Slashdot Mirror


What Ancient Tech Do You Do?

neonfrog asks: "Before silicon, before electricity even, what the heck did those of us with geek brains do? Our brains have not evolved appreciably in half an eon (at least mine hasn't, but I may be descended from turtles). What would today's programmers have been doing centuries before the invention of the keyboard? What would an electrical engineer be doing a millennia or three before the concept of resistors and capacitors? What piqued their curiosity? Were their skills esoteric or exotic? They can't all have been Leonardo Da Vincis or court 'magicians', right? Summer's starting and, for some, it's hobby time. I bet the Slashdot community harbors quite a few Journeyman, or even Masters. I know a lot of geeks are beer-makers (and I do so appreciate you folk ... urp!) so there's no danger of that knowledge getting lost. What other ancient tech do you indulge in and keep alive? What are some good resources?"

308 comments

  1. my hobbies by bluelip · · Score: 5, Interesting

    hunt, homebrew beer/wine, tan animal hides.... you know.... the red-blooded american things.

    --

    Yep, I never spell check.
    More incorrect spellings can be found he
    1. Re:my hobbies by dagr8tim · · Score: 1

      Amen. After a long hard week of slaving in a cubical. I can't wait to get out and go tinker with automobiles. I'm not talking about modern, clean, fuel injected auto's. I'm talking ones with 20+ years of grit, grim, greese, and rust under the hood.

      --
      "Does your computer have IP on it?"
    2. Re:my hobbies by Dancing+Primate · · Score: 1

      Don't forget, you can ferment just about anything.

    3. Re:my hobbies by bluelip · · Score: 1

      ohh.... how could I have forgotten that classic?

      I once tried hillybilly wine made from Welch's. It was starwberry flavor. I thought it'd be cute to do a peanut butter so as to be able to make a PBJ wine. Trust me PB doesn't work too well.

      --

      Yep, I never spell check.
      More incorrect spellings can be found he
  2. i wondered this myself by pizza_milkshake · · Score: 2, Funny

    probably just typing on a rock

  3. Life without computers by sycotic · · Score: 1

    well *duh*

    we would all have big muscles, neat hair, trendy colourful clothes and a girl at our side whilst rolling in the 'hood

    wait, hang on a minute, life without computers???

    ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGH!!!

    --
    -- If I were a fish, I'd be wet
  4. Before the keyboard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    What would today's programmers have been doing centuries before the invention of the keyboard?

    I can't say for sure, but it would probably only require one hand.

  5. Propagate Species by Artie_Effim · · Score: 0

    I don't know about all of you, but I'm keeping busy testing new ways to propagate the species ;)

  6. Intaglio printmaking by FooAtWFU · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Because art is nifty, and because it's a massive leap to go from tweaking stuff with keyboard and mouse to actually scratching stuff onto a copper surface with an etching needle. Because it's fun squishing stuff under the thousands of pounds of pressure in the printing press. Because there is a bit of a puzzle figuring out how to get proper textures with aquatint, mezzoting, engraving, or drypoint, or stippling.... Nifty stuff, really.

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    1. Re:Intaglio printmaking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um...Intaglio is how the goverment prints money. On second thought, I think I'll get into this hobby my self.

    2. Re:Intaglio printmaking by EvilMagnus · · Score: 1

      "I enjoy slaughtering beasts," he said, "and I think of my relatives constantly."

      Now now, you should at least let folks who don't know about Amber know which book you got that delightful quote from, so they too may enjoy R. Zelazny's work. :)

      --
      -EvilMagnus
    3. Re:Intaglio printmaking by sporktoast · · Score: 1

      Now, we all know the only reason you have this hobby is so that you can have plausible deniability for when you ask a girl if she wants to come back to your place "see your etchings".

      --
      In a related story, the IRS has recently ruled that the cost of Windows upgrades can NOT be deducted as a gambling loss.
  7. not really ancient by Bodhidharma · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I roast my own coffee beans. Coffee has been around since the Dark ages and known in the West since the Renaissance so it's not really ancient. Besides, everyone roasted coffee until the late 19th century. It didn't come in cans until then. Still, it predates electronics and such. (As far as we know ...)

    Jim

    --
    A dyslexic man walks into a bra.
    1. Re:not really ancient by dr00g911 · · Score: 1

      I'm another that followed my caffeine addiction to an absurd conclusion.

      Over the last few years I've gathered an extremely large collection of super low tech, and a few high tech pieces of coffee roasting and preparation equipment.

      I also have a passion for cooking, and I've started learning techniques from all over the world.

      My wife is only tolerant of the coffee geekery, but she's utterly devoted to my amateur chef pursuits.

      There's also something extremely meditative I find about fishing. Gear, technique, patience. Much like chess -- easy to learn, lifetime to master sort of thing.

      I don't seek out low-tech diversions on purpose -- in fact, there are incredibly high tech tools to use in each of these fields. It's just in some of them, the low tech ways are the best ways of accomplishing things -- plus I feel there's more of *me* in the end result, which is a bit more rewarding.

      I still do all of my art in Photoshop and Maya, though. Low tech is great for some things (a grill, for instance), but undo is better!

    2. Re:not really ancient by computerdude33 · · Score: 1

      Welcome to grill!

      What would you like to do?: make hamburger

      You set your house on fire. It burns with a very nice glow.

      What would you like to do?: UNDO!!!!!!!

      Sorry, undoing is for WIMPY programs like Photoshop and Maya. You can't undo in a COMMAND LINE! MUAHAHAHAHA! ...excuse me...

      What would you like to do?:

      (note: these views are not my views but a grill CLI's views)

      --
      computerdude33's stuff: My blog of wonder.
    3. Re:not really ancient by trick-knee · · Score: 1

      > I also have a passion for cooking, and I've
      > started learning techniques from all over the world.

      techniques are good and useful, as you know, but simple food combination is fun as well. one usually takes cues from other cultures, but there is plenty of room for messing about, finding what you like.

      this isn't strictly cooking, but have you ever tried a Guiness float? in the USA, we have these "pub packs" that have nitrogen capsules in the can (they make nice creamy foam). scoop some rich ice cream (in the USA, Haagen Dazs vanilla works well), and poor the stout over it, root beer float style. it sounds like a joke, but it's addicting, let me tell you.

    4. Re:not really ancient by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      And if you ditch the high-tech you'll do better.

      The thermostat went bad in my coffee roaster. While I was getting around to fixing it I tried a batch in my cast iron frying pan on the BBQ grill, so I could survive.

      The coffee roaster hasn't been fixed yet - it's so much better this way and I can do a whole pound in 10 minutes.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    5. Re:not really ancient by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      If I had a handy copy of tHHGG trilogy of five books, I would post the excerpt about "The Sandwich Maker." Food is chemistry and art, and physics, and a bunch of other stuff. When Arthur became the sandwich maker, he went through extraordinary labors to make the perfect sandwich, use the right knife, bake the perfect bread, cut the perfect slice of meat. Also, look at Alton Brown. Food is great geekery.

  8. Blacksmithing by digitect · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was fortunate enough to work at an 18th century living history museum many summers, weekends, and holidays as a blacksmith. Nearly twenty years later, I am still impressed at how much can be done with steel and fire. The technology of tempering is ancient, and the same metalurgical chemistry is used everywhere today in instrument sharpening, oxidization resistiveness, and high strength/weight component design such as in an F1 racecar (when they choose to drive them).

    You can set up your own blacksmith shop now for not much more than some fireclay, an old hairdryer blower, some coal fuel, an short piece of railroad track turned upside down for an anvil (always used a forged metal, never cast) and a hammer. Although if I did it these days, I would be more disciplined about wearing hearing protection.

    --
    There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
    1. Re:Blacksmithing by retostamm · · Score: 3, Informative
      I got a set of books on "How to build your own Metal Workshop" from here.

      It looks promising, but I have not started yet (mainly because the landlord does not appreciate foundry equipment in the appartment).

      Their catalog is really cool, they have reprints of documents from 1900, 1800 and before, all obsolete by now, of course, but that's how the Golden Gate and the Titanic were built.

      They also have an electrical section, for example, how to make an analog amplifier in a Jar from a speaker and a carbon microphone. Really neat stuff, and I wish I could tinker with it some more.

    2. Re:Blacksmithing by Tumbleweed · · Score: 4, Funny

      all obsolete by now, of course, but that's how the Golden Gate and the Titanic were built

      One of those is perhaps not the greatest example. :)

    3. Re:Blacksmithing by enigmatichmachine · · Score: 2, Informative

      one more for blacksmithing, i took a class at the local community college, and rented all the books at the library, and now have my own forge. its pretty cheap to setup. harbor freight has usable anvils for under 5o bucks, and the forge itself is propane mixed with air tossed into a box made of refractory brick or something similar. carefull, its HOT!!!!

      --
      -and occasionaly a giant moose.
    4. Re:Blacksmithing by eamonman · · Score: 1

      Well, I guess if I had to become a smithy in the D&D world, appraisers would rate my weapons

      -1, Crappy
      or
      -2, Cardboard

      --
      0- Eamonman Proud member of DNRC
    5. Re:Blacksmithing by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Trust me - Harbor Frieght sells a terrible anvil. Wait till you get to use a good one and then you will appreciate the difference. I work pt (for fun) at Arms and Armor I shudder to think of what it would cost to rebuy our forging equipment (especially the stakes) and we have a couple nice anvils and one that looks like we put it under a surface grinder daily - flat smooth - nice. As for doing the Gingery books - I highly recommend trying the casting ones, but as for the rest - it is a lot like 'roll your own linux' very educational, kinda fun, but man alive - your time is also worth something - try Grizzley tools.They are still junky tiawan/chinese tools - but they are considered the best of the low/pro-sumer tools. Sorry this was so long - meh.

      Sera

      --
      Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
    6. Re:Blacksmithing by damionfury · · Score: 1
      One of those is perhaps not the greatest example. :)
      Good point. Look at how San Francisco turned out. I've always said the Golden Gate bridge was a horrible influence.
    7. Re:Blacksmithing by bladesjester · · Score: 1

      You haven't had fun untill you've had the entire village rolling on the ground with laughter as the three blacksmiths (me, the joureyman, and the master) did an improv version of The Anvil Chorus (hammer, anvil, and voice).

      To the blacksmithing, add skills in carpentry, wood carving, and martial arts and you've got a small chunk of my past and present hobbies =]

      I miss the forge, though.

      --
      Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
    8. Re:Blacksmithing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Absolutely!! Who knows what San Francisco could have been? It could have even rivaled Tulsa or Dallas.

    9. Re:Blacksmithing by An+Ominous+Cow+Aired · · Score: 1

      You were looking for things that are pre-tech... too bad ;) Computer Numeric Control - CNC - used to run metalworking equipment: linuxcnc.org

      --

      Become A Real Millionaire, in 10 seconds, on your computer! (rf=really fast) Read manual, YMMV.
      rm -rf *
  9. Whatever they did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...they only had about 30 years to do it.

  10. Same hobby, different tools! by facelessnumber · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well that's easy. I would have been a pirate.

    1. Re:Same hobby, different tools! by jim_redwagon · · Score: 1

      then you must be looking forward to this

      --
      I forgot what I wanted to say, but honestly, it was important.
  11. History of the Ancient Geeks by TheCamper · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Many geeks would have probably been monks; it's a structured environment where personality quirks wouldn't be a problem.

    Many would perhaps be smiths; blacksmiths, armorsmiths, glassworkers, etc. All types of smithing requires an advanced knowledge of the craft, with nuances more intricate than any xfree86 config file. What makes geeks tick is not sci-fi itself, or computers themselves, it's systems. Geeks love systems. Systems of numbers, systems of logic, computer systems, pen and paper games rules systems, computer language systems. Even non-geeks like systems. Physical Sports are systems; they are self consistent rule-based constructions. Geeks are merely overly obsessed with certain systems, such as the stars, or physics, or computer languages, much like an autistic person could be obsessed with anything, but he chooses a certain something. So perhaps any intricate systematic smithing craft would appeal to the ancient geek.

    1. Re:History of the Ancient Geeks by Short+Circuit · · Score: 2, Funny

      with nuances more intricate than any xfree86 config file

      Wow. You have no idea how much you've raised my respect for these things. Cognitive dissonance...what a feeling.

    2. Re:History of the Ancient Geeks by phixson · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Monks yep. You could renounce your worldly existence and join an order.

      Smiths nope. Unless you were rich, in which case you had actual education and intellectual opportunities, you did whatever you were _born_ to. If your family were farmers, you were a farmer, period. We tend to project our current state of affairs into our speculations about the past. This is fun, but it has no effect on history.

      Until the very recent past, there were geniuses laying bricks and plowing fields because the simple fact was, no matter how smart you were, there was no opportunity to use your brain to make a living. Maybe you could invent a better way to lay bricks? Maybe, but remember, there have been many other brick layers smarter than you and they didn't.

      If we're really honest, most of us, lucky as we are to be coding, are not really advancing the state of anything now. We're laying bricks. Granted with Java/C++/Python instead of clay and mud, but still laying bricks.

      At least we got to choose to be brick layers.

    3. Re:History of the Ancient Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You pretend to think that most or all geniuses nowadays are discovered? Or have the appropriate opportunity to utilize that genius?

      Please. For the majority of the populace, things haven't changed that much.

    4. Re:History of the Ancient Geeks by jthayden · · Score: 1

      If you were male, it is unlikely you could have gone into the Clergy. It was a good gig and generally was reserved for the non oldest sons of powerful people. Women on the hand could become nuns easily, but it wasn't a good gig and was generally for women who had been tainted by having sex before marriage or were raped.

  12. What I would have been... by Baron_Yam · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Probably a failed Leonardo. I've always loved taking things apart, figuring out how they work, then trying to put them back together... and then imagining how to improve them despite my failure to reassemble the original design.

    I'd have been the peasant who starved because he was so busy trying to figure out how to get his ox to plow more field when all he had to do to survive was plant a small garden with his hands.

    Good thing I'm alive today and didn't live in centuries past.

    1. Re:What I would have been... by teksno · · Score: 1

      speaking of leo...

      i still take math classes at the local universities. math is probably one of the greatest languages of all... and in essance, is one of the oldest languages known to man. maybe i should give up it and just become a mathamatician...

  13. Make mead. by numbski · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Amen to this.

    I wanted to make my own cider, and despite my love for Cider, my new first love is Mead, and its near cousins, melomels, cysers....mmmmm

    My first 1 gallon batch of mead recently hit its stride finally. Dear GAWD is that stuff good.

    I swear, if you ever get a good mead, you'll never drink beer again. I'm not kidding, I'm dead serious. I have 5 gallons of strawberry melomel going right now, and another 5 gallons of some dark cider that has been going since mid-october. Both are far superior to their off-the-shelf alternatives, and these are just my first tries!

    Resources?

    The BrewBoard

    and if you wish to take my advice on the mead specifically:

    The Compleat Meadmaker by Ken Schramm

    That second link *is* an Amazon link, but not a referral link, so I'm not whoring.

    Oh, and yes, I did spell "compleat" correctly. Took me forever to find the book the first time. Oops.

    --

    Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    1. Re:Make mead. by Muhammar · · Score: 2, Informative

      "I swear, if you ever get a good mead, you'll never drink beer again. I'm not kidding"

      Good cool mead taste masks the incredible quantity of sugar that you are actualy drinking. Sugars compete with alcohol for dehydrogenase and overworked alcohol dehydrogenase is the cause of the hungover.

      I swear, if you ever get a good mead hungover, you'll never want to drink again.

      --
      I doubt that we will ever figure out - and I suspect that even if we did figure out we couldn't do much about it
    2. Re:Make mead. by rossifer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Good cool mead taste masks the incredible quantity of sugar that you are actualy drinking.

      Not sure what you mean by "cool mead", but your statements are only true for what I've typically heard called a "sack" or sweet mead, which is much easier to make, but not as delicious as the dry recipies (IMHO). A dry mead is more my style, and has an amazing spectrum of flavors that really do justice to the layman's description, "honey wine".

      The citric acid is important to conceal the alcohol flavor in a dry mead, however... I think I'm going to be making some more real soon. This thread has me salivating at the thought...

      REgards,
      Ross

    3. Re:Make mead. by dbIII · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Make mead
      Funny thing is that a mead recipe if the first thing I ever got from USENET some time around 1990.

      I made it in PET bottles: when half the plastic had gone white with craze cracking from the pressure and the bottle had stretched by about one fifth it was time to drink it.

    4. Re:Make mead. by lisaparratt · · Score: 1

      There is a recipe out there for never ending "party" mead - you can tap two pints from a demijohn a week, refill with water, honey and occasionally cracked wheat now and then, and it'll go on forever. It's admittedly a bit cloudy, and the strength and flavour varies from week to week, but it's good stuff.

    5. Re:Make mead. by Fizzl · · Score: 1
      and its near cousins, melomels, cysers...
      ...LSD, DNA, Telomere, Meta-amphetamine...

      Sorry, I have no idea what those words are :)
    6. Re:Make mead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      Geez, Wikipedia is your friend:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mead

      A mead that contains fruit (such as strawberry, blackcurrant or even rose-hips) is called melomel and was also used as a delicious way to "store" summer produce for the winter.

      Cyser is made with (hard) apple cider and honey;

    7. Re:Make mead. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That second link *is* an Amazon link, but not a referral link, so I'm not whoring.

      Well, for Pete's sake, put a referrer link in there next time. I mean, you're providing us with useful information and it's not like I'm going to save money if you don't put a referrer link in there - Amazon is simply going to keep the profit.

      Now, who would I rather see the money go to, Amazon or Numbski? That's easy.

      If you were selling your book there might be a conflict of interest, but Amazon has nearly every book in existence so this is just a matter of who gets the money, and contrary to the comments of some on Slashdot, there's nothing wrong with making money for your work.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    8. Re:Make mead. by numbski · · Score: 1

      Well, don't keep it to yourself....post it up! :)

      --

      Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    9. Re:Make mead. by numbski · · Score: 1

      I don't have time to go hunting for it right now I'm afraid (have a firewall to go install...yay), but I would love to see this, would make a good experiment, and I have a group brew coming up with any luck, and will have some extra honey to spare. :)

      If you have a working link, please either post it here or go to my site and post it, or e-mail me. :)

      --

      Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    10. Re:Make mead. by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      Sack mead still has an ungodly amount of sugar in it, which is why you use citric (or tannic, tartaric, malic) acid to balance out the sweetness.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    11. Re:Make mead. by CaptainCarrot · · Score: 1
      Well, okay, the subject is ancient tech put into practice by modern geeks. Consider the amount of jargon in modern geekspeak. Did you really think that kind of thing was new? Hell, this is simple. Look into the jargon of 19th Century sailing if you want to see something complicated.

      Good jargon (as opposed to the kind of polysyllabic blather adopted by some of the soft sciences as counterfeit jargon) is a set of shorthand phrases with specific, non-ambiguous technical meanings and as such tends to be opaque to the layman. In this particular case we're not even reaching that far: the words are simply archaic and were once in common use.

