the people teaching them in such high regard. It's like a satanist converting a young child to satan worship. It is not an affirmation of the belief system nor is it an example of free will on the part of the new convert.

      As an advanced (relatively speaking) people, we have a moral duty to not impose religious beliefs on people who lack the sophistication to understand the difference between science and beliefs in the occult (e.g., people rising from the dead, ceremonies in which wine and wafers symbolise cannabalism, people being turned into pillars of salt, etc.)

    6. Re:The depressing part of the story by Greedo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't mean this confrontationally, but how do you know no one "made" them accept Christianity?

      The fact that someone even attempted to convert them, let alone that they succeeded, is bad enough. What was wrong with their belief system before that some missionary felt it their duty to "save" these "savages"? The history of missionary work is rife with "forced" conversions (Inquisition, anyone?). I realize this probably wasn't the case in the 1950's, but who knows.

      Those American missionaries also taught them "Christian modesty", which could be a thin disguise (in my tin-foil hat world) for "American hegemonic consumerism". Why else would they favour shorts and T-shirts, or ask for an electric keyboard.

      Again, missionary work isn't always about spreading the Good Word. In fact, it is based on the assumption that the indigenous Good Word wasn't Good Enough to start with.

      --
      Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
    7. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      Sad why?

      Because it supplants the tribe's own belief systems, losing that part of their culture and making the world poorer for the loss. You may feel that teaching primitive, innocent people to feel shame about their own bodies is good. I, and others, do not.

    8. Re:The depressing part of the story by Latent+IT · · Score: 2

      What was wrong with their belief system before that some missionary felt it their duty to "save" these "savages"? The history of missionary work is rife with "forced" conversions (Inquisition, anyone?).

      Mmmm. Hmmm....

      I realize this probably wasn't the case in the 1950's, but who knows.

      Ah, right. So you knew your statement was misleading, and inflammatory, but you provided it anyway. And nice use of 'who knows'! After all, perhaps the inquisition *was* in the 1950's! Or, maybe they were whipped with noodles!

      Those American missionaries also taught them "Christian modesty", which could be a thin disguise (in my tin-foil hat world) for "American hegemonic consumerism". Why else would they favour shorts and T-shirts[...?]

      Too right! Why else indeed. Only Americans wear shorts and T-shirts!

      In fact, it is based on the assumption that the indigenous Good Word[...]

      Er. What? The indigenous... oh, forget it.

    9. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's assume, for the sake of understanding the Christian missionaries, that they ARE right, and that life now and hereafter DOES get better if you're a Christian.

      Let's assume that the missionaries are wrong. Let's assume that the local beliefs are right. Let's further assume that the locals' conversion to Christianity angers their gods and causes those gods to put a curse on the village and the crops. Let's assume that the villagers then starve to death.

      You are going on the assumption that there is some reason to believe that Christianity is "right" and that local belief systems are "wrong." That's simply not the case.

      Now, if we discard the "the Christians are right" assumption and simply look at it from a general standpoint, it STILL isn't "sad."

      Yes, it is. These people probably had a rich cultural heritage and religious views that were passed down from generation to generation in stories. Losing that so that they can be added to the Catholic Church's list of conquests is very sad.

    10. Re:The depressing part of the story by zephc · · Score: 2

      When did Muslims start making pilgramages to Rome? I thought it was Mecca. Silly me...

      The point is that an otherwise prospering culture has been given the shiny beads treatment. A couple simple rules to life: Diversity = good, Homogenity = death.

      --
      "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
    11. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      If they can't tell the difference between a flashlight and magic, then they are going to be easily duped into Christianity

      That's probably true. They may accept the posession of said flashlight as a sign that the holder is wise, powerful, and intelligent. If the flashlight owner were then to teach them about irrigation, food safety, and medicine, while winding in teachings about Christianity as if it is above question, then it is likely that the indigenous people will accept Christianity as factual.

      Maybe someone should go in and teach them critical thinking skills and the scientific method, so they can more objectively evaluate the prosthyletizing of the missionaries.

      An excellent suggestion.

      Another option would be to just leave them alone.

      An even better idea.

      However, whether it's missionaries in the '50's or ranchers and eco-tourists in the '00's, the world is getting smaller and they are going to have contact with some outsiders sooner or later.

      Sophisticated outsiders have a moral responsibility to not try to supplant the indigenous religious belief systems of primitive people.

    12. Re:The depressing part of the story by L-Train8 · · Score: 2

      Sophisticated outsiders have a moral responsibility to not try to supplant the indigenous religious belief systems of primitive people.

      Well, I guess the key word there is sophisticated. There are people who believe a book written by middle-eastern sheep hearders thousands of years ago to codify their superstitions is irrefutable fact. Would you consider them to be sophisticated? If not, then do they have a moral responsibility to follow the prime directive?

      Missionaries believe they have a moral responsibility to help people and teach the word of God. Does that make them unsophisticated?

      You selectively quoted me. I said another option is to leave them alone, but qualified that by saying that is not really an option in todays world. The world is a small place, ever hungry for yet more resources. Today, tribes cannot live in seclusion. If it's not missionaries who want to teach them about irrigation, food safety, medicine, and Christianity, it may be ranchers who want to kill them so that trees can be cut down and cattle grazed on the land.

      The transition to modernity may have been started by missionaries, but it will be rapidly eclipsed by other influences, some with much less altruistic motives than saving souls.

      --

      Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.
    13. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      There are people who believe a book written by middle-eastern sheep hearders thousands of years ago to codify their superstitions is irrefutable fact. Would you consider them to be sophisticated?

      In areas other than that one huge blind spot, yes. But that is a good summary.

      You selectively quoted me. I said another option is to leave them alone...

      No, I did not. Please reread my response and you will see that I did not quote selectively.

    14. Re:The depressing part of the story by Greedo · · Score: 2

      Ah, right. So you knew your statement was misleading, and inflammatory, but you provided it anyway. And nice use of 'who knows'!

      Hey, this *is* Slashdot ... not the Harvard debating team. :)

      Too right! Why else indeed. Only Americans wear shorts and T-shirts!

      Okay, let's try that again ... "American-style hegemonic consumerism" would've been fairer. Heck, I wear tshirts! But mostly because I was born in a culture where they were readily available ... the "native dress", if you will.

      --
      Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
    15. Re:The depressing part of the story by corbettw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Hardly."

