Sadly, I feel that China will be a land of the have and the have nots and the gap between them will be larger than any other country.
Uhhh, I don't think so.
Here in SF, I literally trip over have-nots every block. And these are only the visible ones....
Just look around you: in this country 1% of the population owns 90% of the wealth. The average CEO makes upwards of 30 times the poor slob on the frontline makes.
The gross disparity between rich and poor is right here, right now, and China's gap may *mirror* that of the US, but it seems statistically improbable that it would be larger than here.
I, too, am in the tech industry, have been for years, and the closer I get to the technology, the more I wonder WHY?
There is no question that these things are fascinating--otherwise we wouldn't be here to discuss them, but at the end of the day, where do they leave us? A conversation with my wife is far more fufilling than getting my MTA working through my firewall, but I still want that system--and the four or five others I have at my home (let alone work!)--to function at peak, secure performance, and so I leave the conversation to go make sure It Is So.
I personally fear that the machines already have control of me, and I'm not certain how to extricate myself.
Ahem. Pardon this personal digression.
While I hesitate to call myself a Luddite, I certainly understand your worldview.
You hit it right on the head: what started 500 years ago is only shifting gears, right into our collective consciousness.
There are more people on the planet today than EVER before, and, correspondingly, more people live in abject misery than ever before. The underlying racism of this--these poor unfortunates just don't know what's right for them; let US decide what is best--is not even hidden from public airing in the West's so-called "intelligensia". They click their tongues at the backward nature of these people, if only THEY had computers, cell phones, ad nauseum, they would be better off, they would be like US. Rarely over the last 500 years has the question been raised that maybe THEY know what's best for them; no, you have to abide by the Kissinger Rational for command and control.
This elitism is now pervasive in this realm, where "progressivists" justify every little "advance" as the means to godhood and every soul that resists their proclamations as Luddite. The fact that many of us have lived without these modern conveniences--and continue to do so in some "backward" places--is merely a statistical anomaly that will be quickly be corrected once these toys are ubiquitous.
Humans are only more comfortable today than they were 200 years ago, not happier. Just look at all this "extreme sports" crap to see how empty modern life is, to see how desperate people are--even in this, the history's most powerful, most advanced hegemon--for any sensation that will convince them that they are truly alive and not some sleepwalking zombie.
I've lost faith in technology's ability to lift us up. If it cannot make us happier, perhaps we should look elsewhere for the Next Revolution.
I've consciously avoided getting a cell and carefully forget my pager at home every opportunity for the very reasons you state, but there is another facet to this (one that appeals to my vanity):
The ultimate sign of status in the future will be those who do NOT have cell phones, pagers, or similar such devices. In a networked world, those who deny access to themselves--or place barriers to easy access--will be the elite.
When I posted a comment that started this thread, I knew it was inflammatory, and I hoped that it would spark more interesting and insightful commentary than this.
Let me be clearer, since you're not getting it: I actually WORK in corporate America. I, like most of you, am a drone working in a high-rise, looking out over the scuttling ants so far below my window that their humanity is all but lost (which, fallaciously, assumes they have any humanity to begin with.) I SEE the dehumanizing elements at work, and the keepers of the flame that ensure the machine grinds forward. (And this is in a start-up, no less!)
You kid yourselves if you think the Faustian bargain we've all made will ever be enough to satisfy our souls. What I ask of you is that you THINK for yourselves--which means stop this incessant comparison of things, such as corporations and governments, to us living, breathing creatures of this planet. We are unique, we have thoughts and feelings that CANNOT be contained within these walls, nor answered by the pandering to our greed presented by these organizations.
DEFEND yourselves, not the corps or the governments. YOU ARE SEPARATE FROM THEM.
Which brings me to my ultimate point: my rights are separate from, and superior to, the organization I work for. I will not equate the two, and if any of you have any thoughts left to you outside of the corporate mind engram you've embraced, you will not either.
Finally, in response to this person's post, and the comment about being rich being equal to being successful, please remember the two are NOT necessarily equivalent. If you really believe that, you elevate mediocrity to godhood, and elimate any meaningful definition of what success can be.
If you've listened to an ENTIRE Nader speech, he is QUITE different from Whore and Shrub. In addition to actually being funny, he is insightful and believable, two qualities the Republicrats lack.
In this complex world, people can agree on some issues and be totally at odds on everything else. Just because Nader talks about Hollywood violence like the others, it doesn't mean he's anything like them.
Voting for Nader ensures that the Greens will get Federal matching funds in the future. That in and of itself is worth a vote for him.
WHY should an immortal paper entity be given due process? A corp is a thing, with less life than a slug (and even less benefits to the planet).
I wish you corp leeches would get a clue. This is MY world, too, and every time you equate a human being with a faux entity like a corporation, you steal a bit of our collective humanity, diminishing me and everyone else right along with your sorry selves.
If you want to be a lap dog, feel free. Just keep it away from the rest of us.
Actually, it is that world NOW, it's just that people are more "in touch with their feelings" today than they will be in the future (where emotions outside of greed will be bred out of the species.)
By the time the free-marketeers realize the Faustian bargain they've struck with Gold-inlaid Faucet Crowd, they'll be scrubbing the bowls and polishing the fixtures, all the time looking forward to James Caan's blood being splashed on their clothes on Friday night.
Slashdot Mirror
Sadly, I feel that China will be a land of the have and the have nots and the gap between them will be larger than any other country.
Uhhh, I don't think so.