      --
      And the brethren went away edified.
    12. Re:Make mead. by lisaparratt · · Score: 1

      Can't find a web reference - I got passed it by word of IRC. Note that units are British imperial . Name removed to protect the innocent :) :

      * I took the recipe from the Saga of "Odin and the mead of inspiration"
      * took me two years to work out
      * this is the party in a month version
      * 3 or 4 lbs of honey, cheap stuff will do as long as its pure
      * a champagne yeast
      * scrape the honey out of the jar into a plastic measuring jug, fill the jar with just off boiling water to dissolve the remaing honey, pour this into the jug and stir with a fork till its all dissolved, add 2 jars of cold water
      * pour into a sterilised demijohn
      * repeat until the demijohn is 3/4 full
      * if the honey/water mix is bloodheat or less, tip in the champagne yeast, fit airlock
      * exactly one lunar month later you have a gallon of mead at 12% alcohol
      * replace whatever you drink with honey/water in the same proportions of 1 honey to 3 of water
      * it keeps going for years with maybe just a few grains of cracked wheat as nutrient for the yeast
      * too sweet - wait a week, too strong - add more honey
      * drink a couple of pints a week - just keep it turning over, otherwise it gets too strong to be nice

    13. Re:Make mead. by modecx · · Score: 1

      I've wanted to try and make a meade for years now. Seems easy enough. I just need to clear out some junk to keep it for the weeks it needs! Ugh! Bye bye computer stuffs.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
  14. I don't know about humans by coyote4til7 · · Score: 1

    But the hero in an Ant's life is certainly a geek.

    Then there were the unsung geeks who invented fire, the spear, the flint tip for same, the wheel, the bow and arrow, camoflaged big hole in ground, etc.

    More recent-ish, before Henry Ford came along, most auto owners had to be (or hire...) geeks to keep those !@#$! things on the road.

    On a slight tangent, one college professor of mine talked about how, in some "primitive" cultures, homosexuals had roles as things like helpers in child rearing. More directly, societies have an interesting way (when dogma and fear don't intrude) and putting aptitudes to some use.

    Some thoughts to grease the thunking...

    --

    the clock on the wall says 4 til 7
    1. Re:I don't know about humans by QuantumG · · Score: 1
      But the hero in an Ant's life is certainly a geek.

      Didn't he end up leaving his wife ant and moving in with her daughter ant?

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:I don't know about humans by coyote4til7 · · Score: 1

      I think that sequel got vetoed as being marketing-challenged.

      --

      the clock on the wall says 4 til 7
    3. Re:I don't know about humans by Issue9mm · · Score: 1

      You're thinking of either "A Bug's Life", or "Antz", and I'm leaning toward Bug's Life, since I can't remember Antz.

      -9mm-

  15. Blacksmithing by nrlightfoot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I always thought that blacksmithing was kind of interesting, and it has some similarities with computer work.

    1) swinging a hammer all day can give you a repetetive motion injury like using a keyboard.

    2) When making complex things you have to pay attention to details and have an idea of what your working towards.

    3) You can undo mistakes fairly easily, just heat it up and pound out the error.

    4) There are lots of technical things to remember like metal compostions, metalworking techniques, and different ways to heat treat metals to give them different properties.

    5) It's rather a skilled job compared to being a farmer, and I suppose the pay might not have been too bad.

    Plus you can make your own swords and armor for D&D.

    --
    what sig?
  16. my hobbies by coolguy2k · · Score: 1

    I'm a geek about how i play basketball and skateboard... so i guess that qualifies under this category.

  17. Sailing by southern · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I try to get out sailing after work everyday in the summer. Yes there is a navigation computer on board, but basics haven't change since humans took to the sea.

    --
    Chris Southern
    1. Re:Sailing by yasth · · Score: 1

      So how many line of oars do you have on that boat? And all that wood was cut with axes because you didn't have saws. Really, while we like to think that sailing ships are sailing ships they have changed a lot. I mean it is like saying modern cars are basically the same as horseless carriages. Change might not have been Moore's lawish, but it happened. Technology improved, and the ships got better.

      --
      I'd do something interesting, but my server can't handle a slashdotting.
    2. Re:Sailing by Stoutlimb · · Score: 1

      I've been told that sailing on the ocean is a lot like jail, except with the added danger of drowning. Then again, I've never been on the ocean, or near it.

    3. Re:Sailing by dcstimm · · Score: 1

      I agree, I fell in love with sailing, its a world of fun.

    4. Re:Sailing by g-san · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd agree. Take the basics of knots for example. You have knots that slip, knots that don't slip, knots that come undone easy under a load, knots you can trust for a few hours and knots you can trust for months, and those knots that you never tie because they don't hold or are known to get stuck. Knots that are functional, knots that are pretty and knots that are both. Those knots have been in use for hundreds of years, and there is a reason... they work.

      It's also very fuzzy and analog. The wind changes direction and speed, the current changes, you have waves, you sail trim may be dead on or not. There is no such thing as staying on a heading of 270 exactly for two hours. The weather for tomorrow may be what is predicted or may not, you learn to watch the water and the sky. Sure there are electronics on board, but if you are out on a clear day, it's all by your senses of sight, touch and hearing. Very unlike this binary behemoth that earns me my living (and pays for the slip.) And what I know about sailing will still be good in 5 or ten years, unlike most computer related topics.

  18. Gardening... by dasunt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes. Gardening.

    Its geeky, in its own way.

    Not only do you have layout, planting times, and organic methods, but there are loads of experimentation available.

    Do you want to use the French-Intensive method of gardening? How about the traditional method? Blocks or rows?

    This year, I'm experimenting with rooting suckers from tomato plants and seeing if the new plants are worthwhile producers. I'm also trying to plant late corn in between flowering beans. (I like to maximize my yeild from a small space.) Next year, I'm going to try interplanting lettuce and tomatoes, hoping that the tomatoes will keep the lettuce cool enough to extend the growing season. I'll also try more mulch next year, I think.

    1. Re:Gardening... by nimblebrain · · Score: 1

      Seconded!

      I'm a gardening geek myself, and I think I'd be doing that if there were no computers around. There are a lot of geekly things you can do with gardening, and I don't think there are many gardeners who are masters of all of them.

      There's plant identification (so controversial at the time - identifying by plant's private parts!), propagation, grafting (had an uncle who was big on this, and it can help you grow plants in different climates than they were bred for), growing edible plants, growing specialty plants (orchids, carnivorous plants, cacti), breeding plants, making the perfect lawn, landscaping, watering schemes, collecting odd plants, pruning, composting.

      You can totally geek out with any one or two of these specialties.

      I like collecting odd plants, growing fruit and growing fragrant plants. We just got some cherry-plum crosses and honeyberries this year (zone 3!), and there are mimosas (touch-sensitive) , papayas and teddy-bear vines indoors. Zone 3's pretty challenging, but I'm impressed at what grows and overwinters here. (e.g. Yucca, of all things!)

      Now if I could only figure out how to keep seedlings alive and fungus-gnat-free :)

      -- Ritchie

      --
      Binary geeks can count to 1,023 on their fingers :)
    2. Re:Gardening... by jgrahn · · Score: 1
      Now if I could only figure out how to keep seedlings alive and fungus-gnat-free :)

      No organic material in the soil is a solution that works for me. But the only plants I grow from seed are cacti; I suspect most other plants resent the brick-and-gravel treament ;-)

    3. Re:Gardening... by CFTM · · Score: 1

      Heheh this is OT, so feel free to MOD as such but it reminded me of my buddy who grows ganja. Over the past five years he's gotten quite good at making plants grow much larger than normal...it's hilarious.

    4. Re:Gardening... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention, you're outside in the fresh air, and your end result is edible produce.

      Win, win.

  19. Welding by citmanual · · Score: 1

    Not so ancient, but I have been spending a lot of time with my TIG welder lately. Built an entertainment center out of aluminum and oak ply.

    I started by making a welding bench out of steel and have kept doing more and more projects with it.

  20. Religion stifles advancement in our species by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Before silicon, before electricity even, what the heck did those of us with geek brains do? Oh, the geeks have only recently been truly free:
    Archimedes, the father of calculus, has his ancient texts bleached and written over with religious mumbo jumbo. Over 1800 years passed before Newton 're-discovered' calculus.
    Galileo proclaimed that the earth wasn't the center of it all. Then the Catholic church made him recant (this was the time of the Inquisition which killed a friend of his just a few years before). (it was only in 1992 that the Catholic Church said Galileo wasn't such a bad guy, and that was after 12 years of arguing)
    More recently Louis Pasteur, a lifelong rationalist, had his crazy ideas of bacteria and disease poo-poo'd by various religious leaders.

    Seeing a trend? Ancient geeks were free to test and invent only so long as the results agreed with the religious diatribe of the day.

    1. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Mahou · · Score: 1

      BS. ancient geeks were free to test and invent only so long as the results agreed with the beliefs of people in power. during those times some 'religious' people happened to be in power. and your blatant anti-christian post should be modded flamebait as you didn't provide any examples from the other religions

      --
      if i'm not immortal, what's the point of living?
      ...te?
    2. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by jericho4.0 · · Score: 1

      You are an idiot, considering that your saviour wasn't born for 212 years after Archimedes died.

      --
      "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
    3. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Mahou · · Score: 1

      his ancient texts bleached and written over with religious mumbo jumbo

      i assumed he was talking about christians writing over archimedes' stuff but i could be wrong since i'm such an idiot
      /tear

      --
      if i'm not immortal, what's the point of living?
      ...te?
    4. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by samjam · · Score: 1

      Are you saying the Christiaity only started with the ministry of Jesus Christ? It is actually a fork of Judaism (claims to be the true prong of the fork) and hence claims to date back to Adam and before the creation.

      The birth of Christ is accepted by Christians as the arrival of the long promised Messiah.

      But the other guy was right, it is those-in-power that cause the trouble and looking at history one has to wonder of those-christians-in-power during the middle ages were actually Christian at all.

      These days the anti-religionists and evolutionists are so fervent it is hard not to call it a "religion" but lets not go there today, this topic was visited enough in recent reationist/evolutionist:school-curriculum discussions on slashdot and the register.

      Sam

    5. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually you'll find that compared to say, Islam, Christianity was very backward until the renaissance.

      The Arabic Islamic world was the most advanced civilisation in the early centuries of the second millennium, whilst the European Christian world was stagnated around the bits of Greek science they could understand.

      In addition to developing from the knowledge of the Greeks in such areas as medicine, they developed our modern mathematical characters and the idea of 0. They also developed a law system where Christians and Jews could peacefully co-exist in Islamic countries, albeit as second class citizens.

      This was a far cry from the situation in Europe where anyone who was non-Christian in the same period was likely to end up dead. Even being suspected of something like witchcraft (normally an elderly woman with some property but no surviving relatives, funny that, eh?) was a death sentence, unless of course you weighed more than a duck.

      Somehow the Muslims in power were more able to tolerate the advance of science than the Christians in power during the same period.

      So the original post seems to be fair in its focus on Christianity as a bad example of established power structures fighting progress with dogma.

      And it still goes on; eggs, sperm, zygotes, blastoclysts and embryos with less nerve tissue than a per rat are claimed to have equal rights to born humans by the Roman Catholic Church.

      Jehovah's Witnesses oppose the transfusion of blood.

      Fundamental Christians deny the vast level of supporting evidence for an ancient naturalistically formed Universe where life developed under the control of natural selection, and insist on a literal 7 x 24-hour day creation. ... of course there are Muslims and Hindus capable of equivalent stupidity, plus stuff like Mormons, Scientologists, etc., but Christianity seem to win the contest as 'religion most likely to stifle scientific advancement'.

      Look at the lobby groups now most opposed to stem cell research...

    6. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Stachel · · Score: 3, Informative

      "they [Arabic Islam] developed our modern mathematical characters and the idea of 0."

      This is actually not true: the concept of zero originates with Hinduism, around the 7th centure BC.:

      http://www.udupipages.com/book/hindhu.html
      http://www.atributetohinduism.com/Advanced_Concept s.htm

      --
      Stachel
    7. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by KidHash · · Score: 1

      May I refer you to the old testament

    8. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by ElectricRook · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      only so long as the results agreed with the religious diatribe of the day

      And how is 17'th century religion that different from todays religions of Political Correctness and Environmentalism?

      Go read an excellent essay on todays blacklist of topics by Paul Graham titled what you can't say.

      --
      - High Tech workers, please say NO to Union Carpenters, their Union sees fit to control our compensation.
    9. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 1

      Thus me using 'developed', instead of 'invented'. ;-)

      The "who invented zero" question depends on whether you're talking about the numeral, or the number.

      Best guess regarding the number is actually the Olmecs, as they definately had it in the 1st Century AD.

      Ptolemy used a sign for zero as an independent number in 130AD.

      The earliest Indian use of zero was as a decimal digit by 300AD, although Brahmagupta (628AD) often gets mentioned as his is the first more-or-less complete work discussing the number zero, Brahmasphutasiddhanta, as your links mention.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0_(number)

    10. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1
      And how is 17'th century religion that different from todays religions of Political Correctness and Environmentalism?

      "Political correctness" is 10% a bunch of idiots who claim to be liberal but have no idea what the word means, and 90% a strawman set up by the right as a (very successful) political maneuver.

      Environmentalism? Please, let's not pretend that environmentalists have any power in a nation where SUVs rule the roads and the president denies the scientific consensus on global climate change.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    11. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Jehovah's Witnesses oppose the transfusion of blood.
      And?

      Do enlighten us. You post this apparently as an example of both "fighting progress with dogma" and resistance to "advance of science."

      All the while ignoring both the -actual- reasons for it, as well as the modern scientific realizations about it.

      So again, do enlighten us further.

    12. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by elemental23 · · Score: 1

      Are you saying the Christiaity only started with the ministry of Jesus Christ?

      Well, yes, actually. Where to you think the name came from?

      The fact that it's an offshoot of Judaism doesn't mean that the religion itself is as old as Judaism.

      --
      I like my women like my coffee... pale and bitter.
    13. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by samjam · · Score: 1

      Well I think you are wrong.

      The first Christians were Jews who recognized Jesus as the Messiah. For tham it was a continutation of their old religion and not an offshoot. I maintain this belief.

      Although the term Christianity came from Christ, greek for Messiah, how sure are you that the term was not known before the greek civilization started?

      Ancient prophesy foretold the birth of Christ and many events, pre-mosaic animal sacrifice was anticipatory to this.
      (For further details if you are interested I suggest you consult Jesus the Christ by James E Talmage available from Amazon). In anycase I contest that for Christians who can believe in a literal creation, foretelling the name of the Messiah is childs play.

      All this, however has nothing to do with the original point, but it does show how little we understand eachothers viewpoint and how ill qualified we are to make judgements on them.

      Even a quick quip on the "birth of Christianity" may have no basis for millions.

      cheers

      Sam

    14. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by graphicsguy · · Score: 1

      It is actually a fork of Judaism (claims to be the true prong of the fork) and hence claims to date back to Adam and before the creation.

      Judaism does NOT claim to date back to creation.

    15. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by 1lus10n · · Score: 1

      We live in the western world and a good portion of science has been created in the western world. The major religion in the western world ? Christianity.

      Its not on him to bash religions that have nothing to do with his post. The fact is that the catholic church has always been anti-science. Hell just look at some of the crap the church and its minions are pulling now.

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
    16. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 1

      ... well, I will give you a brief backgrounder.

      JW's, along with a few other similar Christian adventist belief systems, have a rather poor history when it comes to medical science.

      At one point JW's opposed vaccinations. This was not on any genuine scientific ground but on the grounds of religious superstition. I can validate this satement with quotations fom their literature if you wish. Often JW's or their apologists are totally unaware of their beliefs previous doctrinal revisons. They later revised that teaching.

      Similarly they opposed organ transplants until the mid 1980's. They actually believed (for example) that a person's personality would change after a heart transplant, again, due to religious superstition. They later revised that teaching. Again, I can prove the thoroughly muddled thinking behind the dogma (which had only the lightest of claimed Biblical backing, as with the vaccination prohibiton) by quoting from their literature at the time.

      Their prohibiton against blood is another religious superstition. If you actually study the devlopment of the doctrine you can see it bears no relation to science what-so-ever.

      For example, they oppose the transfusion of whole blood even if death is the likely outcome of this. However, the dogma is not consistant with science.

      If they had an internaly logical objections based upon their religious beliefs one could accept it. Like not eating pork. That's simple. Don't eat pig flesh.

      However, JW's leaders have progressively fiddled with the doctrine. For example, you cannot have a transfusion of blood plasma; this is 99% water. You can however have treatment using blood fractions that are 100% derived from red blood cells. It is like saying don't eat pork, and then disallowing bacon-flavoured crisps (potato chips to Americans), but allowing the consumption of small pork cocktail sauceges.

      The reason that I site them as an example of an attitude is that rather than trying to interface their religious beliefs with the real world in some comprenhensible, logical, consistant manner, they set non-medical church leaders to make pronouncements they do not have the understanding to make, with the resultant illogicities.

      They suspend reason in favour of dogma, which is exactly the atitude of some religionists that stifle science.

      I hope you are suitably enlightened.

    17. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 2, Interesting

      graphicsguy talks sense. If you look at the Biblical account, Adam-Abraham were monotheists, Abraham made a covenant with god, later his descendants entered into the Mosaic (nothing to do with early web-browsers) Law. It is either from the covenant with Abraham (ancestor of the Israelites) or from the Mosiac Law that one can date Judaism. Christianity is based on the belief that a man called Jesus was the Messiach (sp?), the Hebrew term for a saviour prophecied about in the Bible. One can say 'ooo, it most be true, the prophecies were fufilled it says so in the Bible'. One can also say that it is easy for someone to write a story about someone who came and detail how they fufilled the prophecies that made identify them as the Messiah, and for that person to actually not have done any or all of what the story says they did. If one views the simlarities between the Jesus story and the Buddha story, or the Vedic traditons about Krishna, then Jesus actually existing as he is described becomes more doubtful. Buddha was born of a virgin and had 12 disciples, for example. http://www.rastafarispeaks.com/forum/storeroom/con fig.pl?noframes%3Bread=49229 http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr.htm There is a very strong case for Jesus being a wholey or largely mythical person who was deliberatley invented or whose life was elaborated on and fictionalised to form the basis of a religion, blending other stories that were known at the time about various other god-men in other religious traditon. Thus Christianity's claim to pre-date Jesus is as dubious as Islam's claim that Jesus was JUST a prohet and Mohammed was the final messenger, and the similar claims made by Mormon's about Joseph Smith.

    18. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by tilleyrw · · Score: 1

      Jesus was most likely a real person. There is archaelogical evidence of the burial headstone of the brother of Jesus, James(?).

      Research the history of Jesus and it's intersection with the topic "jesus in india".

      Jesus seems to have been a hippy (independent thinker!) and much displeased with the status quo. To escape a pre-arranged marriage he ran away and hitchhiked to India. There, he became quite skilled in the yogic traditions of meditation, asana, spirituality, etc.

      When he returned to middle-east and began sharing his new wisdom, the powers-that-be found the ideas threatening to the current power structure. And so Jesus was executed. End of story.

      Ever notice much the main tenets of Christianity mirror those of evolved yogic thought and spirituality? Most religions are similar in their basic tenets (minus the differing "miracles") because people are the same all over the world.

      Read "Autobiography of a Yogi" by Paramahansa Yogananda for superb insight in the similarities between all people. Much of history owes a great debt to India and Vedic thought.

      --
      This post encoded with ROT26. If you can read it, you've violated the DMCA. Handcuffs please, sergeant.
    19. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by DingerX · · Score: 1

      yeah, okay, so one idjit needs some parchment, can't afford a flock of sheep for a new book, so scrapes over some text he can't read anyway. Does the fact that he's a Christian even enter into his decision to use this parchment?

      And yeah, the church courts told Galileo that he could not sustain as the absolute, unequivocal truth the theory that the sun was the center of the universe. They did not say that he had to hold the unequivocal truth to be the theory that the earth was the center of the universe. You know what? The church courts were right, as most of us believe neither the sun nor the earth to be the center of the universe (it is, in fact, me).
      Anyway, good troll.