      Hear, hear. Whenever people start shouting how Christians shouldn't convert people to their religion, and that it's wrong for them to do so, I'm always amazed that they are forgetting the central tenet of Christianity: only Christians go to Heaven. Everyone else, no matter how nice you are, goes to Hell. Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Wiccans, they're all bound for eternal damnation according to us Christians, because they reject the divinity of Christ.

      Given all that, it can only be considered cruel to not attempt to convert people (though I'll grant there are better, more civilized, ways of doing it than others...conversion at the point of a sword isn't quite what Jesus had in mind, I'm sure).

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    16. Re:The depressing part of the story by timeOday · · Score: 2

      It seems your premise is that people shouldn't pollute each other's minds by communicating with each other.

    17. Re:The depressing part of the story by duck_prime · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The point is that an otherwise prospering culture has been given the shiny beads treatment. A couple simple rules to life: Diversity = good, Homogenity = death.
      How insultingly patronizing can you get? The Wai Wai are just as intelligent as we are; they are capable of picking parts of Western culture they want to adopt, and leaving the rest behind. Just like the Japanese. Hell, just like the West.

      Would you be so concerned if some people in, say, California became Buddhist? Aren't you sad that they've been hoodwinked by the mysteries of the East, and their diversity reduced? Give it a break.

      You seem to be laboring under the misapprehension that "all cultures are equal" and should be cherished equally. Forget it. These people's precious culture didn't invent writing for them, or medicine, or clothing, or Christianity, but guess what? They like all that stuff. They want it. Don't ghettoize these poor folks into a nice little illiterate culture zoo just so you can be happy that "diversity is being protected". Fuck that. I say offer every last fucking tribe on Earth a refrigerator, some good shoes with arch support, and a writing system if they don't have one.

      Stop treating the Wai Wai as children that you have to protect from our poisonous culture. Give them the respect and dignity that they deserve, and let them make their own choices.

      One last thing... you say "Diversity = good, Homogenity = death". Please clarify. I understand how that works out in agriculture, or heck, even population genetics, but I don't see the relevance to cultural choices. Not trying to troll here, I'm trying to understand what you're getting at.
    18. Re:The depressing part of the story by duck_prime · · Score: 2
      Sad why?

      Because it supplants the tribe's own belief systems, losing that part of their culture and making the world poorer for the loss. You may feel that teaching primitive, innocent people to feel shame about their own bodies is good. I, and others, do not.
      What about teaching them to read? Are you against that too?

      What really saddens me is that you, presumably a Westerner, seem to believe that all cultures are equally valid, and that the only reason you have the ideals and lifestyle you have is that you were born here (for some value of here).

      I like to think that universal literacy, the scientific method, freedom of (lots of things), not getting shot with arrows, etc, are great things, not just my particular tribal taboos. I am genuinely sad for people who don't have these things, and would like to offer them the benefits of our culture.

      They don't have to accept, that's certainly their right, but I think they'll be silly to turn down the things the West has to offer. Doubtless they'll take the parts they like, and skip the rest. What's wrong with that?

      One more thing here, and I want a sincere answer. Why is the world poorer for the loss of cultural diversity? Are you worried about a particular dance no longer being performed? The loss of some pagan religion? The loss of a language (I'll admit, as a linguist that one gives me the heebie-jeebies)? The loss of wearing loincloths? Please tell.
    19. Re:The depressing part of the story by dubiousmike · · Score: 2

      Well, I guess what I meant is that no one held a gun to their head and said believe or die. I am with you that I don't like someone's beliefs pushed on me, but I can say no, even if I listen to the whole pitch.

      My wife went on a "mission" when she was a teen. (again, though I was raised catholic, I am not a practicing one at this point - just a disclaimer) They built playgrounds for kids, taught them about oral hygiene, and brought them stuff similar to tee shirts and flip flops. Granted this was Yougoslavia (I know I butchered the spelling) and not somewhere in the Amazon, so their cultural influence was less prominant than if she had done the same in the Amazon.

      Though they were also willing to talk about Christianity to anyone who would listen, that wasn't actually their prime directive while there. They just wanted to help.

      Granted everyone's idea of helping isn't the same.

      But they really did go there with higher priorities than converting heathens.

    20. Re:The depressing part of the story by dubiousmike · · Score: 2

      First, I have to say,

      "Help me Jebus!"

      that is my absolute favorite line EVER from the Simpsons. I am definitely not what anyone would call a "holy roller".

      Though I would never personally go on a mission (though my wife did and you can read what I said about that as a reply to someone else in this same thread), I guess I would say that you and I would both have the right to travel to the Amazon to teach these folks anything we wanted (personally, I'd choose Pitch (card game) though perhaps that'd have bad concequences like it did with Homer and gambling).

      Though I am not particular to any one religion, or even consider myself a very religious person, I see the value that religion has to many people. Why don't they mission to Muslims or Hindus? Likely, becuase they have God (sigh - yes, I did capitalize that didn't I?) in their lives and thus there isn't as much of a need to save them. That last statement is me playing devils advocate.

      At least in the states, religions have historically competed with each other like retail stores. Believe in my religion or my god says you're going to hell. Well, my belief in a god goes to this extent:

      Religion is good. why? cause it helps people explain the unexplainable. Why did my baby die? not sure, but it must be part of god's plan. Most religions teach the same basoc tennants: be good to your neighbor. don't kill. don't steal. don't sleep with your neighbor's wife, no matter how hot she is when she gives you that look.

      regardless of if there IS an afterlife where you either get to chill with god, allah, budda, ect or some form of hell, or that there is NO afterlife, if everyone took the basic message that religion is supposed to get across, the world would be a better place. Treat everyone like you want to be treated (unless your a person who wants to hurt yourself ;] ) and we should all be generally happy.

      So no, I don't think the missionaries went there hoping to add a new church and thus a new stream of revenue. I think they had intentions of trying to bring religion to a "godless" people (much like myself) and trying to convert a hindu is a lot tougher than converting someone who has never heard of any gods.

      Though you and I may feel this is unnecesary, if one really does believe in a particular god, then it is likely that you'd take pity on those who don't and thus would be unlikely to go to "heaven". You'd likely want to try to save them. After all, you genuinely believe that faith in god will save their souls.

      That being said, I will finish by saying that I prescribe to the Bart method of living life (faith healer episode) where he says that he'll life his life doing whatever he wants and do a death bed repentance just in case...