Here in SF, I literally trip over have-nots every block. And these are only the visible ones....
Just look around you: in this country 1% of the population owns 90% of the wealth. The average CEO makes upwards of 30 times the poor slob on the frontline makes.
The gross disparity between rich and poor is right here, right now, and China's gap may *mirror* that of the US, but it seems statistically improbable that it would be larger than here.
I, too, am in the tech industry, have been for years, and the closer I get to the technology, the more I wonder WHY?
There is no question that these things are fascinating--otherwise we wouldn't be here to discuss them, but at the end of the day, where do they leave us? A conversation with my wife is far more fufilling than getting my MTA working through my firewall, but I still want that system--and the four or five others I have at my home (let alone work!)--to function at peak, secure performance, and so I leave the conversation to go make sure It Is So.
I personally fear that the machines already have control of me, and I'm not certain how to extricate myself.
Ahem. Pardon this personal digression.
While I hesitate to call myself a Luddite, I certainly understand your worldview.
You hit it right on the head: what started 500 years ago is only shifting gears, right into our collective consciousness.
There are more people on the planet today than EVER before, and, correspondingly, more people live in abject misery than ever before. The underlying racism of this--these poor unfortunates just don't know what's right for them; let US decide what is best--is not even hidden from public airing in the West's so-called "intelligensia". They click their tongues at the backward nature of these people, if only THEY had computers, cell phones, ad nauseum, they would be better off, they would be like US. Rarely over the last 500 years has the question been raised that maybe THEY know what's best for them; no, you have to abide by the Kissinger Rational for command and control.
This elitism is now pervasive in this realm, where "progressivists" justify every little "advance" as the means to godhood and every soul that resists their proclamations as Luddite. The fact that many of us have lived without these modern conveniences--and continue to do so in some "backward" places--is merely a statistical anomaly that will be quickly be corrected once these toys are ubiquitous.
Humans are only more comfortable today than they were 200 years ago, not happier. Just look at all this "extreme sports" crap to see how empty modern life is, to see how desperate people are--even in this, the history's most powerful, most advanced hegemon--for any sensation that will convince them that they are truly alive and not some sleepwalking zombie.
I've lost faith in technology's ability to lift us up. If it cannot make us happier, perhaps we should look elsewhere for the Next Revolution.
I've consciously avoided getting a cell and carefully forget my pager at home every opportunity for the very reasons you state, but there is another facet to this (one that appeals to my vanity):
The ultimate sign of status in the future will be those who do NOT have cell phones, pagers, or similar such devices. In a networked world, those who deny access to themselves--or place barriers to easy access--will be the elite.
Just ask the government...
When I posted a comment that started this thread, I knew it was inflammatory, and I hoped that it would spark more interesting and insightful commentary than this.
Let me be clearer, since you're not getting it: I actually WORK in corporate America. I, like most of you, am a drone working in a high-rise, looking out over the scuttling ants so far below my window that their humanity is all but lost (which, fallaciously, assumes they have any humanity to begin with.) I SEE the dehumanizing elements at work, and the keepers of the flame that ensure the machine grinds forward. (And this is in a start-up, no less!)
You kid yourselves if you think the Faustian bargain we've all made will ever be enough to satisfy our souls. What I ask of you is that you THINK for yourselves--which means stop this incessant comparison of things, such as corporations and governments, to us living, breathing creatures of this planet. We are unique, we have thoughts and feelings that CANNOT be contained within these walls, nor answered by the pandering to our greed presented by these organizations.
DEFEND yourselves, not the corps or the governments. YOU ARE SEPARATE FROM THEM.
Which brings me to my ultimate point: my rights are separate from, and superior to, the organization I work for. I will not equate the two, and if any of you have any thoughts left to you outside of the corporate mind engram you've embraced, you will not either.
Finally, in response to this person's post, and the comment about being rich being equal to being successful, please remember the two are NOT necessarily equivalent. If you really believe that, you elevate mediocrity to godhood, and elimate any meaningful definition of what success can be.
You're oversimplifying Nader's message.
If you've listened to an ENTIRE Nader speech, he is QUITE different from Whore and Shrub. In addition to actually being funny, he is insightful and believable, two qualities the Republicrats lack.
In this complex world, people can agree on some issues and be totally at odds on everything else. Just because Nader talks about Hollywood violence like the others, it doesn't mean he's anything like them.
Voting for Nader ensures that the Greens will get Federal matching funds in the future. That in and of itself is worth a vote for him.
WHY should an immortal paper entity be given due process? A corp is a thing, with less life than a slug (and even less benefits to the planet).
I wish you corp leeches would get a clue. This is MY world, too, and every time you equate a human being with a faux entity like a corporation, you steal a bit of our collective humanity, diminishing me and everyone else right along with your sorry selves.
If you want to be a lap dog, feel free. Just keep it away from the rest of us.
Due process INDEED.
It will be the Rollerball world.
Actually, it is that world NOW, it's just that people are more "in touch with their feelings" today than they will be in the future (where emotions outside of greed will be bred out of the species.)
By the time the free-marketeers realize the Faustian bargain they've struck with Gold-inlaid Faucet Crowd, they'll be scrubbing the bowls and polishing the fixtures, all the time looking forward to James Caan's blood being splashed on their clothes on Friday night.
As Dick said, The Empire Never Ended.
How is it that publicly funded tech always winds up in the hands of private hands?
This is another case of universities prostituting themselves out for for future funding.
Can anyone say cold fusion?