    20. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      ...Did you just blame political correctness on the Republicans?

      And here I thought all that Feminism stuff came from the left. Yep, modern feminists, just a bunch of left wingers.

      Sheesh.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    21. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by samjam · · Score: 1

      Not as "Judaism", Judaism as a sect/religion was based on revelations from God through Moses but based on the same religions and teachings that Moses's ancestors practiced, so if you define Judaism as "a sect that sprang up with Moses" then you are right, but if you define it as a formalisation of existing knowledge for specific people who (read Genesis) had proved unowrthy of higher law and therefore received the Mosaic law, then it does go back to the creation.

      I admit my knowledge of prevailing definitions of Judaism may be weak, I perhaps could have chosen a better term to carry my point; however since pre-mosaic sacrifice anticipates the sacrifice of the Messiah, then, from what you say, Christianity precedes Judaism which makes my point just as well. Of course this depends on your definition of Christianity; but if Christ is the Son of God then I feel it can be applied to pre-Christ followers who anticipated and prophesied of Him. If you are interested in such prophesies you might look at http://scriptures.lds.org/tgj/jcprphcs
      or more generally, http://scriptures.lds.org/tgj/contents

      This is all irrellevant to the original point that it is those-in-power who seek to quash advancement.

      I'm sure there is enough for you to read on this if you are interested, but I have made my point.

      I expect if we carry this on it will become the inevitable quibbling over terms; it does not really matter if we agree over whether or not the term Christianity can be applied to what I call Christianity, and I won't presume to imbue more than 20 years of culture into you though a few mere slashdot posts.

      I have enjoyed the conversation though.

      Sam

    22. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by samjam · · Score: 2, Interesting

      These are all good points.

      Interestingly those in the "stories" you refer to did not take their belief merely because they read other "stories" but because of their own experiences with God, which, strangely is a strong force in the lives of many in the less extreme religions.

      For instance, my belief in Jesus Christ is based on my own experiences in relation to the practice of the religion I study and not on account of "ooh, it must be true because of...".

      An interesting thing for you to look into would be the origins of belief and not just the history of belief.

      That there were pre-Christ prophecies is interesting but it was a source of faith to pre-Christ people who believed those prophecies because... because of what?

      I say that my belief comes through the action of the Holy Ghost in my heart when truth is taught, but this is entirely subjective to my own life; I say that a similar action took place in all ages when truth was taught to those who would receive it.

      You may decide this is rather freaky and superfluous, and a complex explaination for a bogus observation*, but if our existance pre-dates the creation and earth life; if we lived in the presence of God before our birth then it is not unusual for God to be able to speak to use through his Spirit convincingly to those who are willing to hear.

      [* I'm looking for truth, not explanations.]

      I only point this out so that you cn be aware that for many their religious belief is not based on some tenuous chain of reasoning but on the actual day-to-day mechanics of following what they have learned by experience to be good, and trying to learn more, yes, a sort of inner journey, but very real. This will of course sound like complete tosh to those who have no experience with it, and will be described as complete tosh by those who have rejected it (perhaps why they rejected it, who can tell?), but I'm doing it for me, not them, and I find it more real than the Millenium Dome, the UK Tax Credits Fiasco (and this government think they can run a national identity database).

      I find it the most satisfying thing in my life. Not because there is a cosy "it will be all-right-for-you" type feeling but because there is a part of me that says "I know" that takes joy and confidence and love in the whole thing. It is jam today and jam tomorrow.

      In short, John 7:17, John 17:3, you have to try it to know, and if you don't you won't. And yes, sometimes it takes extreme circumstances before some people try, but others will say "they just clutched at straws"; other peoples faith can never satisfy you or look reasonable to you.

      For a good short discourse on the development of faith as experienced by individuals, read http://scriptures.lds.org/alma/32

      You will certainly find it interesting, it is the process by which faith is developed, and is more real than tenuous reasoning on imcomplete knowledge.

      I'm happy to discuss this more, but you may prefer to get some Mormon Missionaries in and ask them just how individuals are supposed to get a certain knowledge of God, and then try it! It's a good experiment.

      Interestingly, they won't try and convince you! (Can you believe that in a religion?) They will teach you and encourage you to try what they teach if you want. You will come across things you never imagined could exist, or perhaps you will say you had forgotten a long time ago. If you think it is a trick, why not try and spot the trick?

      It will be interesting anyway, and certainly a new experience, I'd say try it.

      I'm not intending to get in to a long debate, I thought I would give the other view on Monty's excellent summary, and to show how two explanations of the same scene can fail to even overlap.

      Sam

    23. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1
      ...Did you just blame political correctness on the Republicans?

      No, I blame the 90% of the fuss about PC that has no basis on the Republicans.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    24. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by dynamo · · Score: 1

      Gee, it's lucky that's all changed now.

    25. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Pseudonym · · Score: 1
      Galileo proclaimed that the earth wasn't the center of it all. Then the Catholic church made him recant (this was the time of the Inquisition which killed a friend of his just a few years before).

      Interestingly, this happened 100 years or so after Copernicus said much the same thing. Copernicus was not asked to recant, and the church gave him a cushy retirement job as an administrator of a see.

      So what gives? The moral of the story is that it's never about religion, but it's always about politics.

      Consider the plight of stem cell researchers today: Whether or not they get to do their stuff depends not on what the prevailing religions believe, but rather on what kind of person happens to be in power at the time.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    26. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Pseudonym · · Score: 1
      Somehow the Muslims in power were more able to tolerate the advance of science than the Christians in power during the same period.

      ...and Christians were more able to tolerate it in the following period. I fail to see your point.

      And it still goes on; eggs, sperm, zygotes, blastoclysts and embryos with less nerve tissue than a per rat are claimed to have equal rights to born humans by the Roman Catholic Church.

      Interestingly, most Roman Catholic politicians in the US seem to disagree, or at least not let it interfere with their policy-making. Try fitting that into your theory.

      Jehovah's Witnesses oppose the transfusion of blood.

      Only for themselves. They won't stop you getting a transfusion.

      [...] of course there are Muslims and Hindus capable of equivalent stupidity, plus stuff like Mormons, Scientologists, etc., but Christianity seem to win the contest as 'religion most likely to stifle scientific advancement'.

      That's only because Christianity is the biggest religion in your neighbourhood.

      Your problem is that you can't see Sturgeon's Law underneath all of this. Basically, most people suck. Christians happen to be the largest group of people that you can see, so you point to them and say "they suck more than everyone else".

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    27. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, you're wrong. For a start. the James Ossuary is a bone box, not a headstone. And secondly and rather imprtantly it has now been shown to be a forgery.

    28. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 1

      "I fail to see your point."

      That might have something to do with you not seeing it in context to what I was replying to.

      The contention was "religion stifles advancement"

      In response to examples of Christian scientific repression, Mahou argued "ancient geeks were free to test and invent only so long as the results agreed with the beliefs of people in power. during those times some 'religious' people happened to be in power." and argued that the previous post #12869301 was anti-Christian as it didn't give examples from other religions.

      I was pointing out there were not nearly the same number of examples from other religions. Rather than proving this wrong by providing examples, ya know, like we were having a real discussion and all, you whine and miss the point.

      If you'd bothered to read the post properly I actually say "So the original post seems to be fair in its focus on Christianity as a bad example of established power structures fighting progress with dogma.". My point was there for you if you were courteous enough to read it before posting.

      Any other threads you need explaining to you, feel free to ask me...

      "Interestingly, most Roman Catholic politicians in the US seem to disagree, or at least not let it interfere with their policy-making. Try fitting that into your theory."

      As I am talking about Vatican policy, y0u know the people who run the RC Church, Pope Fester and all that, rather than religious people in politics, it does fit rather nicely, thank you.

      If you pay me I can even tell you what logicsal fallacy you just tried to use. You seem to have got a bumper box of sarcasm and no idea where to use it.

      "Only for themselves. They won't stop you getting a transfusion."

      As per my other comments on Jehovah's Witnesses, it is the mental attitude revealed by such doctrines that supports the original contention, that "Religion stifles advancement in our species". I suspect you didn't read them and just skimmed looking for bits you could poke at. BAD IDEA. It just makes you look like you've not bothered to read a thread you've responded to or have a problem with reading comprehension.

      "That's only because Christianity is the biggest religion in your neighbourhood."

      The entire point being made is historically Christianity HAS been more opposed to scientific progress than any other major religion. I am sorry you missed it. Start at the top and try again.

      Of course, if you have evidence of _similar_ Hindu, Muslim, Seikh, Buddhist, Confucianist, Taoist, Anamist, secular or Jewish scientific suppression, this is the point you can roll it out. Go on then.

      "Your problem is that you can't see Sturgeon's Law underneath all of this. Basically, most people suck. Christians happen to be the largest group of people that you can see, so you point to them and say "they suck more than everyone else"."

      I am not nearly as ignorant as you'd like to think. Your apologism is ill-informed. I actually study this shit. Thus I make it my business to develop an objective view, not just one based on the happenchance of my place of birth and enculturation.

      Whilst everyone sucks, historically there is no religion which has a comparable track-record of scientific repression and opposition to Christianity.

      Please feel free to rebutt this statement with evidence. So far evidence has been produced about Christian scientific oppression, and comparisons made with liberal attitudes to science in other religions. No one's bought one shred of evidence that other religons have the same record of scientific oppression over history, although it's obvious many people have a knee-jerk reaction to criticsm of Christianity.

      Fortunately Christianity in the developed world (apart from America) rarely has this characteristic anymore due to increasing secularisation. In America you are still likely to find people who will believe the creation myth of a bronze-age goatherd as a literal revelation from god.

    29. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sam...

      I mention JW's and someone goes into apologist mode, I mention Joe Smith and someone links to lds resources - I have to say I preferred the tone of your post though.

      When we talk about the validation of religious belief by internalised experience we enter an area where there is less and less useful data.

      I can take you, a Christian friend of mine, someone from the local Spirtualist Church, a UFO abductee, a Jehovah's Witness, a Voodoo practitoner, assorted other animists, a Buddhist, a Scientologist... ... and they will all likely claim internal religious experiences that validate their belief structure.

      The curious thing is that some of these experiences will be anathematic to others. Some will interpret others religious experience as possesion by evil spirits, or body thetans. Others will view them as forms of self-dellusion.

      Now either all of these people are right, and they are tapping into something Universal and then wrapping it up in the referentials of their enculturation, or one of these people is right and the rest of us are doomed! doomed I tell you, or they are all wrong.

      Autosuggestion seems the most probable answer to me.

      If there is some Universal force they are experiencing it's strange that this leads to denial of others similar experiences as being authentic or from god. If only one 'way' assures us of a good outcome, then god is biased and is not fit for the 'job', as one's religious way is almost always a result of our place and family of birth and the idea of an unfair god damning people in ignorance is just offensive.

      Thus the experiences being belief-mediated internal self-validation is the simplest explanation.

      I am afraid that no matter how nice a Mormon you might be, your internal valdidations are of no more weight than a Papuan Anamist with a bone through his nose.

      The Mormons actually have a pretty good record regarding science. Some doctrinal points are nonsensical on points of fact; the tribe of Israelites journying to the New World, which has as little archaelogical evidence as the 40-years-in-the-wilderness of the Jews.

      But they actually build and run good Universities and have steadily distanced themselves from more extreme doctrines like polygamy, the second-class status of black people, and now it is hard to get a Mormon to discuss the doctrines which state the most exemplary Mormons become a 'god' in their own right and will dwell on a planet somewhere and have lots of spirit babies with many wives who will be sent to fill the bodies of intelligent being being born somewhere else in the Universe. (To those who've not studided comparative religions, I shit you not).

      But having been born in a religious cult, I have severe misgivings about the use of shunning to punish church members who go astray. Although the Mormons are not as bad as some groups, the use of shunning is a crude control technique.

      Effectively it means if you don't do what the local church says you should do, they will stop all of the people you know from that religion talking to you - even family. As many religions who use shunning encourage people to limit relationships with outsiders, this means if someone leaves such a high-control group they effectively have no friends, family or support circle to turn to. This keeps them in.

      Of course, I know more about Mormonism as it is practised in the USA, where shunning is a problem and something a lot of ex-Mormons feel very bitter about. Have a look on line for the support groups if you don't believe me. The UK may be more liberal. It's curious, you're the second Mormon from the UK I have met oline in a few months.

    30. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by samjam · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I hear all of what you say and don't disagree.

      I don't expect my validations to hold more weight with you than your own validations, but its good that you can see that this is what it comes down to, and its nice for me to realise I'm not looking for anyone elses approval of the current state of my learning process.

      As far as your theoretical group of friends, some of them may be lying and one of the liars may even be a mormon. Its had to know what experiences a person has had.

      As far as an unfair God damming people, you are right it is damn offensive (pardon) and such a god deserves no respect or worship; which leads to the idea that his "devotees" and "worshippers" may not fully know him, if they think this is what god is like.

      In my experience, belief in god often comes down to description of god.

      On your point of extreme mormon doctrines and comparitive religion, I have never come across a book that accurately represented mormon belief that was not published by a mormon, and have come to respective conclusions about catholics etc.

      [I was very happy when I came across a Catholic Priests life story where his mentor-priest said (roughly) "Look, nobody in their right mind believes for a minute that unbaptised babies will go to hell, but we can't explain it"]

      You might find a copy of Spencer J Palmers "Comparitive Religion" (compares mormonism to other religions) interesting. I think it forms part of the BYU religion curriculum.

      As for doctrine, I recall in the UK about 20 years ago a mormons might get excited about "sensational doctrine" which often was just gossip, and not checked against doctrinal sources. Mormons believe they can become gods about as much as the bible teaches, which is actually pretty definite. Blacks have never been second class citizens for mormons, and never "second class mormons" any more than non-Levite jews were second class jews. Mormons have not distanced themselves from polygamy as a doctrine, but do not practice it. (BTW did you know the first wife had to give permission to subsequent marriages?)

      As for control and shunning, I think it is not a good way to behave and it is contrary to mormon doctrine. I have heard this claim regarding various religions and have no reason do doubt it; however attending a mormon ward council would show how difficult it is to get anyone to do anything at all; but certainly any form of control or compulsion is wrong, and severely condemmned in mormon scripture: http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/121/41
      No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
      (See also v36,37)

      So where this happens it is just a case of human failing, maybe even by church leaders, and very regrettable. I have to say that the reference I cited is one of the most often taught doctrines in priesthood meetings, you remind me why this needs to be the case.

      I'm not even supposed to say "do it because I'm your dad and I say so" and I need reminding about that; thanks!

      I think some of what you observe may stem from the effects of religion on culture in areas of high religious density, we have a mildly expressive phrase among friends that goes "Utah mormons..."; but in their defense actual Utah mormons I have met have been very caring and sensitive.

      Finally can I congratulate us both for having participated in the most reasonable religious converasation that I believe has ever taken place on slashdot. I respect you as a sane reasoning human and would not be sorry if we met.

      Sam

    31. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by johansalk · · Score: 1

      What people often fail to realize is that the Islamic civilisation was a ***Western*** civilisation. There is no dispute about this point amongst scholars, but the public ignorance of it is profound. Western civilisation as we know today has its roots in ancient Greece and ancient Israel, and the Islamic civilisation was essentially a mixture of Plato and the Bible. If people understood this point they would have less of a problem understanding the history of the West and the Mediterranean Basin that is Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. It's not really a question of "us versus them"; they *are* us!

    32. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by climb_no_fear · · Score: 1

      Jehovah's Witnesses oppose the transfusion of blood.

      Only for themselves. They won't stop you getting a transfusion.


      No, because they are a minor sect with little or no political clout. If they did have any, they would probably not be any different than any other religion, trying to foist their opinions onto others. When I say "they", I do realize that not all religious individuals act this way but somehow organized religions as a whole seem to.

    33. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 1

      Well said; and if anyone breaks their rules, they are shunned.

      As JW's are encouraged not to have any friends who are NOT JW's, this typically means the threat of having no friends in the world who will talk to you if you break the rules is a very strong control mechanism - one of the identifiers of a cult or high-control group.

      You can bet is they had political clout they would be equally nasty in their use of it. Hell, they backed Falwel in a tax case for Christ's sake and were a UNited Nations NGO at the same time as saying the UN was the 'whore of Babylon' in the Bible!

    34. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 1

      Mmmm... well we might degree over the phrasing but up until September 30, 1978, non-white Mormon's did not have quite the same status; I quote from the presentation by President N. Eldon Tanner; "Accordingly, all worthy male members of the Church may be ordained to the priesthood without regard for race or color." This was not the case before that date. I also know from growing up in a cult that the further away you are from headquarters the more different it is, and can well believe that Mormon Society in Utah has some problems from the high concentration that you would not experience as a UK follower. And yes, this has been an encouragingly open and friendly discussion, I've enjoyed it as well. Keep your head screwed on your shoulders and develop a PERSONAL realtionship with god as you see him.

    35. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by samjam · · Score: 1

      [Re: Nathan Eldon Tanner, you are correct, but non-Levite Jews were also denied the priesthood but were not second class; however I undersand your point and the bad feeling often caused and am glad it is no longer the case]

      I agree a personal relationship with God is required and should be developed. Anything less is to miss the point entirely. Being saved is not the same as talking about being saved; but where religion becomes culture I suppose it becomes easy to be "mainstream" and miss the point and not notice.

      I'm convinced we will meet many old friends in heaven and stop surprised "are YOU here too?" I look forward to it.

      Cheers!

      Sam

    36. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      OK, I see your point. Let me backpedal for a moment...

      The contention was "religion stifles advancement"

      My contention is: "Politics stifles advancement."

      I don't think it's valid to count the number of times that certain religions were responsible for stifling scientific advancement and conclude that a certain religion is worse for science than some other religion. It's mostly an accident of history that during the times and in the places where the greatest potential for scientific advancement was possible (and actual), Christian organisations and people have been in political power. As a result, you're focussing on the "Christian" part and not the "political power" part.

      The subtext appears to be that Christianity is somehow more anti-science than other religions, but I don't believe this to be a valid conclusion.

      I believe that the confusion (between "Christian" and "political") is Christianity's own fault. This is why I strongly believe in the separation of church and state. If you have a healthy separation, the church doesn't get blamed for the actions of the state.

      Fortunately Christianity in the developed world (apart from America) rarely has this characteristic anymore due to increasing secularisation.

      Perhaps that's the reason for the misunderstanding. I'm not from or in the USA, so I don't see Christianity as any kind of threat.

      But even so, wouldn't you agree that we're in a time of scientific advancement that's greater than at any point in history previously? Especially in the USA? Even though the Religious Right appears to be in power? Yes, they're against stem cell research et al, but research in biology seems to be going on unhindered.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    37. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I agree that your speculations about Jesus' life are plausible, even if there still is no evidence of his life. The ossuary produced a few years ago (2002) claimed to be the tomb of his brother, James, was a hoax. The best analysis of an actual biography of Jesus of which I know is King Jesus, which describes a hidden heir to the Hebrew monarchy recently conquered by the Romans.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    38. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      We recently wrangled over the possibility that Christians deliberately destroyed Archimedes texts for palimpsests. My speculation was based only on economics, that making new parchment was always cheaper than the value in destroyed thousand-year-old property. Do you have any other evidence?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    39. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 1

      ... and like you say, god is all in the definiton really.

      I am an humanist, but I feel a humanist feels the same way, essentially, about beauty in nature or unwarranted kindness in humans.

      I might not attribute it to Vishu, Thor, Yahweh, Allah or Mithras. It might motivate me to do different things.