      :P

    21. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      Interesting that you assume that the missionaries in the 50s were Catholic. I don't recall reading that in the article. Methinks you might have a bias/prejudice...

      No. I simply confused in my mind the mention of Catholicism in these threads and what I read in the article. The missionaries were actually part of a non-denominational group called American Unevangelised Field Missions.

    22. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      It seems your premise is that people shouldn't pollute each other's minds by communicating with each other.

      Not at all. When two equals communicate, that's great. But when a group of missionaries ties assistance, education, and religious teachings together in one lump package, it does a terrible disservice to less-advanced peoples (who may not be able to separate facts -- about, say, food safety -- from religious beliefs).

    23. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      What about teaching them to read? Are you against that too?

      No. I am in favor of education -- just not religious indoctrination.

      I like to think that universal literacy, the scientific method, freedom of (lots of things), not getting shot with arrows, etc, are great things, not just my particular tribal taboos. I am genuinely sad for people who don't have these things, and would like to offer them the benefits of our culture.

      I agree. And I would add farming techniques, medicine, and birth control to that list of valuable things we can teach.

      They don't have to accept, that's certainly their right, but I think they'll be silly to turn down the things the West has to offer. Doubtless they'll take the parts they like, and skip the rest. What's wrong with that?

      I don't know why you think that they will "skip" anything. Think about this hypothetical situation: Primitive villagers are confronted by people exiting a helicopter carrying walkie-talkies, radios, and computers. The people teach the primitive villagers about irrigation, treating wounds, safely storing food, etc. In with all this, presented as fact, is that there is a "God" that is invisible, all-powerful, created man, and that does battle with Satan. You know the story. The primitive villagers are going to accept that the wise and powerful westerners that arrived there know that this God exists -- probably without question. It's the same phenomenon that allows parents to convince children that Santa Claus exists.

      Why is the world poorer for the loss of cultural diversity? Are you worried about a particular dance no longer being performed? The loss of some pagan religion? The loss of a language (I'll admit, as a linguist that one gives me the heebie-jeebies)? The loss of wearing loincloths?

      I am worried about all of that. And I am worried about the loss of history. Oral traditions tell us much about a culture. When those oral traditions are abandoned because missionaries have "taught" the "Word of God", that's a horrible loss. Yes, I'm worried about dances, religions, languages, and native garb being tossed aside.

      Imagine National Geographic if every person they profiled was basically the same.

      I find it interesting to note your use of the terms "some pagan religion" and "loincloths" rather than simply "their religion" and "native clothing." Were those terms meant to be pejoritive, either consciously or subconsciously?

    24. Re:The depressing part of the story by zephc · · Score: 2

      It's that the Wai Wai (and many other cultures) WE'RE treated as children who didn't know any better, and were thus introduced to 'civilization' by missionaries/conqureors.

      --
      "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
    25. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      These folks have chosen to stay Christians.

      Because they believe it. A powerful and almost all-knowing bunch of people appeared one day and told them, for a fact, that the Christian God exists and that to not believe in that God would damn them to suffer in hell for all eternity.

      Since these people understood medicine, may have had magic boxes through which voices spoke (radios), and may even have arrived by car or helicopter, sure they believed them.

      That's what is referred to as exerting undue influence. It's the same thing that parents do to get kids to believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny: they use their perceived trustworthiness and knowledge to make the child believe.

    26. Re:The depressing part of the story by duck_prime · · Score: 2
      Doubtless they'll take the parts they like, and skip the rest. What's wrong with that?

      I don't know why you think that they will "skip" anything. Think about this hypothetical situation: Primitive villagers are confronted by people exiting a helicopter carrying walkie-talkies, radios, and computers. The people teach the primitive villagers about irrigation, treating wounds, safely storing food, etc. In with all this, presented as fact, is that there is a "God" that is invisible, all-powerful, created man, and that does battle with Satan. You know the story. The primitive villagers are going to accept that the wise and powerful westerners that arrived there know that this God exists -- probably without question. It's the same phenomenon that allows parents to convince children that Santa Claus exists.
      Well ... here's the thing. This scenario has been played out many times, especially in Africa. Native cultures do adapt and survive, and they do end up taking what they want of modernity/westernity. There are still scads of traditional religions in Africa (their adherents are referred to in the news as "animists"), coexisting more or less uneasily with Islam and Christianity. I don't think you're giving these guys enough credit; they are NOT children, they are quite as smart as you or me. If they are not coerced, some of them may convert, and some will not.

      (Sigh) I note you don't have any problem teaching them about the scientific method, or "freedom of (lots of things)", which are just as much a cultural construct as Christianity, and whose adoption would change their society. It seems your objection is not so much to changing the natives' society, as teaching them Christianity. Once you concede you want to change their society, the rest is just a matter of taste, isn't it? My mision civilatrice will include free Bibles, yours likely won't.
      Why is the world poorer for the loss of cultural diversity? Are you worried about a particular dance no longer being performed? The loss of some pagan religion? The loss of a language (I'll admit, as a linguist that one gives me the heebie-jeebies)? The loss of wearing loincloths?

      I am worried about all of that. And I am worried about the loss of history. Oral traditions tell us much about a culture. When those oral traditions are abandoned because missionaries have "taught" the "Word of God", that's a horrible loss. Yes, I'm worried about dances, religions, languages, and native garb being tossed aside.

      Imagine National Geographic if every person they profiled was basically the same.
      Let's be careful here ... are you in favor of preserving culture for their sake, or for yours? What's it to you that they become Christian, or do the Tango instead of (insert-native-dance)? Is this just voyeurism at work?

      (As a side note, it is not Christianity that will destroy the locals' oral tradition, but literacy. But I don't want to go there now.)
      I find it interesting to note your use of the terms "some pagan religion" and "loincloths" rather than simply "their religion" and "native clothing." Were those terms meant to be pejoritive, either consciously or subconsciously?
      Loincloths were cited in the original article. Actually, fairly sensible for the climate of the Amazon, if you don't have modern-weave "breathable" clothing.

      And "some pagan religion" means just that ... pagan means non-Christian. "Heathen" is a pejorative. ;) I find it equally ... odd ... that you seem happy that the natives keep any religion *but* Christianity; it sounds like you have some particular animus against that religion. ... Interestingly, this little disagreement of ours does speak to the fact that "Western Culture" is not so monolithic as at first glance.
    27. Re:The depressing part of the story by Planesdragon · · Score: 2

      You are going on the assumption that there is some reason to believe that Christianity is "right" and that local belief systems are "wrong." That's simply not the case.