      But the feeling in our 'hearts' is the same. We just experience it and rationalise it differently.

      Martin Luther King once said 'The slow curve of humanity it towards justice'. I feel that religon was and is part of that curve, for all it's flaws, but that humnanism (which is like simplified Christianity (be nice to each other)without any Jesus) is equally a part of this.

      Where we differ however, is that you are part of an existing religious traditon, with beliefs stemming from that, whilst I see the future in extending human rights and decreasing the dreadful disparities in wealth and opportunity.

      I see this as our job. We can all do a bit, staring off with fair-trade coffee and working outwards from there, LOL!

      Now, as long as people with religious beliefs don't try to restrict the _lawful_ (i.e. living life without harming others) pursuit of life, liberty and happiness of people who might (to give a silly example) want to eat fish on Fridays, when their religion doesn't hold with that, I'm fine with people beleiving what they want.

      Whatever the afterlife is or isn't, if we try and make the world a better place NOW (which is something theists and non-theists can both do), then we'll sort out the after-life if/when we get to it. Being nice just because being nice is nice isn't a bad thing. Quite the opposite - and 'good works' are seen as important by many religions as well as humanists (I actually hate that term, but have none better as calling myself an atheist would be like an adult calling themselves an asantaist; they're not going to define themselves by something they don't believe exists, are they?).

      The danger is SOME (not Mormons) beliefs are adventist (whether they're Christian or not) and expect the world will end. Soon. Around 30% of American's believe in the Rapture!!! And most of those believe they will float up to heaven in their lifetimes and all the bad people will be left on earth!!

      Now, quite frankly, having grown-up in an adventist cult, where the end was going to come 'in this generation' (but where the term 'generation' keep on being changed as previous definitons became invalid), I know the danger of this.

      It means people are distracted from making the world better NOW. They expect god to come and kiss it better, so why bother? This can extend from what importance a career has to the attitude to world affairs.

      It is interesting to note the 'live for today' attitude to the environment that is actually American policy at this time is from a country with a high proportion of people who feel god is going to bring an end to things in some way with a few decades at most. It contrasts wildly with the attitude of Europe, which is pretty secular now.

      Whether that's a causal link or not, I don't know.

      Take care!

    40. Re:Religion stifles advancement in our species by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 1

      I'm European, but I have a lot of contact with the 'States, and yes, maybe that's why you don't see what I see. I do agree that despite the political status quo in the USA, things continue. Especially in other parts of the world, although in the US also.

      But look at WHO oppose certain research, or try to have Creationism taught in classrooms.

      They are the _literalistic_ religionists.

      In the past, Christianity for example, was far more literal. Now many people see many parts of the Bible as metaphors. They don't believe that god made the world in 6 x 24 hour days, for example.

      It is how locked-in to the surce texts a religion is that determines its liklihood of suppressing advancement. Now, yes, the European Christian church had LOADS of opportunities to supress science at the time it was literalistic. And it did. In the examples I know of, where other religions had the opportunity to suppress science, they did not. Not surpising considering Mohammed said 'teaching science is like praying'. The prevailing religious superstision regarding lunar eclispses died out in India when a scientific theory was developed, and no one got burnt or threatened with excommunication. Thus I feel Christianity as expressed by the society of the time was proportionately more scientifically repressive. Look how recently psychiatric opinions about homosexuality were shaped by the religion of Western society.

      Funnily enough NOW there are Islamic Creationists with their literal beliefs from the Qu'ran and Hindu Creationists with theirs from the Vedic scriptures.

      However their beliefs are not really interfering with scientific progress in the way similar beliefs influenece research in the USA.

      Maybe this literalistic religious belief is something that is seen most sharply when the society that holds a belief is threatened with change. A theory of eclipses didn't change Indian soceity one jot.

      But letting go of a literal belief in the Bible (or any other holy book) means a whole load. If it is literally true, you follow the rules and you're gonna be okay. You can explain the world around you. You have the answers you need. Certainty.

      If it isn't literally true, then anyone's interpretation of it within broad bounds is as likely to be correct as anyone else's.

      Maybe Jesus was just a guy with some good ideas who got nailed to a tree for using a metaphor amongst literalistic people (son of god)?

      Maybe Jesus' message was just humanitarianism and it was wrapped up in religious mummary because of the times it occured in.

      Back to letting go of literal beliefs. Once you start, look what happens. Look at European society and the change it has undergone in the past 50 years with increasing secularisation. Obviously people go to school, work, marry, have kids... nothing much has changed. But the way even the religious people see the world has changed dramatically.

      Not so with many in the USA. And they are scared of the changes they do see in other societies. Multiculturalism, religious equality, equal rights to people with different sexualities. The big changes Europe has and is seeing and still isn't collapsing. They see this as the end of the world as they know it. And it is. Despite the fact the world did change like that for most Europeans, and rather noticably didn't end.

      So they cling to literalism to like some sort of lucky charm. It helps them maintain their world view and makes them feel they are right despite all the evidence agianst it.

      I gather you're Christian, but equally guage you're not in this catagory!

  21. Getting the snot beat out of us by the by XNuke · · Score: 1

    big strong ones since they actually had a competitive advantage then.

  22. The same thing current grads are doing... by LordEd · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... would you like fries with that?

    --------
    +1 sarcastic

  23. food for the animals by josepha48 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    .. probably most geeks would be dead, with our bad eyesight, and all, only a few really smart ones would be saved ..

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!
    Does slashdot hate my posts?

    1. Re:food for the animals by packetl0ss · · Score: 1

      What makes you assume that a "geek" has bad eyesight? Many people I know of with bad eyesight aren't remotely "geeks" in any way.

    2. Re:food for the animals by Stoutlimb · · Score: 1

      I think that geekiness is a survival trait for people with bad eyes. We make ourselves indispensible to non-geeks by learning to do something that's pretty much impossible to do without devoting one's entire life to studying.

  24. building garages by The+Datamangler · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm building my 30x50' garage- except for the slab, I'm framing, roofing, wiring the whole thing myself. I'm what I guess "they" call an experienced DIY'er. My money making background is in remote data collection, so all this stuff I just sort of forge ahead and go for it. I rely heavily on the advice of friends and an amazing brother in law, but in the end, I'm the one that has to redo my mistakes and live with what I build.

    I think tinkering with wood would be a great alternative to coding.

    For resources, other than people, I get alot of stuff off websites experienced tradespeople put up. I have heavy guilt from never contributing the paypal 5 bucks, though. I know when I eventually get my website up about building plank wooden Dory's, I'll never get a dime as Karmic retribution.

    --
    sig wig dig jig rig big mig fig gig higg rig pig tig zig
  25. Probably Priests of sorts by retostamm · · Score: 1
    I listened to this set of lectures on the History of Science and thought that I'd probably be some kind of priest, predicting solar eclipses and calculating best paths for Aequaducts etc.



    But thinking about it, I found that I'd probably be way too stupid for it - you can't simulate anything. Pretty amazing what these folks did.

    1. Re:Probably Priests of sorts by Knara · · Score: 1
      Perhaps, but then again it's amazing what you can achieve if you feel the pressure to figure something out. It's something I've been experiencing since I left college, personally. It hasn't been particularly hard to figure out most things in IT. My brain has stopped trying to figure out unique, systemic ways to solve problems and instead immediately starts telling me to search google for someone else's answer.

      It troubles me.

  26. Not quite ancient, but... by oldosadmin · · Score: 1

    Get your old PC up again @ http://oldos.org/ :)

    Some of us LIKE playing with pre-pentium machines ;)

    --
    Jay | http://oldos.org
  27. Printmaking by Dibson · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've just begun doing some printmaking at home. Doing linocuts and printing them by hand on paper. Just looking up information, I found Escher did this as well. Certainly an artistic figure many geek-types have taken to.

    It's not difficult or expensive to do (all you need is the linoleum, some blades, a brayer and ink), but I find that many traits good coders have apply well to it (like everything, right? Also think design/typography). I find it a satisfying after a day of programming.

    --
    -- Why keep us waiting? We are not made of time.
  28. Musician by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not tech, but I bet a lot of geek minds that are attracted to programming languages are also attracted to the languages of music.

    Also designing and building musical instruments would be pretty geeky even in the 16th century.

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    1. Re:Musician by fifedrum · · Score: 1

      I'm in to fife and drum, and I made my own drum from parts. There are some that make their own hoops, shells and other pieces from scratch though, and that is pretty geeky. Uniforms from broad cloth and shoes from leather are also pretty geeky things to do for the living history buff.

    2. Re:Musician by EnsignFlandry · · Score: 1

      >>Also designing and building musical instruments would be pretty geeky even in the 16th century

      I know how to do that. In 1995 I went to http://www.timelessinstruments.com/classes.html Fun stuff. Well worth the 2 months of living in the Saskatchewanian boondocks. (Wait a minute, that's redundant...)
      I never really got off the ground with instrument making though. I piddled around sporadically with it for a few years, until in '99 I screwed up BIG TIME and went culinary school. Now I'm stuck in a stable career with union benefits and wages.

    3. Re:Musician by KillerHamster · · Score: 1

      I think there is definitely some kind of connection between an interest in computers and an interest in music. Many of the CS students I know play some kind of instrument. I play the organ, and I've even tried building a pipe organ. Several hundred years ago, pipe organs were just about the most complex piece of machinery there was, and I'm sure it had to have been the geeky types that were drawn to the art and science of organ building.

    4. Re:Musician by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > Many of the CS students I know play some kind of instrument. I play the organ...

      Interestingly, many CS students have no alternative but to "play the organ"...

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
  29. Bee Keeping by cpuffer_hammer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It is not so different,
    Boxes with cards, become supers with frames.
    It is in some ways the an early nano-tech with thousands of simple machines carrying out tasks that create something much larger than any of them will understand.
    There are even bugs like Varroa Destructor that can make your hive crash.
    There is even over clocking, some people build hives with two queens (colonies of bees) in the same box, or would that be multi-processing.
    It is a bit like the free software community there is more to be gained by sharing idea with other bee keepers than can ever be gained by keeping ideas to your self.

    Well it is fun and you get sweet stuff to share with people.

    1. Re:Bee Keeping by MikeyToo · · Score: 1

      You can even build your own server farm (apiary). Deal with viruses (foulbrood - yeah, I know it isn't a virus). Piracy (bears destroying your hives for the honey and brood). There's even some invention involved. We used to have a solar-powered capping separator that we built out of a 30 gallon galvanized trash can. New of course. I couldn't call it fun though. Unless you have masochistic tendancies.

      --
      "Well Ranger Brad, I'm a scientist. I don't believe in anything." - Dr. Roger Fleming
  30. Sailing by magefile · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Lots of room there for tinkering if you want. Adjust/add/remove/replace pulleys, change how tight the outhaul and other ropes are, sand or otherwise modify your centerboard or daggerboard ... all sortsa fun stuff!

  31. Cave Man Geeks watch grass grow in the summer by xmas2003 · · Score: 1
    --
    Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
  32. accounting and moneylending by utopia27 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...I've been learning the use (though not the spelling) of abacus and slide rule - true archaotech. Slide rules are likely to go the way of the dodo Real Soon Now (TM). As a math nerd, I'm also learning the theory - I can build one better than I can use one. A computerized emulator (ironic, no?) is available at: http://www.techweb.rfa.org/index.php?option=conten t&task=view&id=86&Itemid=114&limit=1&limitstart=3

    I've done duty occasionally as an accountant/treasurer for various organizations, as well as property manager/stockist for several businesses. Bean counters have always been in demand.

    I've done a fair trade on e-bay selling painted tabletop miniatures (toy soldiers). I'm pretty sure working full time I could have gotten on as an artisan - pottery decoration? illuminator?

    Last but not least, I can carry a tune on about four or five woodwinds (sax, flute, recorder, tin whistle, little bit of clarinet). I'm not sure if I could've made it as an itinerant musician (maybe associated with a theater troupe), but it almost certainly would've appealed more than scratch farming.

    All taken together, I'd bet on bean counter, though maybe travelling merchant..

    1. Re:accounting and moneylending by cathouse · · Score: 1

      A little over ten years ago, driven by frustration over both my own low level of competance and the terrible quality of every book on * SLIDERULES that I'd been able to find in many years of searching, I speant about three months brute-forcing the rules for using almost all of the scales on the K&E Log-Log Duplex DeciTrig sliderule, which is the standard against which other sliderules are compared.

      Generating the rules turned out to be the easy part of the job--*Proving* them was the most difficult work of my life, driving me to tears and black depression on several ocassions. The end result, which easily fits on both sides of two 4x6 file cards, is the simple rules for all of the operations on all of the standard scales, excepting only the Log-Log scales.

      If any /. ers would like a copy of these cards, just send the usual stamped, self-addressed envelope to:
      Silverhammer
      P.O. Box 556
      Cazadero, CA 95421-0556

      It will be interesting to see how many /. readers are interested in using the old slipstick. A few dozen responses would be a happy suprise, but just to cover my ass I'd better limit it to the first 1000.

      --
      Thelma, I'm not making ANY deals.
  33. Geeks have always been around by bursch-X · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm pretty sure many would get into clocks, clockworks, automats and mechanical toys.

    There's been a long geek tradition with making automats and mechanical toys, and funny enough the Japanese in the Edo period (1600 onwards) were really good at that stuff, because "inventions" were not allowed in that era. The feudal lords were afraid "inventions" could be used against them, so only fun automats ("karakuri ningyo" etc.) were considered harmless enough, that people were allowed to "invent" if it was for mechanical toys and automats. This started a real boom of the production of ever more amazing geek gadgets.

    --
    There are two rules for success:
    1. Never tell everything you know.
    1. Re:Geeks have always been around by digitect · · Score: 1

      Great post.

      I've never studied Japanese history, but the ideas you mentioned in one paragraph really help me to make sense of what I see in their culture today. The Japanese love toys and gadgets. And they generally do not shoot the moon with new inventions, prefering to "refine" an existing idea, even until it is superior to the "new tech".

      Both these could be explained by this history, thanks for adding a whole new topic to explore.

      --
      There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
    2. Re:Geeks have always been around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be "automata". Automats are fast food places.

  34. ...And Farming by breadbot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There is no end to the invention you can pour into growing plants and taking care of animals.

    Being not very far descended from farmers, I have to say that agriculture of any kind is a great target for creativity. And a couple of centuries ago, a heck of a lot of the world's population was subsistence farming.

    You have to plan for the seasons, account for risks (weather, sickness), do more with less effort, take care of your tools and your land, preserve foods, try to maintain nutrition through a long winter. Some of it you can figure out on your own, and some of it you really need to learn from those who have gone before you ...

    ... But I digress. Farming rewards intelligence and hard work. And it punishes stupidity and sloth with just about the stiffest penalties I can think of -- starvation of not just yourself, but your family as well. Darwin's hand at work, shaping the geeks of today over millenia past.

  35. ancient tech? by FlashBuster3000 · · Score: 1

    mh, i use linux

  36. SCA of course by obeythefist · · Score: 3, Informative

    A lot of "geeks" I know are all members of the SCA. SCA arts and sciences encompass a wide range of reasonably geeky activities, including but not limited to brewing beer, smithing armour and weapons, leatherworking, costuming, fighting in armour, archery and so on.

    A large amount of effort and detail is put into the crafting of authentic armour and weaponry, and the enthusiasm and energy dedicated to these tasks often exclude the demands of a more normal, healthy lifestyle, thus making these a small part of larger geekdom.

    --
    I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    1. Re:SCA of course by utopia27 · · Score: 1

      ah! not to forget heraldry!

  37. leonardo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But leonardo da vinci was a faggot. Are there such things as gay geeks?

  38. Engineering and Mathematics by dutky · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Both engineering and mathematics are ancient disciplines, with origins dating back almost as far as written history itself. The ancient Babylonians, Sumerians and Egyptians were aware of mathematics to the extent that they were able to contruct mathematical proofs for the same geometric theorems that we all learned in high school. These same cultures obviously had a superb understanding of engineering in order to be able to build monumental architechture that stood for millenia, all without the benefit algebra or decimal arithmetic (much less, calculus).

    There is no reason to think that the sorts of folks that became engineers or mathematicians 5000 years ago were, tempermentally, any differnt from the sorts of folks that become engineers or mathematicians today.

    There were, no doubt, other highly skilled and technical professions that would have attracted ancient geeks: other's have mentioned smithing, scribing is another possability (just being literate enough to read and write was analogous to the general level of education of most geeks today), as is accountancy (conducting simple arithmetic without the benefit of decimal numbers must have required great patience and dedication). In the far east, at least since about 200 B.C., there was a good chance that anyone with reasonable education would have become a government functionary under the Confucian civil service system. I also suspect that, in other times, when people's conception of the world was very different from ours, many geeks may have gone into fields that would seem highly esoteric by modern standards: ancient geeks may have become musicians, artists, poets or monks as a means of persuing the life of the mind.

    Finally, we should recognize the uncomfortable fact that most ancient geeks probably never got the opportunity to persue any career whatsoever. Throughout most of history, most people, no matter what their personal interests or inate abilities, were destined to be peasant farmers, servants, slaves or other bondsmen, like their fathers and grandfathers and so on. The idea that people, no matter what their station by birth, should be able (or even required) to choose their path in life, is a thoroughly modern concept.

    1. Re:Engineering and Mathematics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'Throughout most of history, most people, no matter what their personal interests or inate abilities, were destined to be peasant farmers, servants, slaves or other bondsmen, like their fathers and grandfathers and so on.'

      This suggests that you think that the mass of people were in some way enslaved by the structure of society for 'most of history'. Many of the most famous ancient geeks came from non-geek (and often lower social-echelon) parents. Until the (German) invention of compulsory state schooling there was no obvious single point in early youth at which someone could shine at a skill outside their normal environment, but if you were good enough you could.

      It's much the same today. I suspect many people exist who could have written great books, or made great discoveries, were it not for the fact they were 'wage-slaves'. In fact, there is a well-established current social trend towards turning your back on civilisation, and returning to the life of a peasant farmer.

  39. Railroading... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Between my first job and my second job, I spent a summer in a railroad museum in Vermont, where I touched to many rail trades, from painting old cars to firing a steam engine. If ever I was sent 100 years in the past, I'll go working on the railroad...

  40. Chain Mail by obrienb · · Score: 1

    I enjoy brewing my own beer and I also make chain mail. There are lot's of good sites about chain mail. A good place to start is The Ring Lord.

    1. Re:Chain Mail by Phong1123 · · Score: 1

      Hi all,
      I also make chainmaille. It's a great way to do something fun that doesn't involve annoying ringtones.
      If anyone's interested in learning how to make maille, check out my site, http://theringlord.org/phong It has links to other resources as well.

      -phong

  41. Brazing! Re:Welding by WarPresident · · Score: 1

    Not so ancient, but I have been spending a lot of time with my TIG welder lately. Built an entertainment center out of aluminum and oak ply.

    I wouldn't think you'd get a good weld joint between the aluminum and oak... I've done some CroMoly brazing for a recumbent bike, too cheap for a TIG setup.

    During the summer break, I'm building a Greenland Kayak.

    --
    Here come da fudge!
  42. Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    If you want to get a feel for what pre-history was like for ancient geeks, just install and run Debian, the Sanskrit of Linux.

  43. Drafting/Technical Illustration by pipingguy · · Score: 1


    Learn precision drawing on paper with the old tools (T-squares, pencils, compasses - it's techno-Zen) and/or the ability to effectively express a physical thing/abstract concept with a simple hand-drawn sketch. These skills are being lost.