      In that case, the neighboring locals can laugh at the misconduct of this small tribe.

      Yes, it is. These people probably had a rich cultural heritage and religious views that were passed down from generation to generation in stories. Losing that so that they can be added to the Catholic Church's list of conquests is very sad.

      Bullocks. If there's anything worth keeping, it'll be kept.

      Look how well the native americans lost their culture and heritage to the converting of the colonists. (What? They're still around? Gosh!)

      The fact is, if it wasn't missionaries--who, for the ignorant, aren't all catholic--it would be some other entity with a use for the land. Missionares actually care about the people, even if they have a nonscientific judge of it.

      Let's compare the morality of the missionary to that of the exploratory scientist, who only wants them for personal or ethnocentric scientific gain, or the businessman, who only wants them for their market / land.

      Nope, not "sad" at all.

    28. Re:The depressing part of the story by Planesdragon · · Score: 2

      On the other hand, if there were any other way to bring us to him, other than the cross, don't you think he would have done it? If the Jewish traditions, or Bhuddism, or greek mythology or whatever were enough, wouldn't Jesus simply have come down and preached one of those, instead of allowing himself to be crucified?

      Actually, it's entirely possible that every major religion--not just Christianity--is necessary for us to know God. Sure, I believe that Christianity has the facts right and is the most important, but I still think that God would have done something about the others if they didn't have something work keeping.

      Abraham never knew Jesus' name, or said, "Jesus, come into my heart" or anything like that; but he is considered (by Christians) the father of everyone who has faith in Jesus.

      Jesus, as the Word of God, is the motive force of the Almighty and is the part of that Supreme Being most concerned with us feeble mortal humans.

      IMO, saying "no man gets to God save through Jesus" is akin to saying "no one gets into a car but through the openings in that car."

    29. Re:The depressing part of the story by duck_prime · · Score: 2

      Whoops ... I meant to post that under my own name. Ah well.

    30. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      I don't think you're giving these guys enough credit; they are NOT children, they are quite as smart as you or me. If they are not coerced, some of them may convert, and some will not.

      Intelligence and knowledge are not the same. When primitive people are in awe of modern visitors, they are very likely to believe what these people tell them -- especially if the tangible part proves true.

      I note you don't have any problem teaching them about the scientific method, or "freedom of (lots of things)", which are just as much a cultural construct as Christianity, and whose adoption would change their society. It seems your objection is not so much to changing the natives' society, as teaching them Christianity.

      Science is not a cultural construct and comparing it to the blind-faith that is Christianity debases it. Teaching primitive cultures about medicine, food safety, irrigation, and so forth improves their lives. Teaching them about Christianity denigrates their religious belief systems for no valid purpose.

      I find it equally ... odd ... that you seem happy that the natives keep any religion *but* Christianity;

      I don't want them to continue any belief in the supernatural, whether it is their native belief system or Christianity. I want them to accept the scientific method and logical thinking so that they question any religion that has them worshipping invisible dieties.

      it sounds like you have some particular animus against that religion.

      Yes, I do. Christianity is why we have a President holding back federal funding for stem cell research that could save countless victims of everything from Parkinson's Disease to spinal cord injuries. It's a major cause of people not understanding science. We have religious zealots fighting against schools teaching evolution. Christianity is responsible for the Crusades and countless atrocities throughout history. I could go on and on, but, frankly, that's off-topic.

    31. Re:The depressing part of the story by Mars+Saxman · · Score: 2

      Well, that's their point of view, but just because you can understand someone's point of view doesn't mean you have to excuse it. Christians can think whatever they want; I think they have no place meddling about in other people's business and ought to leave well enough alone. Of course I understand why they do it: but it's still obnoxious and unhelpful. Why should the rest of us care what Christians think about their mythical "heaven" and "hell"? That's their problem.

      -Mars

    32. Re:The depressing part of the story by TheLink · · Score: 2

      ">Maybe someone should go in and teach them critical thinking skills and the scientific method, so they can more objectively evaluate the prosthyletizing of the missionaries.

      An excellent suggestion."

      Well the missionaries went in there first. They showed their faith and love by their deeds. They put their "money" where their mouth is.

      Some even gave up their lives. In one case a bunch were wiped out by a tribe. When the missionaries' children came back to the tribe on a mission, the tribe were convinced.

      So yeah maybe some "objective" scientist of your preferred beliefs (e.g. nonchristian) should go there and help them.

      Well get on with it then.

      --
    33. Re:The depressing part of the story by corbettw · · Score: 2

      "In fact, I'm glad you refuse to believe in a religion with such a belief. "

      What part of "us Christians" made you think I'm not a Christian? ;)

      And, actually, Christianity *does* teach that only Christians go to Heaven. The various churches disagree on just what comprises a Christian, of course, but they mostly agree that, in order to get to Heaven, Jesus is the key ingredient. "Just being nice" doesn't cut it (read Dante's Inferno for a classical explanation of what happens to nice heathens...their Hell isn't bad, but it isn't Heaven, either).

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    34. Re:The depressing part of the story by corbettw · · Score: 2

      "Of course I understand why they do it: but it's still obnoxious and unhelpful."

      Suppose you found someone on the side of the road, beaten and bloody, dying of their wounds. In their blood-loss driven dementia, they claim they need no help. Would you leave them to die, or help them get medical attention anyway? If you called 911 for an ambulance, wouldn't that be "meddling"? Sometimes you have to meddle in other people's business for their own good, it's called being part of a community and sharing social responsibility.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    35. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      Even if every outsider try their best to avoid supplanting their religions belief system, all the other ideas they acquire through contact will still lead them to re-evaluate their belief.

      Why do you say that? Step back and look at how, despite all objective and rationale arguments against it, Christianity has survived. It's pretty absurd when you think about it, the concept of an all-powerful, yet invisible, being whose presence cannot be detected or measured by any scientific method. Yet people cling to those beliefs. I see no reason to suppose that the religious belief systems of these tribal peoples could stand up any less well to scrutiny.

      BTW how do you make the distinction between "primitive people" and the other "less primitive people" and know whom to leave alone?

      I just consider what they know, what they don't, what beliefs they hold, their standard of living, and so forth. Sorry, but there's not a dipstick of advancement to which one can refer.