  44. apprentice or clergy by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 1

    If you were lucky, you'd find yourself apprenticed to a craftsman and learning a trade. You might also choose to join the church. Those would be the only categories of "employment" where you might stretch your brain; aside from that, you'd probably become a soldier or a farmer.

  45. Pillars of the Earth by hlee · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Recently read "Pillars of the Earth" by Ken Follet. Fantastic story, not to mention a wealth of detail on the architecture and building of cathedrals in 12th century England.

    If you think you life is tough now, this book will open your eyes on how hard life used to be the past few thousand years.

    1. Re:Pillars of the Earth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The author's name is Ken Follett (double t, as the library insisted when I tried to look up the author)

  46. Architect or Alchemist by rips123 · · Score: 1

    Depending on the period in history, my choices would have to vary.

    Before computers were all the rage (child of the 70's) I used to want to be an architect/civil engineer as it involved design and factoring in a compromise between a bunch of disparate systems (electricity, structural integrity, water, waste water, heating, sun/wind exposure, fire resistance, etc).

    If I had to jump in the wayback machine, I'd probably take up alchemy or something that involved creating/designing new materials. Anyway, no matter the era there's bound to be jobs that would fulfil geek factor.

    Remember though that if lived way back there, very few of us would have the opportunity to learn to read let alone to pursue a career.

    1. Re:Architect or Alchemist by ncrantz · · Score: 1

      Your last sentence is key.
      Historically choice was a fiction. You did what you were born to do. In the peasant world the 'geeks' would have been those lucky enough to be guildmen.

      Even then your life and livelihood was totally dependent on the whim of inbred nobility and their ability to control the mercenary companies in the region. Even the mercenaries may have been once "free men" pressed into service at one time or another.

      You did what you did to survive. The notion of choice is a modern conceit.

      If I could choose I would choose to be king.

  47. no relation by tdmg · · Score: 1

    The three biggest geeks I know are a:

    1. pro flash programmer / professional chef

    2. mech. engineer / vintage motorcycle repareman / gunsmith

    3. elect. engineer / painter / philosopher

    Their passions are not related to what they do that's techy, but what they enjoy doing in their spare time. Where-ever smart, motivated, skilled individuals are needed you'll find geeks. I know MIT grads that are butchers, lawyers, etc... It's not technology that makes the geek. It's their intensity, knowledge, and enthusiasm.

    I mentioned this before in a post of mine and TheCamper (827137) mentioned this above, but most geeks were probably in the church. All the smartest people joined the church, which would include geeks. It's just that now geeks have returned into the gene pool (sorta), so there's a preponderance of them, and they have just latched onto the feild of technology because it's geared to their skills and an area where major advancements by individuals is common.

    Just before computers, geeks were in the feilds of physics and chemistry. These feilds are more challenging, so not all geeks could get involved. Computers and much easier and more widely available, so it's no wonder that their are more computer geeks than any other type of geek.

    --
    "Man, I am so unbelievably stupid."
  48. They struggled to survive, like everybody else. by nerdup · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A hundred or a thousand years ago, large portions of the population didn't have time to sit at their desks and play around with "hobbies". If your entire waking life is spent trying to scrape a living out of semi-fertile ground on one leg because you lost the other one to infection after dropping a rock on your toe, your options for being a geek are limited. SCA fantasies notwithstanding, if you lived in the middle ages it didn't matter how smart or creative you were if you were born to the wrong parents. If you had a brain for math and logic, you would be free to think about such things while digging up weeds, but applying them to any sort of nerdy pursuit was way beyond the means of your average (read: non-noble) person.

    It's only in the last hundred or so years that our technology and standard of living has allowed non-wealthy people to fulfil their potential regarding intellectual pursuits. Asking what "nerds" did before there were computers and high technology is like asking what fighter pilots did before there were planes... they worked at normal jobs trying to survive, just like everybody else.

  49. Well, duh... by eurleif · · Score: 1

    We would build a time machine to travel forward in time and give a 100% accurate reply to this Ask Slashdot.

  50. Prospecting/Mining by core+plexus · · Score: 1
    I search for gold, other metals, and gemstones, as well as fossils and artifacts. I've done quite well at it, in fact. And even though I use modern tools, the basic tools are hundreds of years old: muscle-powered shovel, pick, pan, and sluice. And, of course, the power of observation.

    -cp-

    The Field Guide to Alaska Rocks and Minerals

  51. Strings by opencity · · Score: 1

    I play stringed instruments. The guitar has passed through a well funded techno arms race since the early 50s but is still based on the older technology. The sitar stabilized technologically around 300 years ago.

    Some linguist has a theory that music was used to teach counting, counting used to lead while taking aim at dinner with a spear.

    Whether music has been improved by technology is OT but if someone wants a rant on that get in touch (Short Answer: yes and no)

    --
    Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it.
  52. Covered in Shit. by jericho4.0 · · Score: 1
    MORTICIAN: Must be a king.
    CUSTOMER: Why?
    MORTICIAN: He hasn't got shit all over him.

    We all would have been what our fathers were.

    --
    "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
  53. bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess you're ignoring that it was the monastaries that kept a lot of this information alive after Western Civilization collapsed with the Roman Empire or that many Islamic scholars were studying and advancing mathematics.

    1. Re:bullshit by BerntB · · Score: 2, Interesting
      that many Islamic scholars were studying and advancing mathematics.
      Read Bertrand Russell's A History of Western Philosophy.

      He claims the reason that the Islamic scholars didn't add that much to what they later transferred back to Europe, was that their religion stopped research.

      So this is another case that supports the grandparent's point.

      --
      Karma: Excellent (My Karma? I wish...:-( )
  54. Buy hotel by dimss · · Score: 1

    I am going to buy small hotel or guest house somewhere in Latgale (east of Latvia). This is more interesting business (I hope) than typing on keyboard all day long.

  55. How to find water the ancient Roman way: by crazyphilman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ok, this is from a thousand-year old Roman engineering textbook I perused many years ago.

    One of the first things a Roman engineer would do on any building site is locate a spring to supply him with water. In order to do this, the engineer would get up before sunrise and lie down on the top of a hill, facing downhill. As the sun rose, tendrils of mist would appear in certain places on the ground. The engineer would note their location, and he would dig in those spots to produce a water supply.

    The reason this works? The mist appears where the water table is closer to the surface. By digging, you go below the water table, and the hole will naturally fill up with water over time. This water can be filtered and used.

    Isn't that neat?

    --
    Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
    1. Re:How to find water the ancient Roman way: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Technology-wise, the Romans kick ass!

    2. Re:How to find water the ancient Roman way: by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      Of course that wouldn't work today, because the watershed has probably been sucked down so far by the increasing water demands of modern human populations, that there wouldn't be any mist to spot.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    3. Re:How to find water the ancient Roman way: by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      So where is that water going? Since we don't have any working fusion yet, it's not being destroyed. And I see no evidence that we have more clouds or higher ocean levels. So where is it going?

      I think you're confusing watersheds with urban aquifers. The watershed for San Fransisco consists of several million acres of Sierra wilderness. On the other hand, the town of Alviso disappeared because it sucked its aquifer dry and sunk into San Fransisco bay. But other towns around the bay and at the same starting elevation, have not met the same fate, because their underground geologies are different.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  56. Making my own joghurt by Muhammar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A galon of a good-quality milk + few spoons of good powdered or condenzed milk is heated close to boil (without actualy boiling it), the mix is cooled to amibient temperature, a favorite joghurt (few spoons) is stirred in and the mix is left under lose lid in a warm quiet place without disturbance for several days until ready.

    Basicaly it's as simple as making your own kids but less fun.

    --
    I doubt that we will ever figure out - and I suspect that even if we did figure out we couldn't do much about it
  57. Lots of stuff by wjeff · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Traditional boat building (in several forms), traditional boat sailing while using non-electronically aided navigation techniques, blacksmithing, leatherwork, sewing and furniture making. These are skills I probably could have made a living with in an earlier age. Probably would have been relatively happy doing it too.

    --
    my old sig is obsolete, and I haven't come up with a stupid enough new one yet
  58. Agriculture is Geeky by shpoffo · · Score: 1

    You would seem to be implying that planting things requires no systemic knowledge of the natural world. Just stick it in the dirt, eh? Agriculture and the esoterics of planting are intensely geeky - and Druids among the more popular-culture ladder-toppers in this area. Agriculture is the root system science of a wide range of other engineering disciplines.

    .
    -shpoffo

  59. Music by olvr · · Score: 1
    Musical aptitude is often correlated with mathematical skills that require auditory memory, mental problem solving and deductive reasoning. Part of the ability to respond to music, like mathematical aptitude, is expressed in the form of skill at uncovering the (sometimes very subtle) patterns within a piece of music. This ability is influenced by learning - which increases awareness of the patterns - and by mathematical aptitude.

    There's also lots of anectodal evidence of famous musicians with mathematical ability and vice versa, but I can't find any rigorous studies. Check out The Psychology of Musical Ability by Shuter.

    Taking a speculative evolutionary psychology perspective, I'd wager we evolved our higher-level musical aptitudes because of their usefulness in communicating and understanding complex emotions and social interactions - and a couple of the musical aptitudes just happened to be useful for mathematical reasoning.

  60. 80 BC: The Antikythera celestial navigation device by obiwan2u · · Score: 4, Informative

    What were engineers doing over 2k years ago? How about building the Antikythera Mechanism (web copy of a June 1959 Scientific American article, p60-7)

    An amazingly complex, intricate, and accurate mechanical astronomical calculation device from 80 BC. Found in a shipwreck in 1900, and not fully reverse engineered until 1973, there are no other examples of this level technology in the ancient world.

    "It is hard to exaggerate the singularity of this device, or its importance in forcing a complete re-evaluation of what had been believed about technology in the ancient world. For this box contained some 32 [brass] gears, assembled into a mechanism that accurately reproduced the motion of the sun and the moon against the background of fixed stars, with a differential [gear] giving their relative position and hence the phases of the moon."

    You can see a reconstructed version of the Antikythera Mechanism here. Another article detailing the probable creation date of the device based on the construction of the gears can be found here"

    ..it was more sophisticated than anything like it until the Eighteenth Century, nearly two thousand years later!"

    Another article makes the conjecture that ancient navigators could have used the Antikythera Mechanism to determine longitude via the position of the moon (1800 years before longitude calculation was perfected in England)

    Ben in DC
    --
    Ben in DC
    "It's the mark of an educated mind to be moved by statistics" Oscar Wilde
  61. Re:Not me by wjeff · · Score: 1

    Good with math, but very musically challenged, it takes quite a few pints of Guinness to make my singing sound good, and then I am still the only who thinks so, of course I also think everybody is my friend at that point, so they would never tell me I how bad I suck

    --
    my old sig is obsolete, and I haven't come up with a stupid enough new one yet
  62. All very true by jd · · Score: 4, Interesting
    "Classical Education" (based on Greek ideas, reinvented during the reneissance) follows the idea of mixing arts and sciences, and it is from such a system that we let Leonardo Da Vinci, Sir Isaac Newton (a concert pianist, alchemist, and inventer of the cat flap), and others.


    These people, in Renessance times, were typically sponsored by rich patrons, who took care of the mundane needs whilst they got on with inventing or whatever. It made for a society that evolved culturally and technologically faster than anything that had preceeded it.


    Geeks would likely also have been explorers - it is very likely that St. Brenden "The Navigator" (who sailed from Ireland to Newfoundland in about 600 AD in a leather dinghy) was a geek at heart. There was a lot to discover, and required a mind agile at problem-solving along with fantastic patience, as they would be doing a great deal of nothing much.


    You find hints of geekdom in gnostic and hellenistic thought and religion, suggesting early geeks may have been heavy into religion. Again, no great surprise - geeks love answering things, and for a long time, those were the best answers anyone could devise.


    Cave painters may well have been geeks, too. One set of cave paintings in England would have been a few hundred feet under an ice sheet at the time they were painted. Someone shimmied down an ice crevice for the sole purpose of dawbing animals that couldn't possibly have existed there on the walls. That guy was NOT normal.


    Brewers, throughout history, have experimented with different sources of sugars, flavours, etc. Since wild yeast can take many forms, and since many ingredients would have been expensive, they would undoubtably have researched methods of sustaining the active ingredient in much the same way that modern kids brew their own "ginger beer plants" by splitting bottles and topping up with fresh ingredients to keep the yeast alive.


    The vertical loom and tablet weaving, both parts of Norse tradition, involved some highly complex thought and engineering on the part of their inventers and practicioners. Even the Viking longships - which would slide up beaches and could then be used to carry cargo from raids by reversing the oars - show considerable evidence of highly creative thought.


    I think it safe to say that geeks throughout history have been much as they are today, excpet maybe more influential, as many of the trades I've mentioned have had considerable status and power in their times.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:All very true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sir Isaac Newton (a concert pianist, alchemist, and inventer of the cat flap)

      Thank Ike for that last: We all know what a drag it is to be hit by debris when following a cat!

    2. Re:All very true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i dislike geeks, i don't think most of them would be brave enough to do too much physical work. I don't know if geeks really existed as much in the same way, they are an invention of the times, a world where you can sit inside all day staring into a screen, hidden from the world. geeks are all wimpy, scared, and hidden.

  63. math and stuff by PerlDudeXL · · Score: 1

    what the heck did those of us with geek brains do?


    math? engineering? inventing things?

    someone had to do the needed brainwork at some point in history which made computers, etc. possible.
  64. Mining and Engineering by AndrewHowe · · Score: 1

    That's what I went with, though I hear Herbalism/Skinning is also a good combination ;-)

  65. I'm a research physicist... by thesp · · Score: 1

    ...and I spend a LOT of time in the machine shop working metal into precision components for my experiments. While the machines themselves are mostly 1950's, the techniques go way back - for example, lathe turning predates metalworking. And I find it incredibly satisfying!

  66. Same as now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would have some relatively boring day job, and on my copious spare time I would be playing music, sailing my boat, brewing my beer, making things out of wood and leather, reading up on the latest theories of this and that, and so on.

  67. 99% of people would be peasants by rpjs · · Score: 1

    What would an electrical engineer be doing a millennia or three before the concept of resistors and capacitors?

    S/he would be working in the fields all day long. If they were very lucky, they might be semi-free and would only have to worry about covering the rent whilst actually growing enough to live on. Most of them would be worrying whether their owner would decide that he had a few too many peasants and so decide to sell a few off or use them for sword practice.

    1. Re:99% of people would be peasants by pancake_lover · · Score: 1

      Also, consider that peasants wouldn't have had an opportunity for an education, couldn't read or write. Most modern geeks would miss out on the mental stimulation that would lead their mind down the geek road.

      Myself, I'd be toiling away in a field somewhere in central Europe.

      On the plus side, I might have better luck with the wenches than I do today.

      --
      Homer no function beer well without.
  68. Bowmaking and fletching by PGillingwater · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Choosing the right wood, shaping it, fletching the arrows. This is "ancient tech" which can be learned today, and is its own reward. Why, there are even courses in this available!

    It's amazing how effective a recurve bow with 40lbs strain is in the right hands....

    --
    Paul Gillingwater
    MBA, CISSP, CISM
  69. Metalcasting by Hadlock · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm melting Aluminum @ 1400 degrees F (ish) in a steel bucket lined with concrete to make sailing hardware. Oh, and I build my own wooden boats (another exercise in mathematics and logic). Both have been practiced for thousands of years, although I think they cast iron more often than aluminum "back in the day".

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
    1. Re:Metalcasting by danrudolph · · Score: 1

      Casting is as much an anchient art as it is a modern science. I cast brass (70 Cu, 30 Zn), bronze, iron, aluminum and all sorts of special alloys. My family's shop is one of the last in the country to work "off the floor" as it's known in the industry. I am an engineer at another foundry which is converting the last of its floor molding to automatic. Although its not the way they really did it back then, its still a dying art in this country. Other than material improvements, melting technology, not much has changed in several thousand years. Make a mold, melt the metal, pour, rinse and repeat.

    2. Re:Metalcasting by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      I'm curious as to what you mean by "off the floor". I'm familiar with most of the basic terms, green sand, ingots, crucibles, dross, etc etc, but I haven't come across this term before. I worked retail at a chocolate shop and had an older man tell me his similar tale about the golden age of the foundry industry when small shops cast engine blocks & whatnot for large companies.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    3. Re:Metalcasting by danrudolph · · Score: 1

      Off the floor simply describes how we work with our sand and molds. The "old" way is to have a pile of sand from which you shovel into your molding machines. The molds are laid out in rows on the floor and are then poured as the metal comes to temperature.

      Most foundries in the US, and worldwide for that matter, use what is known as overhead sand. A system that is installed in a foundry that conditions and stores the sand. It uses conveyors to deliver the sand to the molding stations. These systems are now being used in conjunction with automatic molding machines from Disa, Sinto, or Hunter.

      Here are some pics of my shop. The man molding is my dad and I am the one pouring. Those are tomahawks we make for reproduction.

      http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/d/p/dpr156/pics/

      Enjoy.

    4. Re:Metalcasting by Medievalist · · Score: 1

      What do you rinse with?

      I'm wondering what I should clean my silicon carbide crucible with (it holds about 15 lb of bronze).

    5. Re:Metalcasting by danrudolph · · Score: 1

      I was kidding with the rinse and repeat. As far as crucibles go, I clean mine with a steel rod with a slightly pointy tip (sharpened on the belt grinder). Carefully remove the leftover metal in a scraping motion until it flakes away. Then I use a wire brush to clean the small pieces off the sides and even the surface of the crucible so it is clean for the next heat.

      You might want to get a large spoon(18" handle, 3" cup) to scrape the inside of the crucible while it is still hot from pouring. Most of the metal will come off easily while it is still hot.

  70. Re:80 BC: The Antikythera celestial navigation dev by Jesrad · · Score: 1

    It is amazing what technology and social progress the Greeks had advanced to in their time, right before the fall of their civilization... Steam power, complex mechanical design, philosophy, democracy, calculus, electricity, atomic theory, and more ! They were due an Industrial Revolution of their own very soon, I think.

    --
    Maybe we deserve this world ?
  71. ultrarunning by dsb · · Score: 1

    I eventually want to do WS100.
    so I do a lot of trail running and soon will do my first Ultra!

    That seems ancient?

  72. Advanced Ballistic Physics by fuzzybunny · · Score: 1

    Specifically, I spend my time making little metal masses go really fast and studying trajectories, sonic effects, and impact patterns. If you don't want to call it "potting away at the gun range..."

    Aside from that, I enjoy studying basic physio-chemical effects of complex carbohydrate distillates on the human body, and piecing together the hormonal puzzle of the effect of the female of the species in really short skirts on drunken guy^H^H^Hscientists.

    --
    Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
  73. Best /. thread in what? 3 years? by Vryl · · Score: 1

    Almost lj like.

  74. Recipes for awesome wine/mead by bluelip · · Score: 1

    http://winemaking.jackkeller.net/

    This guy is great. Everything from mild to wild.

    --

    Yep, I never spell check.
    More incorrect spellings can be found he
  75. Burn by cheaphomemadeacid · · Score: 0

    Most of us would probably be burned on the bonfire for witchin':)

  76. Build ships by janwedekind · · Score: 1
    Building boats, rafts and ships. There's a long history of engineering in shipmaking.

    Even today there are people in Asia, who don't have a strong idea about math, but they are building junks from scratch.

    1. Re:Build ships by turgid · · Score: 1
      I was just going to post "boat-building" too. It goes back a long way in most cultures, and it's what got my dad (and hence me) into computers.

      My dad was brought up a crofter in North West Scotland. He inherited an enthusiasm for the sea for his father and so on.