      You know most of say India is pretty primitive by Western standards, so it's just wrong to introduce them to such alien and unnatural things like computers and programming languages.

      {snide remark}
      Then where would we get our H1-B employees? The next thing you know, computer professionals would command the same kind of pay the lawyers, doctors, and other professionals with intellectually demanding work get.
      {/snide remark}

      You are mistaking the teaching of technology and science with proselytizing. While it is good to help people advance, teaching Christian myths and superstitions as fact does just the opposite. It encourages unreasoned belief which is not founded on logic or science.

    36. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      Well the missionaries went in there first. They showed their faith and love by their deeds. They put their "money" where their mouth is.

      So you are saying that, if Scientologists went in first, that would mean that Scientology was the most valid belief system? Little did I know that one should judge a belief system by punctuality.

      When the missionaries' children came back to the tribe on a mission, the tribe were convinced.

      And when the eclipse ended, the Chinese people were convinced that their beating of drums and shooting arrows into the sky is what scared away the dragon that had swallowed the sun. Being convinced of something does not mean that it is valid.

      So yeah maybe some "objective" scientist of your preferred beliefs (e.g. nonchristian) should go there and help them.

      Do you think that missionaries invented the vaccines that cured polio and smallpox? Did you know it was scientists, not missionaries, who invented Mectazin, the drug used to prevent the onset of river blindness? How did the missionaries get there? Did God deposit them there, or were they shuttled in by cars, helicopters, boats, and planes developed by engineers? Was it missionaries that developed prevention and treatment methods for AIDS? (No. Instead, the Catholic Church is busy trying to keep condoms away from people at-risk for AIDS.)

      Missionaries use the valuable work done by scientists and engineers to legitimize, to the villagers, the unfounded Christian belief systems that they foist off on them.

      Your argument is what is known as an Argumentum ad Verecundiam or "Argument from respect (modesty)" (Latin). The basis of your argument is that the missionaries did something deserving of respect and admiration, therefore, their belief in Christianity must be valid. It's a common logical fallacy.

    37. Re:The depressing part of the story by duck_prime · · Score: 2
      I note you don't have any problem teaching them about the scientific method, or "freedom of (lots of things)", which are just as much a cultural construct as Christianity, and whose adoption would change their society. It seems your objection is not so much to changing the natives' society, as teaching them Christianity.

      Science is not a cultural construct and comparing it to the blind-faith that is Christianity debases it. Teaching primitive cultures about medicine, food safety, irrigation, and so forth improves their lives. Teaching them about Christianity denigrates their religious belief systems for no valid purpose.
      Do be aware of your own biases. The scientific method is an invention. The idea of "1/2 proof + 1/2 proof = zero proof" (gauss who said that?) came very late in history. The idea of "radical doubt" is a recent invention. You are trying to press your rational atheism on these people just as much as I'm trying to push my own religion on them.

      Hopefully, they (random tribesmen) will enjoy the material improvements to life that Westernity has to offer until we finish arguing over philosophy... ;)
    38. Re:The depressing part of the story by TheLink · · Score: 2

      Yes, engineers and scientists make amazing and powerful tools.

      My argument is basically: a good tree bears good fruit. Fallacy or not, the native people understand that.

      You can give arguments about Scientologists going to help some tribe in Amazon for all you want, but AFAIK that's just hypothetical fruit. Have they flown to the Amazon to give the needy tribes a much needed audit? What fruit have you seen from the Scientologists so far? Good? Bad? None?

      Christians preach love. If they don't show love, then what's the point? That is the main crux of the Christian faith the good news- God loves us, he sent his Son to die for us. And these missionaries actually did that:

      http://www.hillsdale.edu/dept/Phil&Rel/Biography /0 1/08.html

      Sure you can say the missionaries who died for those tribespeople were believing in a fallacy. But if you are results oriented, see evidence of the positive effect on the tribespeople soon afterwards. I'd say that's good fruit.

      Yes, logical fallacy and all that. Logic is useful. Logic can tell me if the tree has theoretical potential. But when it comes to the crunch, I'll still claim it's best to judge trees by their fruits.

      BTW, condoms have a pretty significant failure rate. So to me it is very irresponsible and misleading for certain parties to keep saying condoms = safe sex when it comes to AIDs or other STDs (HepB, HepC amongst other incurable dangerous diseases). Condoms are better than sex without protection, but far riskier than abstinence or monogamy (faithful partners for life).

      Condoms are fine as a barrier against "accidental" life but not as a shield against untoward death.

      --
    39. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      Christians preach love. If they don't show love, then what's the point? That is the main crux of the Christian faith the good news- God loves us, he sent his Son to die for us.

      Again, you are mistaking good deeds and the good people who do them as affirmation that the religious beliefs are correct. I have no doubt that many Christians have done many wonderful, generous things. And I don't have anything against most of the morals taught by the Christian faiths. But doing good deeds does not give one moral license to pass on their religious beliefs as fact to unsophisticated, and grateful, tribes people.

      Condoms are better than sex without protection, but far riskier than abstinence or monogamy (faithful partners for life).

      Then why don't you go to sub-saharan Africa and try to educate them? Thanks to the influences of industrialized countries, the men no longer work in the villages as hunters or farmers. Instead, they are hauled by trucks and buses to inner cities where they have sexual liasons with prostitutes.

      Deal with reality. The entire continent is not going to suddenly adopt Christian views about sexual morality. What the Catholic church is doing to stop the distribution of condoms in places like that is pure evil.

    40. Re:The depressing part of the story by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      The scientific method is an invention.

      Critical thinking and reasoned thought is not an invention.

      You are trying to press your rational atheism on these people just as much as I'm trying to push my own religion on them.

      Far from it. I don't feel that I have a moral right to go into their village and tell them that their religious beliefs are wrong. I can give them logical tools and they can come to their own decisions about religion should they wish to consider it. What you want to do is to tell them that their non-Christian religious beliefs are wrong, that, if they continue to worship a God other than the Christian God that they will burn for all eternity in Hell, etc. I do not believe in mixing fact and faith when teaching people. If they want to ask you about your beliefs, then answer them. But don't pass off your beliefs as "the gospel truth" {snicker}.

      Hopefully, they (random tribesmen) will enjoy the material improvements to life that Westernity has to offer until we finish arguing over philosophy... ;)

      Amen to that. ;-)

    41. Re:The depressing part of the story by Latent+IT · · Score: 2

      Hey, this *is* Slashdot ... not the Harvard debating team. :)

      Oh, but if only it were! I won't sit around holding my breath, though.

      As for American-(style/wise/ish) hegemonic consumerism, there's something in that statement that makes me want to hit you about the head and shoulders with a club, but you're too nice a person! Dammit. I can't tolerate niceness in response to a good, solid flame. It makes some of my wiring go all wonky. =p

      Anyway, I'll express my origional opinion, like some other people said - even if you hear the pitch, you don't have to buy. It holds true for DVD players, and religion! So uh... I dunno. I can't feel bad for the natives, especially when they sit on their rears, and make the Brits carry the piano. =)

  9. And I bet those "primitives" take good care of it? by saskboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wonder about people when they consider a people who care for music, and treat an instrument properly "savages", yet the piano in my college residence is ruined with misuse and ugly graphiti carving.

    Who are the savages? Do people in the Amazon write on public pianos too? "For a good time call Zanthia." --- "Hey Zanthia, wanna have a good time!"

    --"NO. And stop calling for me!"

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  10. How sad... by tswinzig · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The American missionaries who converted the tribe in the 1950s taught them Christian modesty, and they now favour shorts and T-shirts, largely supplied by visitors and aid agencies. The footwear of choice is the plastic flip-flop.

    No comment necessary?

    --

    "And like that ... he's gone."
    1. Re:How sad... by corbettw · · Score: 2

      "The footwear of choice is the plastic flip-flop.

      No comment necessary?"

      Hey, if the flip-flop is good enough for Jimmy Buffett, it's good enough for the Amazons!

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
  11. all wrong, all wrong! by frotty · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You're supposed to put a STARBUCKS in a neighborhood when you want to increase the TIF funding attractiveness, not a piano!

    Why does this remind me of some sort of
    "Catholocism spreading to the brutes" scenario of a few centuries ago? Oh, wait, because it is that.

    I guess them savage folks needed to understand the Word of God, I mean, it's our duty to inform them that they're going about living all wrong.

    --
    -- The truth is the only thing that nobody will believe.
  12. Pianos and humidity by ThinkingGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember reading an article years ago about people in Japan donating old pianos, mostly to southeast Asia (There had been a boom in piano sales in Japan a while back, when many parents were signing their kids up for piano lessons, but with the boom over, most of these pianos sat unused in Japanese homes).
    The problem was that pianos made for sale in Japan didn't handle the humid climate of southeast Asia and often became warped, as the one in the Amazon did.
    I think it also mentioned some kind of treatment that can be done to the pianos at the manufacture time, to help strengthen them in humid climates.

  13. Oranges to tangerines, then? by fireboy1919 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    People want PIANOs that can produce a wide range of sounds. That's why synths exist. Here are some features on modern day keyboard that prove my point:
    weighted keys: so that it feels the same as a piano. You can't feel the hammers hitting the strings, you can only feel how hard it is to press the keys. Modern synths have this.
    touch sensitivity:Harder hit means more sound...like a piano.
    88 keys:There's no reason that a synth should have so many keys, since it is usually portable, and thre isn't a lot of synth-only music (meaning that the range could be dictated by the instrument). Unless, of course, its a replacement for the piano.

    This doesn't apply to all keyboards because all of these features are rather expensive. But most good keyboard players get their keyboards with all of these features. Saying they're not the same is like saying that a piano wasn't a replacement for the harpsichord (which could only play one volume).

    Interesting how we name our keyed instruments - based upon whatever feature they have that the previous instrument didn't. Pianos where originally called "forte-pianos," and synths...

    --
    Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    1. Re:Oranges to tangerines, then? by callipygian-showsyst · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I'm a professional pianist and I can tell you that you're all wrong.

      • On a real piano, you don't "feel the hammers hitting the strings". There's an "escapement mechanism" that releases the hammer before it hits the strings. There's no mechanical linkage between key and hammer at the actual moment of impact. Inertia carries it there.
      • Harder hit doesn't mean more sound. FASTER hit does. This is how a concert pianist can play for hours without killing his hands and wrists. Want more sound? Lift your fingers higher so they press the keys faster.
      • A synth is not a piano. It's an instument--usually contolled by a keyboard--that can produce a wide range of sounds.
      I cannot perform on a fake piano. It has to be real. No "good keyboard player" has ever learned to play on anything but a real piano. At least none that I ever met.
      --
      Best Buy can have you arrested
    2. Re:Oranges to tangerines, then? by ninthwave · · Score: 2

      I was actually commenting not on the difference between synths and piano's as instruments. I play both and understand a good synth's design but commenting on the durability of a 70 year old piano and a few year old synth. The cult of plastic in instruments does worry me and that was the horse of the different colour.

      --
      I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
    3. Re:Oranges to tangerines, then? by WNight · · Score: 2

      How long have good synths been around? Most "good" piano players I know started as children, so likely good synth players will as well. Anyone older than 25 couldn't really have grown up with a synth the way most piano players grew up with a piano.

      Eventually synths will take over. There's no sound difference some good DSP code can't fix and they're much more than just a piano.

    4. Re:Oranges to tangerines, then? by WNight · · Score: 2

      And a synth can't mimic a piano? It seems that many "piano traits" are things synths should have, like variable-sensitivity keys and such. When synths have that, what's the stop them from loading piano sounds?

      Building a device to *just* emulate a piano seems so limiting.

  14. feedback by carlcmc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm sorry, but you are mistaken in saying that the feedback of hammers hitting the strings cannot be reproduced. While I might be healthcare, i also play classical music on the piano, and for 2500 you can get a digital piano that has as good if not better feedback as your standard uprights in the same price range. Granted a grand piano is better, but what percentage of people are able to afford a 15k to 20k grand piano?. A digital piano such as a korg for instance never requires tuning, has excellent feed back and record and play back. I suppose you may have been talking just about synths that have keys but no feed back, but i wanted to respond to the misconeption that you can't get great feed back with digital.

    1. Re:feedback by Gsus411 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I would love to see some of these digital pianos you speak of. I have played on just about every piano possible, from Steinway grands to no-name uprights from 100 years ago to the most elaborate digital pianos available. A good digital piano may have a better response than a cheap $700 dollar throwaway. But for the $2,500 you mention, you can get a decent upright with better response than any digital piano you can find for any price.

      My $0.02.....