      In the late '60s he went to university to study Marine Engineering (thanks to British state-funded Higher Education) and did an MSc after his BSc.

      The MSc research involved developing some very early CAD and CAM systems for ship building (24-bit mainframes and CNC milling machines in the early '70s).

      I was going on boats since I was born, and have never been sea sick. In fact, on my way to Holland on the SeaCat one day I didn't even spill my pint in the rough weather while all the scurvy land-lubbers were rolling around in puke in the bilges.

      The computer stuff stuck. I got my first computer when I was eight, and here I sit this evening. having been frobbing with bootloader code all day on an embedded Linux system, writing my own language interpreter.

  77. Luthiery by flyneye · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Building stringed instruments,both acoustic and electric,standard and experemental has been part of my life for more than a quarter century.So if anyone out there comes across an instrument emblazoned with a winged,sneakered eyeball wearing a guitar and holding aloft a bolt of lightning,inside the soundchamber or on the headstock,the pleasure will be all yours.

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  78. How about a clockmaker? by Mr2cents · · Score: 1

    When I see those mechanical clocks, and all those machines, music boxes and early mechanical robots (playing piano etc.), I feel those people are our geeky ancestors. Those were the first programmable machinery, and a vital step towards computing. Even today, a clock is still the center of a computer.

    --
    "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
  79. SCAdian by Wolfger · · Score: 1

    In addition to being a geek and spending most of my life in front of a monitor, I am also a SCAdian. I brew beer, I know how to shoot a bow and swing a weapon, and if I can't make a living at any of that, there's always hard labor.

  80. Get a new hobby by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Oh I don't know, how about learning english?

    Cubical -> The property of being a cube -> You meant CUBICLE

    You should have used a comma. Not a period. Get it?

    auto's -> Don't even get me started on the stupidity of using apostrophes to make plurals... WHY?

    grim -> It might be grim, but it's GRIME

    greese -> Uh, what? -> GREASE.

    1. Re:Get a new hobby by el_chicano · · Score: 1
      You should have used a comma. Not a period.
      ROTFL!!!

      "Not a period." is not a sentence but a fragment. Subtract ten points for incorrect English usage.

      The funny thing about your flame is that YOU should have used a comma, not a period!
      --
      A man who wants nothing is invincible
  81. Tech Support by Cheeze · · Score: 2, Funny

    Don't all good engineers start out in Tech support??

    tech: Hello sir, how may I help you?
    caveman: fire, BAD!!!
    tech: I understand your frustration, you'll need to restart your fire by hitting two stones together.
    caveman: FIRE, BAD!!!!!
    tech: Sir, you're going to have to work with me here.
    caveman: fire.........good?
    tech: Yes sir. Is there anything else I can do for you?
    caveman: UNF!

    --
    Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
    1. Re:Tech Support by Xel'Naga · · Score: 1
      UNF!

      Take a guess at which of the three a caveman would be saying.

  82. in the prehistoric times ... by S3D · · Score: 1
    What would today's programmers have been doing centuries before the invention of the keyboard?
    Being eaten by a cave bear ?
  83. Woodworking by haplo21112 · · Score: 1

    I recently discovered I have a knack for woodworking. I have always had a knack for construction in general I suppose. Legos ya know!

    I suppose before the light bulb (which in turn brought the vac tube, and the transistor)...I probably would have been attracted to a profession that involved building things.

    --
    Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
    1. Re:Woodworking by fw_dude · · Score: 1

      I have to agree. I do computers for a living and a hobby, but I really love working with wood. It requires presise planning, measurement and implementation for something to come out right. Much like computer programming.

      I also am looking into Ho-scale train layout and collection. I have an old 1970's tyco train I got as a little boy and have discovered the huge world of layouts and collection recently.

    2. Re:Woodworking by lrucker · · Score: 1
      Living in the Bay Area, I don't have space for full size woodworking, so I do it in 1/12 scale but with full-size techniques - working hinges, real dovetails, the works.

      Website with pics here (yeah, I know, AOL sucks, but I've had this site since before ISPs were common)

  84. Wood Carving by peu · · Score: 1


    I do wood carvings...



    ...with my home made CNC router/mill :)

  85. I'd have been... by 0311 · · Score: 1

    ...a navigational officer on a Man-O-War. And I would still have been a rifleman, only more slowly.

  86. Though I don't do this much any more by BlindRobin · · Score: 1

    When I was young I was fascinated by all of the arrow heads my father had collected as a boy. I had a large, if not the best quality, supply of flint and began making stone tools. By trial and error and with a lot of frustration I eventually made some very good arrow heads, axe's and scrapers are easier. Very satisfying a decent looking point to get it is...

  87. a possible explanation... by snooo53 · · Score: 1

    I have this theory that people who have bad eyesight from birth tend to pay more attention to books and examine things in detail during the critical learning years simply because they are easier to see for them(nearsightedness). So in general they gain a lot more book smarts, and tend to be more geeky as a group. I also think that children who have their vision corrected earlier in life may not exhibit this, or may display the same qualities for an entirely different reason if they are shunned by classmates for having "four eyes".. and naturally gravitate towards learning more.

    I'm not sure how people who are farsighted or have some other vision problem would fit into this schema though. If my theory is correct, maybe your friends have a "geeky" interest in something non-technical? Or perhaps they just happen to be a outside the bell curve of this group...

    (I think maybe the stereotype came about in the first place because people who read more without taking breaks to prevent eye strain end up needing glasses)

    --
    The sending of this message pretty much inconveniences everyone involved.
  88. Meteorology by brontus3927 · · Score: 1

    If I lived in a time before computers and electronics, I would have probably persued a career in my other love, porn, err, my OTHER other love, meteorology. Before Luke Howard gave us the nomenclature and the basic hydrology of clouds, meteorology was mostly cataloguing the weather and making (somewhat) educated guesses based on patterns. An ancient greek weather forcast: A high chance of either sun or rain!

  89. My Spare Time by trongey · · Score: 1

    When I'm not working on computers I'm usually playing video games. Does that count?

    --
    You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
  90. are guns old-tech enough? by cypherz · · Score: 1

    Lots of geeks are into guns. I've been collecting military-style rifles for years. I think John Moses Browning was a wizard-level geek, and all with only the computer between his ears! Did you know that the Lewis and Clark expedition carried a repeating air-rifle with them? Pretty geeky for them there days!

    --
    This sig kills fascists.
  91. Pottery by batquux · · Score: 1

    And when I started, I thought, "If cave people could do it, it can't be that tricky." Boy was I ever wrong. It's amazing they ever got consistent results using 'primitive' equipment and techniques. You'd think that just having knowledge of modern chemistry should be enough to give me a significant edge over the ancients, but my problems are still the same as theirs. There's always something to learn.

  92. What Ancient Tech Do You Do? by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

    What Ancient Tech Do You Do?

    Pulling out.

  93. Try a diptych... by ferralis · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm working on building a replica of a medieval diptych... not the booklet style painting, but the medieval version of the PDA. Folded in half, these were often apparently the size of a palmtop. Using a string as a "gnomon" they make a pretty fair sundial too. With wax on the inside, suddenly they make a handy place to write important notes, etc. Given the properties of sundials, it's possible to approximate the date if you hold the thing level... and there are any number of games you can play with a pen and paper, stylus and wax work for them too. So, in short, a diptych (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diptych) is definitely the sort of thing a medieval geek would have to have... I can see the articles now: "Tic-tac-toe, the next killer app?"

    --
    Any generalization is a stupid one.
  94. Answer the question! by loose+canons · · Score: 2
    the mods have been promoting mostly answers that start with "if I were living X hundred years ago" and "the geeks of yore did W and Z". [and they are mostly interesting answers, I admit]. But the question is what DO you do?
    In fact, if you are an orthodox greenie or you are convinced that petroleum resources will dry up in the next decade, you SHOULD be DOING some low-tech nerdwork right now.
    Some things I do:
    • design passive solar heated housing: no electronics but some mechanical or hydraulic feed back to regulate temp from solar sources and earth/water heat sinks.
    • composting: i have been experimenting with staging anerobic and aerobic phases to speed up the breakdown [it still takes me 3 years to turn unsorted yard and kitchen wastes into a good garden product.]
    • design pedal powered mowing, earthmoving and transportation stuff...the bicycle, evolved as it is, is just a starting point.
    • study how to produce solar concentrators of high precision without recourse to computers, CNC machines etc. We all know how to make an elipse with 2 pins and a loop of string but I know how to make a parablola with pulleys, string and an xacto knife.
    • trying to figure out a sustainable tree and crop rotation pattern on marginal acreage that would support a family without motorized tilling and harvesting, using wood stoves for heat, in perpetuity on the minimum amount of land.
    • self regulating greenhouses to extend growing season in colder climates and without pesticides or pumped water.
    • low tech biological pest control. E.G. gypsy moths all but destroyed my oak trees 20 years ago but I found a few of the caterpillers were dying of some disease. I collected all the limp, sick ones I could find, waited until the fungus or bacteria that attacks them had turned them into little bags of pus, put them in a blender [the wife LOVED that!], filtered the product and sprayed it all over my property. To this day, even when the moths have denuded the trees in other parts of town, my trees fare well and the caterpillers are dying left and right. I need to study more so I can preserve the germs for use elsewhere.
    Being a geek would be so satisfying if i didn't have to make enough money to pay all that tuition!
    --
    You call that a troll? I have a whole beltway full of trolls better than that!
    1. Re:Answer the question! by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      We should be going to solar regardless of any fear of fossil fuel depletion. It's more accurate to say the supply of "sweet light" crude will decline in the next ten years, but of course there's plenty of other harder-to-process fossil fuel, enough for two centuries or more even at current rates of growth (ewwwww). In a pinch a hemispherical solar concentrator is good enough, but in the event The End of All Civilization comes you'll have plenty of parabolic dishes laying around, just pick those satellite dishes out of the ruins and put something light-reflective on them. Interesting there are now commercial bug sprays that use natural ingedients. I would suggest picking up a cheap blender to use for your kewl pest-control experiments, in the event you're unknowngly blending up something that makes anthrax look like chicken pox! Could backfire too, someday you might find mutant super-caterpillars impervious to any bacteria eating your trees and your dog.

    2. Re:Answer the question! by Medievalist · · Score: 1
      I would suggest picking up a cheap blender to use for your kewl pest-control experiments, in the event you're unknowngly blending up something that makes anthrax look like chicken pox!
      Good advice, if you are blending dead things you've found in the woods you are almost certainly working with live anthrax.
      Could backfire too, someday you might find mutant super-caterpillars impervious to any bacteria eating your trees and your dog.
      That's not impossible, but it's somewhat unlikely; the benefit of using micro-organisms instead of raw chemicals is that the microbes will co-evolve with their host environment. If the prey have a slower life-cycle than the predator (like, for example, bacteria .vs. caterpillars) the predator evolves faster and the system should settle into a dynamic equilibrium... a good predator does not kill *all* its' prey, and the trees can support *some* caterpillars.

      Diversity in your local ecosystem is good, it makes your kids grow up strong.
    3. Re:Answer the question! by tverbeek · · Score: 1
      design pedal powered mowing

      Why bother with pedals, when the elegant simplicity of the push-powered reel mower is already available? It's already superior to the alternatives in every way: quieter, less expensive to buy, less expensive to run, and easier to store. And the fact that I get a little bit of light exercise pushing it around the yard is a bonus. Who needs to sit down to do it?

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  95. Village idiot by dtfinch · · Score: 1

    No doubt about it.

    1. Re:Village idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You took my job, you scab!

  96. No, both were good by bluGill · · Score: 1

    It is important to point out that those old books are the old knowledge, but old knowledge wasn't better than ours today. Those books will teach you how to do things that have strong odds of killing you. Every reminder of safety is important, particularly when your instructions ignore them, so you have to consider it all of yourself.

    There is something wrong with the geek who doesn't love that catalog and buy books from them once in a while. Always something interesting, even if you never build the projects. (Note, if you don't order you won't get the next catalog, so beware...)

  97. Why? by QMO · · Score: 1

    "5) It's rather a skilled job compared to being a farmer"

    I can see how a smith would need different skills than a farmer, but not how a good smith would need more skill than a good farmer.

    --
    Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    1. Re:Why? by bladesjester · · Score: 1

      Okay, time to put on my smith's hat.

      Smithing is a very complex art. Think of it as a combination of applied physics, chemistry, and engineering.

      A good smith had to know the use of a great deal of tools(many of which he had to make himself), how hot to heat the metal he was working with, what to cool it in (salt water, molten lead, or any number of other things), how metals could be made into alloys, how to pattern weld (which is a heck of a lot harder than it looks), how to properly shape metal, and in some cases how to get metal from raw ore.

      On top of all of this, the smith had to know at least the basics of *using* the things which he made in order to make them properly.

      It's *really* not as simple as most people think.

      --
      Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
  98. Astronomy by mooncrow · · Score: 1

    One of the classical ancient studies (not part of the Trivium, the other one I can't remember now), amateur astronomy is both wonderfully old and bleeding edge new.
    Interestingly, astronomy is one of the few remaining sciences which can still realistically be studied by "amateurs" who can do real research. Remember Comet Shoemaker-Levy that slammed into Jupiter? David Levy, one of its co-discoverers, is technically an "amateur" astronomer.
    It can get expensive, but doesn't have to be. Good amateur astronomy begins with just your eyes and a map and dark skies.
    Of course, binoculars or small telescopes up your opportunities, and fine instruments can be made at home (another huge faction of amateurs do ATM) or for a few hundred dollars you can acquire superb optical instruments that fold down into easily transportable luggage.
    Then the sky is the limit for this technology, such as a 16 inch GPS-enabled GOTO SCT with a peltier-cooled CCD camera (hint, hint). Or go even better and deploy a remote-controlled observatory on the night side of the earth from your dayside location and view images across the internet.

    Total geek satisfaction level: 9.9 out of 10.

    1. Re:Astronomy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the great satisfactions I derive from astronomy is that essentially, if you are observing a star or a nebula, what you are seeing is the same the great ancient astronomers saw. Give or take a few hundred or thousand years, but in the great scheme of things, that is a completely irrelevant timeframe.

      Sure, I do it with modern technology most of the time, but that's just part of being a geek...

  99. Let's be realistic by TomorrowPlusX · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It seems -- and this may be somewhat cynical of me -- that an ancient geek would have had a life approximately like thus ( where the timeline is from pre-history up to, say, the 17th or 18th century:

    1) Born into violence, filth, and disease.
    2) Eek out a life of scavenging or farming, paying taxes to your lord, having some children, most of whom will die before a couple years old, until:
    3) war, or some other tribal/religious/cultural dispute.
    4) death at 20.

    This hypothetical geek from BCE 5000 or AD 1600 might have been the next Einstein, or Stephen Hawking, or anything we can imagine. But he'd never have had the time, opportunity or resources to do anything with it.

    We're NOT smarter than previous humans, we just have an *unprecendented* level of peace and prosperity. We have developed a culture where people have the opportunity *not* to toil and die at an early age.

    Finally, this success isn't evenly distributed, yet. A fair amount of humanity still lives the way our ancestors did centuries ago.

    --

    lorem ipsum, dolor sit amet
    1. Re:Let's be realistic by tverbeek · · Score: 1
      This hypothetical geek from BCE 5000 or AD 1600 might have been the next Einstein, or Stephen Hawking...

      If he were a Stephen Hawking, he wouldn't have lived much past 20, regardless.

      A fair amount of humanity still lives the way our ancestors did centuries ago

      More than don't, in fact.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    2. Re:Let's be realistic by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      More than don't, in fact.

      For millenia all of humanity lived in squalor. Today a portion of humanity has managed to crawl above that squalor. But to talk to so some people, the capitalism that has enabled this unprecedented rise in humanity's fortunes is grossly unfair. It almost sounds like they wish everyone was still down in the mud grubbing around for survival.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    3. Re:Let's be realistic by tverbeek · · Score: 1
      It almost sounds like they wish everyone was still down in the mud grubbing around for survival.

      Only if you assume that any criticism of capitalism must be motivated by stark raving insanity. To most other people it just sounds like they're saying it's... yeah, you had the right word for it: unfair. Many people consider fairness a virtue worth pursuing, not one to sneer at.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    4. Re:Let's be realistic by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      I'm not sneering at fairness, I'm sneering at the idea that dragging people down to the lowest level is fair. Go read (or watch the movie) Harrison Bergeron, by Kurt Vonnegut. You don't make everyone equally beautiful by mutilating those who are beautiful so that everyone is equally ugly. Yet that's how some people would have us behave with wealth. They want equality of destitution. They are not happy that some of humanity has managed crawl it way out of abject poverty.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    5. Re:Let's be realistic by driftingwalrus · · Score: 1

      Couple of issues. You're thinking of feudal government, for one. That wasn't everywhere - in fact 'democracy' was invented in ancient Athens.

      Life has never been so short that most people died before they where twenty. A lot of numbers regarding average lifespan are skewed by a much higher rate of infant mortality. The historical truth is that most people would have lived into their sixties, providing they survived infancy.

      Regarded unprecedented level of peace and prosperity, that is profoundly incorrect. Rome enjoyed a great deal of peace and prosperity, and in ancient times many romans worked a total of three hours a day, even the poor. Stability of government contributes a great deal, however stable governments have appeared many times before.

      --
      Paul Anderson
      "I drank WHAT?!" -- Socrates
    6. Re:Let's be realistic by TummyX · · Score: 1

      I agree. Stoner hippies who live at home and don't work should be paid the same as an electrical engineer. Sounds fairer no?

  100. Hahaha by marcus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You really don't know much about much about farming do you?

    Try blacksmithing when you don't control the fire or the availability of the quench water.

    How well do you handle different ores? Can you actually make a decent alloy from the dirt on the ground?

    Oh well, I'm still educating city kids.

    I did spend this last weekend with an axe and some trees. It's great whole body physical exercise, and beats meditation to smithereens as far as the ease of mental focus and achievement of Zen is concerned.

    --
    Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
    - W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
  101. Longitude by subtropolis · · Score: 1
    That last link is to the Amazon page for a book called Longitude. I just read it last week. Highly recommend.

    The Antikythera Mechanism is indeed one very strange mystery.

    --
    "Our interests are to see if we can't scale it up to something more exciting," he said.
  102. Your subject applies to me as well. by mindaktiviti · · Score: 1

    I'd be robin hood. :D

  103. Farming, fletching, smithing by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

    Well, it's likely that I would be a farmer, because that is what my most recent ancestors did, going back about 3 centuries.

    On the other hand, I didn't take up farming, even though it was an option. I have a penchant for bows and arrows, so I might have become a fletcher.

    Otherwise, I might have been a blacksmith or a tinsmith. Tinsmithing is probably relevant in the geek crowd anyway, because, like hardware hacking, tinsmithing involves soldering.

    My brother-in-law, who is also a computer geek, has shown some skill at manufacturing musical instruments, mostly flutes and fifes of various types and sizes. This works well because his wife (my sister) plays flutes and fifes of various types and sizes.

    --
    www.wavefront-av.com
  104. Two words: Siege engines by Diakoneo · · Score: 1

    Sure, you could use big, strong, non-geeks to build them.
    But the geeks would have to design it!!
    The International Registry of Hurlers (and Chunkers)
    http://www.trebuchet.com/registry/display.php

    --
    "Well..here I am..." - Jubal Early
    1. Re:Two words: Siege engines by 6digitdotter · · Score: 1

      I'll be spending the weekend tuning my trebuchet. It currently can chuck a golfball about 300' but I think it can do another 50'.