  15. New sport: Extreme Philanthropy by Ooblek · · Score: 5, Funny
    A set of hearty do-gooders get this warm, tingly feeling when a bunch of savages want a grand piano of their very own in the middle of the Amazon. These heros set out with visions of a next renaissance in music as these villagers are left with a musical instrument and a desire to learn. Documenting their great struggle in taking this behemoth from the civilzed world to the uncivilized world. Overcoming obstacles like raging rivers and dense tropical jungles, they finally deliver this prize. They leave, intending to come back a few years later. In this time, they expect the musical capabilities of these primitives to mature beyond belief - much like leaving a batch of wine to ferment to perfection in an old oak barrel.

    So our intrepid travelers return and are greeted be the villagers that have apparently just been shopping at Target. Flip-flops, shorts, and even the occasional T-Shirt that has the phrase, "I'm a lion hunter. If you see me running, try to keep up," on the back.

    The cheap-clothing aside, the veteran piano-tuning-commando-squad makes the exhausting 8-mile trek through the jungle to finally visit the prize instrument and to taste the sweetness of the evolved musical talent that should have developed over these past years.

    What they found is that the piano that was donated has almost cracked in half due to the fact the generous donation turned out to be little more than someone deciding not to sell the thing for $5 at a garage sale. (They must have decided they didn't want to move the thing out the front door every Saturday for a month while trying to get rid of it.) The instrument itself was infested with insects and their eggs, probably due to the fact that they generally kept the piano in a storage shed until visitors with cameras decided to show up. This explains all the Target type clothes since it appears that they are really cannibals that would eat visitors without cameras and take their clothes.

    In the end, the savages did learn how to belt out a few Bach and Beetles tunes, but then just wanted a fricking Korg keyboard, "Like we asked for in the first place." I don't see why they didn't just ask for a PC and a net connection so they could just use Kazaa and download all the Bach and Beetles MP3s they wanted!

  16. Re:Not a hard choice by Greedo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was expecting an interesting read about how this tribe had taught themselves to play a piano, improvising melodies and chord progressions based on their indigenous musical heritage. Coming up with unorthodox techniques, etc..

    Instead, it's the story of a bunch of British folks playing Beatles songs with the villagers, who have been Catholicized and are wearing American t-shirts and plastic flip-flops.

    How sad. And mildly offensive.

    (Oh ... taking a piano into the jungle is interesting. Taking a Korg is dumb. IMHO.)

    --
    Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
  17. Hi tech/Lo tech by swm · · Score: 3, Funny
    I find it funny when people complain about the rediculousness of low-tech firearms on a spaceship
    OK, I'll bite.

    I used to watch Lost In Space when I was a kid. I knew it was hokey, but as long as I accepted it on its own terms, it was good enought for TV.

    Then one year I came home from college, and I was channel surfing, and I stumbled across an old episode. The Robinsons were trapped on some alien space craft, and they were shooting their way out, firing those laser pistols they always carried, and then one of them starts lobbing grenades...and I'm just sitting there thinking...
    ...yeah, that's the ticket. Whenever I'm on board a strange spacecraft, I always lob a few fragmentation grenades around. If their containment vessel can't handle the shock, that's their problem.

    Hissing noise? What hissing noise? Hey...does the air in here seem little thin?
  18. God I loved the smell of the tubes warming up. . . by kfg · · Score: 3, Funny

    in the morning! And in the "old days" we didn't have to waste time and money *adding* lights to our computer cases.

    You want "eerie glow?" I got yer eerie glow right here buddy.

    Plus you could use them to keep your bagel warm and nicely soft.

    Of course you couldn't use them to mill grain like you could with a Babbage machine. There are always downsides to new technology.

    KFG

  19. Electronics don't last.... by freejung · · Score: 2, Informative
    in the jungle. I can tell you that. I live in the jungle and I work with electronics, and the humidity is hell on them, it's no surprise the new synth didn't work out very well.

    Trying to use computers here is a joke, they break amazingly fast. The trick is to use it all the time, so the circuits stay warm.

    --
    My site: Free Nature Pictures
  20. I have a piano and live in amazon, but i�m lucky.. by the+cobaltsixty · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I live in Belem, the largest city within the Amazon Rainforest, with two million inhabitants. For about nine years, i also played piano and almost became a classical pianist. But then i left in order to have more time to spend at the computer.

    There are two piano tuners in my city. One has serious hearing problems, which is weird. The other one looks weird, because hes not brazilian, but russian. But i heard hes a good tuner.

    Keeping a piano is a challenging task. The climate has much air humidity, the wood helps changing its sounds. Also, we have problems with the extreme heat... But anyway, thats not impossible.

    There were two piano factories in brazil, and the most popular, Essenfelder, got bankrupt. The remaing, Fritz Dobbert, still exists. There are in my city two music schools, Carlos Gomes and the Federal University of Para Music School (EMUFPA). I used to study at the later one. They still have a really beautiful Yamaha piano there. When they were about to buy, i've heart they had to make a poll to choose whether to buy a white or a wooden one. Thank god, the wooden is there.

    Disclaimer: I have nothing against people who think theyre trendy about white pianos, but sure Def Leppard making a Video with a white piano is a shame

  21. Juju magic seems more effective than modern tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "But I could never track down the fault, let alone fix it. I wrestled with the Korg on and off for more than a fortnight, right until the eve of the fundraising concert, when one of the Wai Wai somehow got it working."

    Hmm, all these uber-geeks and no one else found it curious that an unknowledgable aboriginal fixes an electronic device that they couldn't possible understand? Anyone care to explain? Btw, no, I don't buy the "gave it a good whack" excuse.

    yet another x-file ...

  22. Obligatory Simpson's Reference by zephc · · Score: 2

    Ah hell, I'll just link to it: "Missionary: Impossible"

    --
    "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
  23. Most Important Low-Tech Discovery by duck_prime · · Score: 2
    Lets face it, we're still dependent upon the 7 "low-tech" discoveries/inventions of the Neanderthals
    I don't know if the Neandies had this one, but the sine-qua-non of our existence that didn't make your list is:

    CONTAINERS!

    Yes, the lowly BAG. Hunting and gathering really, really sucked when you had to jam those tubers up your ass in order to free your hands to pick more.

    The mighty BAG made it possible to carry your stuff around. Unfortunately, it made warfare and plunder possible, as it made it possible for other people to carry your stuff around, too. ;)

    Forget this fancy-schmancy "fire" stuff. BAG all the way!
    1. Re:Most Important Low-Tech Discovery by tomhudson · · Score: 2
      You know, you're right. And it's interesting that much of our knowledge of past times comes from pot-shards (containers). Son-of-a-bitch! :-)

      Mind you, this might come under the heading of "tools" in general, oh, wft.

    2. Re:Most Important Low-Tech Discovery by TheLink · · Score: 2

      Yep. Containers or ways to carry stuff. I bet some tribes never really needed fire, but the ability to carry things whilst leaving your hands free was ever important. I'm sure many moms invented a multitude of ways to carry their babies whilst leaving their hands free.

      Still, fire enabled a wider range of cooking/food processing. And that leads to wider types and varieties of food. Mmmmm :).

      --
  24. Re:Juju magic seems more effective than modern tec by Aggrazel · · Score: 2

    No, it was all part of the great Wai Wai:

    "Lets see how far we can string these stupid brits along for great comedy".

    Which of course started with:

    "I bet you can't get them to bring a piano out here."
    "Bet you I can!"
    "Nah, no way."
    "Yeah I can! And I'll even up that, I'll get them to bring a GRANDE Piano, AND we'll tell them our village is flooded!"
    "Hahaha, there's no way they'd be that dumb."

    But of course, my favorite part of the whole story is where all they thought they would have to do is "shout at them" to move the piano.

    "Wai Wai strong, British Weak!"

  25. Re:Not a hard choice by skivvie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That story did nothing but depress me. Leave these people the f**k alone! They were doing fine for thousands of years living a natural life... and their most cherished possession is a piano?? Please. This paragraph made me wanna punch someone.

    "When our 11-strong team landed at Gunn's Strip, it seemed as if the whole of the tribe had turned out to meet us. But if any of us had been expecting half-naked, blowpipe-wielding savages, we were disappointed. The American missionaries who converted the tribe in the 1950s taught them Christian modesty, and they now favour shorts and T-shirts, largely supplied by visitors and aid agencies. The footwear of choice is the plastic flip-flop."

    Good ol' Christian missionaries.

  26. Re:(OT) LCDs are three times as good as CRTs by kin_korn_karn · · Score: 2

    (Lacks Sense Of Humor And Completely Misses The Point: -1)

  27. Re:Not sad. by tswinzig · · Score: 2

    Unless the Christian missionaries put guns to their heads, I don't see what's sad about it.

    Guns aren't necessary when dealing with primative cultures ... scary stories do just fine.

    You don't see what's sad about convincing people they should be ashamed of nakedness? (And "Lord knows" what else they convinced them of.)

    --

    "And like that ... he's gone."
  28. They're people, not savages. by forii · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why do you assume that the people who live in the Amazon are not able to choose their clothing/lifestyles for themselves? You may wish that some people stay nice and "natural" (perhaps you mean "primitive"?) but I'm sorry that these people who live in the Amazon are probably not as interested in living as museum displays for your pleasure.

    1. Re:They're people, not savages. by ndinsil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Every good Slashdotter should know the Prime Directive!

      Seriously, although a strict hands-off approach like the fictional directive is probably not a good idea in these circumstances, rapidly changing a culture can cause serious harm that's often not recognized until later, and usually can't be undone. And missionaries have a long history of carelessness and even intentional destruction.

      Case in point: they used to be able to support themselves; but they've been taught to cover themselves with western clothing that they must get from elsewhere, creating a need that never existed before. How does that do them any good in any way?

  29. They should have used... by CommieLib · · Score: 2

    Opporknockety strings.





    Why?





    Opporknockety only tunes once.

    --
    If your bitterest enemies are people who hack the heads off civilians, then I would say you're doing something right.
  30. Re:Not a hard choice by l810c · · Score: 2
    wearing American t-shirts and plastic flip-flops

    Yes, National Geographic used to be much better when they showed more T&A.

    Of course if I had the choice between circa 1979 basketball shorts or one of those weenie slings I'd go with the shorts.

  31. Re:And I bet those "primitives" take good care of by l810c · · Score: 2
    yet the piano in my college residence is ruined with misuse and ugly graphiti carving.

    You didn't read the part of the article about where they carved graffiti into their piano:

    'Wai Wai Rulez!'

    'For a good time dial Bong Bong Bing Bong Bong'

    'Tinkatu is a Fag'

  32. Prime directive by nightsweat · · Score: 2

    But what of the prime directive, man!?

    --

    the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
  33. Re:Not a hard choice by 5KVGhost · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why are you offended? Give the natives some credit for their ability to make rational choices. They aren't museum exhibits or zoo specimens.

  34. Do you have one of those heaters? by TheLink · · Score: 2

    I'm in a hot and humid country (Malaysia) and in many pianos you put a electric piano heater in to help keep the temperature right.

    Might help in your case.

    Not a bar heater - it's kind of specific for pianos.

    --
  35. How to help without getting involved? by TheLink · · Score: 2

    How do you propose to help people by leaving them well enough alone? Or are you saying it's fine for others to help but not Christians?

    Maybe you think the tribes don't need help? Or they don't need more friends in the world? Demonstrate your love for those people, then I will believe that you have their interests at heart if you tell me they don't need our help. I may not agree with you, but at least I will respect you.

    Christians preach love. If we do not show love how can we be Christians? Christianity is about love - God so loved the world that he sent his beloved Son down to die for us.

    If there are tribes turning to Christianity in the Amazon that's usually because Christians are helping them. They aren't stupid, they know a good tree bears good fruit. A useless tree that looks good but bears no fruit or bad fruit is often chopped down and burnt for firewood.

    As far as I see, most missionaries are far from unhelpful or obnoxious. In fact the people they try to help may be unhelpful:
    http://www.hillsdale.edu/dept/Phil&Rel /Biography/0 1/08.html

    As far as I know, it's the missionaries that build schools, hospitals and educate people. It's the secular commercial traders etc who come bearing cannons and opium. You rather the traders reach the natives first?

    In many countries including mine the elite schools are the missionary/christian schools, due to the legacy the "foreigners" laid down. Even the non-christian rich battle to send their children to those schools.

    --
  36. Re:(OT) LCDs are three times as good as CRTs by unitron · · Score: 2
    Have you already forgotten about the motherboard with the onboard vacuum tube audio? It was a Salshdot story within the past year or so.

    And speaking of within the past year or so, didn't I see or something recently about a (fictional) novel about a piano in the middle of a jungle?

    --

    I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.