      Since I live in a small house, it's a small one, only about a meter tall with a forty pounds of counterweight. I'd love to build a full-sized one someday.
      I suspect if I had a neighbor who ticked me off enough I would. ;)

  105. Hwaet! by spaceyhackerlady · · Score: 1

    I remember some years ago telling my niece and nephew about a book I was reading. It seems the main character, a fellow named Beowulf, liked to drink mead. When he wasn't doing that, he killed monsters.

    They heartily approved.

    ...laura

  106. Geeks as monks by phorm · · Score: 1

    At least your chances of getting lucky would have been about the same...

  107. Re:Engineering and Mathematics and by technoextreme · · Score: 1
    This quote iritates me a bit.
    What would an electrical engineer be doing a millennia or three before the concept of resistors and capacitors?
    The capacitor has been around since the 18th century in one form or another. The leyden jar was a basic capicator. The Mythbusters have used those numerous times. People were used as resistors. I know there was a special on the discovery channel were a bunch of people tried to replicate an experiment by monk's where they shocked a lot people at once. There were numerous static generators. It was a fun time and I would like to build some of these devices. Kites are an old but fun technology too.
    --
    Ooo man the floppy drive is broken. No wait. The computer is just upside down.
  108. Hmm what to do.... by NidStyles · · Score: 0

    Perhaps working on physics problems mathematically, only with paper instead a computer. Maybe I would be inventing something we have currently, but not then. That way future generations would be grateful to my works, and appreciate me. I know no one else does currently. Ungrateful ingrades. I'm the greatest that ever lived, you just don't know it yet.

    --
    Yes, I said it.
  109. Astrolabes by Corvus9 · · Score: 1
    The astrolabe is a mechanical device for determining the positions of the stars and continents, predicting dawn and dusk, the seasons, and finding latitude.

    They would appeal to ancient geeks because they are endlessly tinkerable; you can add indicators for stars or mechanical work to predict things like eclipses and conjunctions. Chaucer was apparently quite the astrolabe hacker.

    Start building by pushing a stick into the ground, or go here to download a diagram which one can print onto stiff paper.

  110. The real answer... by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They where blacksmiths, wheelwrights, coopers, or maybe weavers. I have read about people in the old west making sail wagons to try to ride across the plains. Put a sail on an old wagon? What a cool hack. Barbed wire or a mechanical reaper? Also way cool hacks. Even the Wright Brothers first plane was in effect a way cool hack.
    Back in the day you had to do cool hacks to survive. Hackers are not the descendants of court wizards. We are descendants of farmers that when one of his tools broke he would fix it with what he had on hand or make a different tool out of it.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  111. There's a difference between Ancient and Medieval by Medievalist · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You need to study more history. In most ancient cultures smiths were mystical figures, who gave up much for their mastery.

    For example, an ancient goidelic bronze-smith's life was generally short and often ended in madness due to the lack of forced ventilation technology. The arsenic and heavy metals naturally occuring in ores acculumated in the body and induced illness and psychosis. Consequently the smiths were often unable to have normal children; so of course fathers did not want their daughters to marry smiths. A smith who wished to marry might have to steal or buy a bride.

    The inherited, rigidly defined social and occupational classes you're talking about are a feature of medieval and post-medieval (c.g. Renaissance and Modern) culture, and are very rare in truly ancient times. In ancient times fostering and apprenticeships were more the norm, and typically a smith chose his apprentices or fosterlings based on aptitude and ability.

  112. Amateur Radio... but then... by brindafella · · Score: 1

    Try Amateur Radio (aka Ham Radio) which has had 'licensed' geeks going since around 1905, and the pioneers years before that.

    Try to resist the temptation to speak to communicate via a satellite with people using an antenna that you made yourself, find that elusive summer or winter atmospheric inversion that lets you speak across the continent, catch a meteor trail and send specks of data at a time, try to resist chopping into the roof of your new car to put a VHF antenna there while heaving out the AM/FM radio to put in the radio's control head, explain to the bank why you need to buy a rural block for your 120m tall tower, find that elusive vintage spark-gap transmitter and try to resist turning it on for just a few minutes, build yourself a valve power amplifier that requires two household power circuits to run - one each for the heaters and the high tension supply,etc, etc.

    I'm not speaking personally, you understand! Well, only some of it! :-)

    --
    Looking at space, radio, science and computing from a 'down-under' amateur enthusiast perspective.
  113. There are other similar societies, too. by Medievalist · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Markland, the Tuchux, the Norse Film and Pageantry Society, Acre, The Sealed Knot, Dagohir, Milites Normanorum, all do some kind of sword'n'axe type live combat recreation.

    Several of those listed above do "live steel" combat, with varying levels of realism and danger. SCA does stickfighting and fencing. Dagohir & its offshoots do padded sticks, Markland does live steel, padded sticks, and fencing.

    All require equipment which is easier (and more fun) to make than to purchase... lots of geeks are into it more for the craftsmanship than for the adrenaline rush.

  114. WORLD'S OLDEST PROFESSION..... by FLOOBYDUST · · Score: 1
    Of course they had to pay for it...

    Once a geek always a geek......

  115. Building Trebuchet machines.... by msoftsucks · · Score: 1
    --
    Quit playing Monopoly with Bill.
    Linux - of the people, by the people, and for the people.
  116. A Class for you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like you'd love the summer class I'm taking here at SUNY.

    The book we use is called "Science and Technology in World History" and written by McClellan and Dorn. After reading a little more than half of it. I'd say that its clear that a geek 2000 or even 3000 years ago would be working on the same thing he is today... Technology.
    (Technology has been around for tens of thousands of years while Science is only a recent development)
    But definitely, he'd be working on various new techonologies.

    Of course in order for the people who would invent the new technology to even exist, there are many things that the civilization need to provide. The book talks about various civilizations and how technological development only began to really take off when civilizations were capable of making surpluses (such as in food).

    And also the book has a chapter or two on civilizations that had developed amazing technological developments for a period of time and then completely stopped as the society had become unable to provide the support needed (war, famine, etc.)..

    Further, these technological developments were sometimes *lost* since further generations were incapable of understanding, reproducing, or even repairing any of the previous work. (Such as the case of Su Sung's waterwheel powered astronimical clock (1090AD China)).

  117. I would have done cabinet making by rczik · · Score: 1

    I'd be a cabinet maker (woodworking), which is what I do now in my spare time. I make high end stuff, building a dinning set now. I even turn custom pens. I mostly use powered equipment but there is something immensely satisfying using hand tools such a good block plane or *really* sharp chisel to fashion fine wood. Very tactile.

    r

  118. Oil painting... by elmlish · · Score: 1

    Or Killin' folk. One or the other.

    Though with the choice of oil painting comes the lovely effects that all those pigments have on the system.. Blindness, liver damage, insanity.. Lot's of fun!

  119. I can tell you whatgames geeks played by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

    Rithmomachia of course!

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  120. Blacksmithing! by Trails · · Score: 0

    Yup! Hammer, anvil, tongs, forge, etc... It's good fun, it's active, artistic, and appeals to the "Lord of the Rings" nerd in me, though after 3 years, I'm nowhere near being good enough to even begin weapon or armour smithing (or Rings of Power, alas). Good books on the subject include The New Edge of the Anvil, and the Art of Blacksmithing. You can also usually find small priavetly run courses on the subject.

  121. I'm Jewish by arhar · · Score: 1

    So I would probably be a loan shark, since that's the only thing that was allowed for our people.

    1. Re:I'm Jewish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm Jewish

      So I would probably be a loan shark


      Or, more likely, a slave.

  122. Nomography by Nyrath+the+nearly+wi · · Score: 1

    I draw nomograms, which are sort of like a static slide rule hard-wired to solve one particular equation.

  123. Storycrafting by tverbeek · · Score: 1

    My hobby is the ancient tech of storycrafting. The ability to commit thoughts and ideas to semi-permanent physical form (and convert them back) was one of the great technologies of ancient priests. Coming up with an idea and plan, developing characters, debugging the threads of a narrative, and so on aren't all that different from procedural programming (which is itself a more creative task than usually given credit for). I use semi-modern gear for it (a G3 iBook), but writing stories is still fundamentally the same craft as in the days of Homer or Moses or the author of Gilgamesh.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  124. Peasants by radtea · · Score: 1


    The vast, vast majority of geeks in the past were peasants, working themselves to death in a few short decades in subsistence farming.

    Same with the majority of artists, musicians, etc.

    I'm not sure if it's pretty depressing, or positively invigorating, to think that if I'd been born into my grandfather's generation I'd've had pretty much the same choices he did: join the British army and eventually settle in one of the colonies if I survived, or stay at home and work as a labourer of one kind or another.

    Go to university? Accumulate wealth? Learn a trade? Not likely.

    --
    Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
  125. A baker or chef by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love to cook and even back then, you still had ovens and stoves. Heck, a campfire is easy enough to use to prepare food. :-)

  126. Farming... by aero6dof · · Score: 1

    Irrigation Network engineers?

    Past lifers always think that they were persons of significance. What I really suspect is that in ancient or medieval times, most of us would be peasants. :)

  127. Start brewing! by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

    Never brewed beer? Want to brew beer? No problem! Pardon my self promotion while I introduce you to QBrew, the world's premier Open Source homebrewing software. Available for Unix, Linux, Windows and Macintosh, QBrew not only helps you figure out a recipes, it comes with a brewing primer. So stop dreaming about it and start brewing!

    Okay, end of advertisement. Gee I feel all cheap and dirty whoring myself like that...

    Seriously, brewing is easy to do. It was probably the first "technology". With modern malt extracts, all you need is a pot to boil in and a container to ferment in. Oh, and bottles or a keg to store in. But I'm sure true geeks will want to mash from scratch. Some even make their own malt and grow their own hops.

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  128. Entertaining the Masses by stormcoder · · Score: 1

    By dying in the arena.

    --
    Sorry my bullshit sensor overloaded.
  129. WRT naturalistically formed universe by anomaly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You said:Fundamental Christians deny the vast level of supporting evidence for an ancient naturalistically formed Universe where life developed under the control of natural selection

    I would certainly be described as one of those "Fundamental" Christians, and I must respectfully take issue with your point.

    People who believe as I do do not deny the evidence. We collect evidence and draw inferences from it to see how that fits into our view of how the universe works. To be fair, this is precisely what naturalists do. We all share the same evidence. We differ in the meaning of the evidence and the explanations that accompany the evidence. Only a fool would reject solid evidence.

    You also said:Christianity seem to win the contest as 'religion most likely to stifle scientific advancement'

    I'll take issue with that as well. While it is true that many who claimed the name and power of the Christian church have abused that power and have done despicable things, that is not consistent with Christian beliefs. The list of Christians who have offered up significant scientific advances includes:
    Johann Kepler, Francis Bacon, Blaise Pascal, Robert Boyle, Charles Babbage, Samuel F. B. Morse, Gregor Mendel, Louis Pasteur, Henri Fabre, Lord William Thompson Kelvin, Joseph Lister, George Washington Carver, Wernher von Braun, and many others.

    To suggest that scientific advancement is inherently incompatible with Christianity is simply not inclusive of the facts.

    Look at the lobby groups now most opposed to stem cell research...

    Embryonic stem cell research is definitely opposed on moral grounds.

    Adult stem cell research - the area that shows therapeutic benefit TODAY is not morally out of bounds and is helping people to live a more healthy life. This is GOOD science, and should be promoted.

    Embryonic stem cell research is different. We believe that all human life is sacred and that no human should be killed to make life easier or healthier for someone else. The science shows that these zygotes are inherently human - that all that is required for a person to grow from a fertilized egg is food and shelter.

    Science's technological reach has exceeded its moral grasp in this area. Science has long existed in a realm where there were moral guidelines on appropriate research. e.g. People must know that they are part of an experiment, and what the risks are, etc. I feel strongly that one day, the conventional scientific wisdom will look on this and say 'oops' we messed that one up.

    FWIW - While I've not seen it written this way elsewhere, I rather like the idea of a "Fundamental Christian" over the moniker "fundamentalist" As a Fundamental Christian, I hold fast to the tenets of the historic Christian faith, which is somewhat different from the connotation of a fundie as described on /.

    Respectfully,
    Anomaly

    --
    But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    1. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by GlassHeart · · Score: 1
      I would certainly be described as one of those "Fundamental" Christians, and I must respectfully take issue with your point.

      People who believe as I do do not deny the evidence. We collect evidence and draw inferences from it to see how that fits into our view of how the universe works.

      Either you ignore contrarian evidence, or you are not fundamentalist. A fundamentalist is not open to new evidence or ideas, because he or she is already in possession of absolute and complete truth. You cannot reason with a fundamentalist, by definition, and they cannot lose an argument because there isn't an argument.

      Anybody who is willing to accept that he or she may be wrong about God is not fundamentalist. (There's a big difference between thinking you are right and not accepting that you may be wrong.)

      Embryonic stem cell research is different.

      Not any different from letting the embryo die any other way. A fertilized egg that dies because of birth control pills is literally flushed down the toilet, and "leftover" embryos from artificial insemination are not exactly killed with any more ceremony. Would your opinion change if there was a way to take such an embryo from certain death into a lab, instead of fertilizing an egg specifically for research? The morality of such an act seems akin to harvesting body parts from the braindead, as an embryo has no discernible brain.

      I guess the question is, is experimenting on embryos absolutely immoral, or only when embryos are created for experimentation?

      Science has long existed in a realm where there were moral guidelines on appropriate research.

      You mean like how the first folks who figured out that the sun didn't revolve around the earth were accused of heresy? Where would we be if science always stayed within moral guidelines?

    2. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by anomaly · · Score: 1

      Anybody who is willing to accept that he or she may be wrong about God is not fundamentalist.

      I am willing to admit that I may be wrong, but it seems extremely unlikely. For example, how convinced are you that you have hands? Is it possible to disabuse you of the notion that you *do* have hands? It seems to me that there are several things that convince me:
      1. The existence and complexity of the universe
      2. The accuracy of the biblical record
      3. The evidence of the changed lives of the people who knew Jesus personally
      4. The evidence of the way that my relationship with Jesus Christ has changed my life.

      Is it possible that I'm wrong? Perhaps, but someone would have to provide me with a more palusible explanation of the things that I have studied and experienced.

      ignore contrarian evidence,

      Naturalists and creationists share the same evidence, and we each have things that we cannot fully explain. This is not a reason to bury one's head in the sand - rather it's an opportunity for further study.

      Not any different from letting the embryo die any other way.

      I agree with you, and I think that IUDs and birth control pills are not morally acceptable because they are abortifacients.

      You mean like how the first folks who figured out that the sun didn't revolve around the earth were accused of heresy?

      Based on our current knowledge of science, all that is needed for that fertilized egg to grow up like you or me is to have food and shelter.

      Is it ok to kill them for the furthering of scientific goals?

      This is really not comparable to the heliocentric issue.

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    3. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by GlassHeart · · Score: 1
      I am willing to admit that I may be wrong

      Then you are not fundamentalist. You are a person who is trying to understand the universe through religion. But just for the sake of argument:

      1. The existence and complexity of the universe

      You are making a leap of faith here, assuming that complexity requires design. But I don't want to argue about that.

      2. The accuracy of the biblical record

      The bible contains many fantasies. For example, do you believe that the children of Adam and Eve are incestuous? Also, do you believe in Noah's Ark, literally? Do you believe that Moses parted the Red Sea? These are all major events in the Bible that are unlikely to be literally accurate.

      3. The evidence of the changed lives of the people who knew Jesus personally

      How many people's lives changed when they encountered Buddhism, Islam, or maybe Hinduism?

      4. The evidence of the way that my relationship with Jesus Christ has changed my life.

      Again, nothing I wish to argue. If you're interested enough, you can see that the points I don't argue cover what science simply doesn't know (and maybe cannot know).

      Naturalists and creationists share the same evidence, and we each have things that we cannot fully explain.

      I wasn't talking about a naturalist or creationist, but a fundamentalist. A fundamentalist can fully explain everything. As I've said, their knowledge of the truth is both absolute and complete.

      Based on our current knowledge of science, all that is needed for that fertilized egg to grow up like you or me is to have food and shelter.

      Well, not quite. For an arbitrary embryo to grow up like me, he or she would have to be born into a "regular" family and be able to afford to go to college. Also, in many parts of the world, food and shelter are not available. It takes quite a bit of resources.

      Is it ok to kill them for the furthering of scientific goals?

      Yes, I think so. If you believe in God, then you must believe that he made one egg cell per month per woman. Roughly guessing that we have three billion women and twenty years of fertility each, we're talking 720 billion eggs (and God knows how many trillion sperms) per century or so. I don't think you can argue that most of them were not intended to die unproductively. That is, I know about "fill the earth and multiply", but 700 billion people on this earth should be ridiculous.

      So if God intended for them to die, why is it immoral to "recycle" them to improve the life that had been produced?

      This is really not comparable to the heliocentric issue.

      I was responding to your "moral guidelines", which sought to quash scientific discovery. I can't be sure, but I'd say it's likely that they were at least as sure of their moral superiority as you are of yours when they persecuted Copernicus. Point is, morality frequently lags, because it tends to be controlled by conservative and slower-moving entities. So how do we know it's not just lagging right now?

    4. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ---1. The existence and complexity of the universe

      Of course not. The universe was obviously created 5000 some years ago in a 7 day even in which the creator rested. ....Ok onto facts. There's a 3k background radiation that seems somewhat uneven in a honeycomb shape millions of ly wide. There's how many particles along with weird types of matter and energy. There's 4 forces, in which one is something on the range of 10^-30 as strong as magnetism, yet controls the orbits of the moons, planets, suns, galaxies, and even local superclusters of galaxies..

      Complex indeed. I want to discover WHY and literally become a god myself.

      ---2. The accuracy of the biblical record

      Ok, it makes it a good history, AS long as you can get the unassaulted "translations". Compare translations as "All your base are belong to us". Whats the quality, and how in the heck do you check?

      3. The evidence of the changed lives of the people who knew Jesus personally

      You personally know any of them? WHat evidence there was is corrupted by transcribing those very events no sooner than 60 years after He was murdered, bad translations, or just plain loosing the transcribed events.

      4. The evidence of the way that my relationship with Jesus Christ has changed my life.

      My relationship with myself has changed my life. Yes, I was a Catholic, and still believe in basic ideas.... I do not reject that a ultimate God exists, nor do I reject that Jesus did not live. I also believe that this God is not what people normally think, as in the holy angels flying and all that crap. If God exists, our univerrse exists as a particle in his body, or the way we exist outside of a computer emulating (in softwre) a device.

      I abide with the basic idea that we all hold the truth what we are, how to unleash that truth, and how to bring ourselves to godlike stature through eterenal death. A form of Buddho-Catholicism, if you will. I violate no commandments from the 10, and I abide by ethics that Shakyamuni and descendants have proposed that we follow.

      If this God many pray to actually listens, let him consider me on what I have accomplished and who I am, and NOT who I can offload "sins" to. Anybody can say "Forgive my sins, oh Lord, Jesus Christ" but whoever cannot conqueror problems of conscinousness mean nothing.

      ---I agree with you, and I think that IUDs and birth control pills are not morally acceptable because they are abortifacients.

      Let me ask you something from a totally different angle..

      Is it ok to kill a mammal (say, a great ape)? Why or why not?
      How much of a person is a "person"? If even one cell froma human is dropped, is that a lost 'life'?
      And to iterate a joke used by Cleese, "is every sperm sacred"? Why/why not?

      --
    5. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 1

      Anomaly

      I think we need to define some things here. In context, by fundamental I mean those who take a literalistic interpretation of their Holy Book. I made this clear with the rest of what I said; "... and insist on a literal 7 x 24-hour day creation. ... of course there are Muslims and Hindus capable of equivalent stupidity".

      Now, if you believe literally in either the Biblical account of the Flood or Creation, then you are denying _rather_ solid evidence. For example, with regard to the Noachian Global Flood, both dendrochronological dating of bristlecone pines still standing today and the dating of the Great Pyramid at Geza falsify this as an actual event. The dating one can take from the Bible's chronology implies that both the Great Pyramid, and trees on the top of mountains in Califronia were apparently totally covered by water and yet examination of the trees and Pyramids - hell, the existence of the trees and pyramid, show that this cannot have been. That is solid evidence. The yawning lack of evidnce for a Global Flood backs this up.

      If you do indeed fall under the designation I gave (a literalistic believer), I'd be happy to discuss it with you as you may not be aware of the evidence or misunderstand the evidence that the Earth is far more than a few thousand years old. If you regard the Bible account of creation as a metaphor, fine, your beliefs do not deny solid evidence.

      I am afraid taking a bunch of post-rennaisance scientists who were Christian because of where they were born (rather than any decision on their part) and who lived in a period where the worst excesses of Christian suppression of science were in the past does not invalidate my point, which is that over history Christianity seem to win the contest as 'religion most likely to stifle scientific advancement'.

      I can, for example, quote how a Hindu astronomer introduced a correct theory of eclipses to replace the religious supersticion of moon eating demons (in 400AD I think), and how no one threatened to burn him for rubbishing fondly held religious dogma, and then I can keep on going with other examples until I have a dissertation. Islam holds teaching science to be of equal value to prayer!

      Religious supersticion still makes some people oppose scientific progress, as you demonstrate;

      "We believe that all human life is sacred and that no human should be killed to make life easier or healthier for someone else. The science shows that these zygotes are inherently human - that all that is required for a person to grow from a fertilized egg is food and shelter."

      Now, your theory firstly requires belief in god. This is not universal, yet you seem to expect respect to your religious supersticiona be shown by non-belivers (and not return a similar respect to their beliefs).

      Your theory requires drawing equivalence - for example between one ounce of fetus barely 2" long, with less nerve tissue than a pet rat - and the mother or a new born child. This is NOT supported by science; your contention that human life is sacred is not even supported by the facts; did you know a large number of fertilised eggs fail to implant? What of the sacredness of those lives?

      And also, your theory requires belief in a soul. Now I can get in the Hebrew here if you like, and point out by the Bible's own definiton of soul (nephish) a baby has no soul until it breathes, as nephish means 'breather'. I can also ask why the Bible has laws against bestiality and wearing clothes made out of mixtures of fabrics and somehow forgets to specifically legislate against abortion - even though abortion was known and practsied in antiquity. If you can answer those, please do.

      But I don't mind what you believe -fine, HAVE those beliefs, just don't inflict them on others.

      "Science has long existed in a realm where there were moral guidelines on appropriate research. e.g. People must know that they are part of an experiment, and what the risks are, etc."

      Please provide evi

    6. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by Monty_Lovering · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As you're getting into this;

      "1. The existence and complexity of the universe"

      This is what I call the green hat paradox. Some religionists maintain that it is impossible the complexicty around arose without a designer. They cannot answer the question of where the complexity represented by that designer arose.

      It is like a man with a green hat saying you can't belive what someone is saying as they are wearing a green hat. The very insistance on a designer for complex systems invalidates their own belif as they cannot provide a designer for the complex ssytem that is their 'start conditon'.

      Political manuevering has resulted in the spawning of Intelligent Design. If anything ever cralwd out of the abortion bucket, it is ID. Talk about a oxymoron; it's a self-falsifying theory.

      "2. The accuracy of the biblical record"

      Like saying there was Global Flood when there is no evidence for it and direct evidence against it?

      "3. The evidence of the changed lives of the people who knew Jesus personally
      4. The evidence of the way that my relationship with Jesus Christ has changed my life."

      These claims are not unique, they are made by believers in the paranormal, by scientologists, by alien abductees, by healthfood fanatics, by reformed addicts, by other religonists outside of the Christian traditon. They just change who they give credit to.

      As for any internal proof, I'd recommend you learn more about auto-suggestion and dwell on the fact the shaman of a tribe of neolithic hunter-gatherers ALSO believes he is right because of his internalised experiences with the spirit being he believes in.

      You seem to base your opposition to abortion on the loss of POTENTIAL. What about the loss of potential for a woman who is not in a postion to raise a child? What about the loss of potential to children born in developing countries or to disadvantaged familes? How come the minute a baby is born all this talk about loss of potential goes away? The stance you have is niot consistant unless you take step to ensure the loss of potential is also prevented from happening once a child is born.

      However, unless you are able to counter evidence I presented in my other post to you (that there is no Biblical prohibition against abortion even though logically there would be if the writer had wanted there to be one), all you are doing is supporting a Pharasitical elaboration of Biblical law, and I'm sure you know what Jeus thought of the Pharasees.

      You say you are doing gods will, but I see no evidenece for it in this respect, so that even if one accepts the existence of god all you're doing is expressing a personal opinion you've copied of someone else, not a law that can be shown to be divinely inspired.
      I think the main problem with the abortion debate (other than it being approached from two different paradigms whose arguments are largely meaningless to each other) is that at 12 weeks gestation, whilst a baby is a tiny 2" long human being in appearance, that is where the similarity ends. In terms of neurologica complexity (the thing that arguably makes us human), there is no comparison.

      If cats had scales and long flicky tongues people would like them far less. They are cute and cuddly, even if they are totally self-centred couch parasites. Likewise, if 12 week-old fetuses had scales, or were still an amphorus blob, there just would not be the issue.

      Because it LOOKS like a tiny little human being, people think it is. But it isn't, not in any meaninful fashion, even when compared to a new-born.

    7. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Here's my take on things.

      The God(s)/God created PI. An infinite number of non repeating digits that describe the ratio of circle to an ever more perfect degree.

      Thus it could be argued that god(s)/God are really into doing things right up front.

      Hence the whole Adam and Eve creation myth is bunk because it's too much of a kludge for a god who's into elegant solutions.

      The big bang was an elegant solution. It was elegant because of the beauty of its simplicity.

      Evolution is an elegant solution. Going and creating all kinds of specialed creatures isn't how a God who thought up PI would do things. An elegant God who can think up an infinite number just has to have the one elegant thought and the rest just works itself out.

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    8. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How could a god create a universal truth that was, and always is true--especially before he defined it? There's always going to be an equivalent, no matter the number of dimensions. You simply can't create a truth that's intrinsically related to the universe.

      If god can do anything, I wonder how easy it would be for him to define pi to a square.

    9. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you can collect all the data, and all the crap you want. You still intrinsically belive the "truth" as presented in the bible, and try to fit what you learn about nature around that belief. That's **NOT** what a scientist does.

      What it comes down to is that you (and indeed people like you) are too much of a pussyfoot to even acknowledge the direction evidence points, so you constantly manipulate your discoveries--even subconciously--to fit your pre-conceived notion of the truth. If the glove doesn't fit, so to say.

    10. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by bear_phillips · · Score: 1
      We believe that all human life is sacred and that no human should be killed to make life easier or healthier for someone else.

      Why do so many christians support the death penalty?

      --
      http://www.windmeadow.com/
    11. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by Pseudonym · · Score: 1
      Why do so many christians support the death penalty?

      I have no idea, but if it helps, most don't.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    12. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anomaly mentioned "The existence and complexity of the universe" as proof of the existence of god, but I have always raised issue with this argument. God, by definition, must be more complex than the universe he created. His splendor, awe, and majesty must dwarf that of even the Earth itself. As such, if you're going to say that complexity and splendor necessitate a creator, then it must hold true that god, because of his complexity and splendor, also needs to have had a creator, and that creator needs one as well, and so forth...

    13. Re:WRT naturalistically formed universe by cathouse · · Score: 1
      OK Creepy Crawler, I'd like to compare your *ex-Catholic* take on the subject with mine--a former fairly hard core *Agnostic* { mainly because the one group clearly more fixed and rabidly dogmatic in their views than the *every word of scripture is the exact and perfect truth* zealots is the Atheiests--too embarasingly stupid to tolerate either]

      -1. The utterly simple and consistant nature of the universe Four forces, all of which combine into one under the conditions of an event which we can *hear* today if we just listen. 3k, sure aint A440, but it wasn't hard to find .

      In fact that 3k background just might fit the definition In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God.... now couldn't it?

      -2. I would have to say that the results of the VERY careful translations of both the* Dead Sea Scrolls and a number of other [carefully screened for authenticity] ancient manuscripts DO show that Mainstream biblical translations *Oxford Annotated Revised Standard Version* and several others are far better than .999 identical That does not say anything at all about the reporting, but it does point to one hell of a good chain of custody. If you are faulting one of the two aspects you have an obligation to clearly specify which.

      -3.evidence, etc..... Far too vague a statement to critique--except to point out that the five Christian gospels clearly show a progression from Thomas', written VERY Closely after the events/quotations by a direct observer, and that of John, written almost a century later by quite possably the finest Public Relations' Man in the entire history of Western thought. DAMN, now there was a Flac!

      Your #4 was a lame strawman which you set up just so you could knock it down....BOO HISS BOO

      As for the rest of your post--Well, I supose I wouldn't object to you making any of those statements to my kids, but I most strongly DO NOT WANT YOU EVEN TALKING TO MY SISTER--I prefer Outlaws to inlaws. -

      --
      Thelma, I'm not making ANY deals.
  130. whoa... by SailingDeity · · Score: 1

    ...Stella is hott! -- singarde, and welcome to castle infinity... -- gold tyrannasaurous, GROW CAP!

  131. This may sound modern... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but every army laying siege to a castle needs an Engineer or three.

    Explorer would appeal to me also.

  132. I feel the same way by QMO · · Score: 1

    Farming is also very complex. Think of it as a combination of botany, meteorology, applied chemistry, mechanical and civil engineering.

    A good farmer has to know the use of a great deal of tools (many of which he ends up making himself), what to plant, when to plant it, when to harvest it, how to care for it, how to prepare the land before planting, and care for the land after the harvest. A good farmer will know important differences between varieties of the same species that are identical to the layman. In some cases a lot of zoology/veterinary medicine is necessary as well.

    On top of all this the good farmer has to estimate the market a year ahead of time.

    It's *really* not very simple either.

    I would guess that a lot of people think of a smith as someone that has more muscles than brains. I would guess that people make a similar mistake with farmers, confusing the farm laborer with the farmer.

    --
    Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    1. Re:I feel the same way by bladesjester · · Score: 1

      I spent a fair chunk of my childhood on a farm. My family owns a few hundred acres (vegetables, cows, etc. We even used to grow a fair amount of tobacco) Comparing the two, smithing tends to be more difficult.

      --
      Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
  133. Ham radio by n1ywb · · Score: 1

    Nuff said

    --
    -73, de n1ywb
    www.n1ywb.com
  134. fire is pretty ancient... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    blow glass. that's pure chemistry.
    http://www.cmog.org/index.asp?pageId=426

    or spin fire. it's close to pure math. lol.
    http://www.homeofpoi.com/

    get primal! \m/ stack rocks and dance in your underpants. i do, and i still lurve my tecknowledgey. ;) peace.

  135. Plants,Animals,Religion,Politics by jago25_98 · · Score: 1

    1) Horticulture. A big one. Genetically engineer a new fruit with selective breeding like our ancesters did with the bannana.

    2) Animal husbandry. You can even selectively breed new things like a mad scientist and domesticated dogs.

    3) Carpentry, Masonary, Metal-work. Making boats and canoes.

    4) Religion. Another big one. I'm reading about kabbalah at the moment and it's really interesting - a lot of traditions stay through today after ~4000 years. You know the cross-your-heart good luck thing - that's kabbalahistic symbolism

    Magick may have some scientific base in that expectations create reality. That was the science of the day.

    So, there you go. Geeks in the past would have been aiding horticulture, looking after animals according to religious beliefs (science to them), studying the stars and trying to find order in the little things. Perhaps the geek may later get involved in power, another kind of order.

  136. Re:80 BC: The Antikythera celestial navigation dev by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah. Too bad they were all homos and their civilization died out. Gotta procreate, damn greeks, err, geeks.

  137. Bacon for me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would have tried to get a student position with Roger Bacon. It would be fun inventing all aspects of science and technology from first principles 650 years before they actually happened.

    I'm suprised more geeks don't read Bacon - his complaints about incompetent authority and his plans for dealing with it could do with a better airing today! And his proposals for creating and structuring an Internet are first-class. Then again, you do need 11th century Latin. :(

    Try http://84.1911encyclopedia.org/B/BA/BACON_ROGER.ht m for a taster.

  138. Back then by ninjakoala · · Score: 1

    I guess I would have been on Fidonet having a long-winded discussion with some crazy trolls called Socrates, Plato or something like that.

    --
    Against the grain
  139. Sangaku by Intron · · Score: 1

    Sangaku. Since reading about this in Sci Am a few years back, I've found a few descriptions and worked on the problems.

    --
    Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
  140. Building Pipe Organs and Woodworking by rclandrum · · Score: 1

    I like to build new street pipe organs and restore old pipe organs and player pianos. You can get plans to build a small street pipe organ that plays punched paper rolls (a program!!!) from John Smith of Flitwick, England and can see some examples of organs people have built here (along with a picture of mine):

    http://www.melright.com/busker/jsmith.htm

    Building a street organ will test your woodworking skills to the max, and if you are musical you can cut your own music rolls.

    My log house was built around a 1933 Moller pipe organ that I pulled from a church in Chicago. Stands 16 ft tall, 16 ft wide and 6 ft deep. Has a door in the side you can walk into to do maintenance. Fire that baby up while inside and its almost better than sex :-)

    Craig Landrum Flint Hill, VA

  141. Caveman Chemistry by SteeldrivingJon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here's the site to check out:Caveman Chemistry

    Projects from making charcoal, mead, and ceramics to casting metals and glass, and making plastic (making and drawing polyester fiber).

    --
    September 2011: Looking for Cocoa/iOS work in Boston area Cocoa Programmer Quincy, MA
  142. Magic / Necromancy by SteeldrivingJon · · Score: 2, Funny

    Back in the medieval period, the educated people were the clerics, some ordained, some not.

    Problem was, there weren't enough good jobs for the educated class. There were many underemployed people with time on their hands and limited prospects.

    So they did what came naturally. Like we hack technology, they hacked theology.

    Much 'black magic' was based on the standard Catholic rite of exorcism. In the rite, the priest commands demons or the devil to leave, in the name of the father, son, and holy ghost, perhaps with other holy names thrown in for good measure.

    Some clerk must have seen that, and thought "What a waste! If you can command them, why not tell them to do something useful?"

    Thus, the idea that a sorceror could follow a similar ritual, and use the influence of the holy powers to command the spirits to bring wealth, or sex, or knowledge.

    Sort of like hacking a CueCat.

    --
    September 2011: Looking for Cocoa/iOS work in Boston area Cocoa Programmer Quincy, MA
    1. Re:Magic / Necromancy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am, in all seriousness, a pagan magician.

      The analogies between hacking technology and mystical discovery are distant but strong. Good post.

  143. What Ancient Tech Do You Do? by Dogfarts · · Score: 1

    --Steam engines, toot-toot!
    http://www.nmpproducts.com/subdir03.htm

  144. Good example of geeks in the past by Buttercup · · Score: 1

    Read Hardy's Jude the Obscure.

    --
    Don't try that "protecting the children" shit you people use to keep the tits and bad words off my TV. --Seanbaby
  145. My non-technical hobbies: by RecycledElectrons · · Score: 1

    My first hobby is a war against the MPAA / RIAA / BSA. So, if I had lived 60 years ago, I would have been fighting the NAZIs.

    My hobbies in guns, reloading, and explosives probably would have put me in the Ordnance Department, but then I would have never had the privlidge of bayonetting an RIAA employee with a swastica on his uniform...that would have been a tough decision.

    I'm buidling a Piggott Style Brake-Rotor Windmill (see http://www.otherpower.com/ )

    Andy Out!

  146. Carburetors by homer_ca · · Score: 1

    OK, not that ancient, but it is getting to be a lost art with fuel injection taking over everything. My motorcycles aren't even that old, but they have carbs. I haven't had to mess with them in a while, but it's interesting to take one apart. They're like little mechanical analog computers.

  147. Medicine Man by smchris · · Score: 1


    So many plants and animals, so little time -- some of them with quite amazing effects.

  148. The fine olde art of... by DirtyLiar · · Score: 1

    Leering... uh...

    Oogling... er...

    Girl Watching!

    --

    THINK! It's patriotic

  149. camping, travel, old languages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Camping, canoeing, living close to nature. No high-tech toys for days. It was quite a shock the first time, but you get to enjoy the complete turn-around when you get used to it.

    Travel around, including foreign countries if enough time and budget.

    Learn dead or old languages like Latin and Chinese. Not at the level of fluent conversation, but keeps you interesting to learn the history, especially how they influenced West/East culture. I'll get to Middle East languages like Hebrew if I have time.

  150. Swordsmith by B4RSK · · Score: 1

    I would have been a swordsmith, no doubt about it. What cooler tech could there have been in times long since past?

    --
    Some people are like slinkies--basically useless but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs.
  151. Re:80 BC: The Antikythera celestial navigation dev by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have never been able to find a good text explaining how to calculate longitude based on the position of the Moon. Has anyone ran across this information?

  152. BBQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'nuff said

  153. Geek Tree by Valiss · · Score: 1

    Speaking of... ...my fiance and I went to Home Depot the other day to get some fruit trees to plant in the yard. We stumbled upon 1 tree (about a year old) that says it produces two kinds of peaches, nectarenes AND plums. Four fruits on one tree??

    Now I'm busy trying to research on the net how they did this and what to expect when it matures. Sure enough, upon closer inspection of the actual tree, it appears as though each branch is spliced from a different tree (except one).

    That's pretty cool tech (therfore geeky) to me!

    --

    -Valiss
  154. Thievery and the Occult by psykocrime · · Score: 1

    If I'd been born in an age without what we call "technology" today, I would probably have been either a thief, or some sort of occultist.

    Thievery involves something like hacking, eg, learning to "hack" locks and other security systems, etc. Think a medieval version of "Oceans 11," that would of been the kind of shit that I would have liked.

    Or I would have been off somewhere trying to learn about magic, the occult, astrology, alchemy, etc. Actually I'm a little bit interested in some of that stuff even living in modern times.

    Of course those two things aren't mutually exclusive, so maybe I'd have been involved in both.

    This whole discussion reminds me, I need to go order that set of lockpicks I've been jonesing after....

    --
    // TODO: Insert Cool Sig
  155. Atlatl by Randym · · Score: 1
    *Somebody* had to invent the device that made a spear fly both truer and harder -- no longer did you have to slink back to camp and say to the missus: "You should have seen the mastodon that got away -- it could have fed us all winter!"

    It sure wasn't one of those guys with the bear grease in their hair who were always hanging around the young maidens, comparing their eyes to the flowers that grew down by the river, and slipping off with them into the nightshadows while the shaman told scary tales of 12-feet tall bears by the firelight. Nope, it was the short guys who had to squint to see anything, who couldn't throw a rock more than twenty feet, who ended up living in caves with their mothers, always scratching on the cave walls with bits of charcoal. You know those guys: their motto was, "Must innovate to procreate!" It was those of whom it was later said: "He is not so good in battle, but watch him throw that atlatl!"

    --
    DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.