Given rise of robotics, expert systems, eventually crude and partial AI and maybe later progress there, the current imponderable of productions and distribution of sufficient cheap energy based on blend of stuff that works to increase capacity and balance load (that includes lots of nukes, especially thorium cycle; also methane cycle stuff, and despite the large initial costs and long ROI, solar-power sats), planetary distribution of work, gradual planetary shift to post-Industrial - all this calls into question the apathetic acceptance of unexamined traditional apportionments of who owns what and what precisely that ownership entails especially in regard rights and responsibilities. I note a doubling of population can apply some pressures here.
I dislike to add in the word, but it applies. Given requirement of cheap abundant energy, adequate robotics, a paradigm shift in econ is necessary for the betterment of all and not just the traditional privileged, else the control of large serf class becomes more than just problematic.
I see the need, the possibles, the eventuality at least as potential, I just don't see it happening - not soon, anyway. Give it thirty years, then come back and tell me what you see (addressed to the doubters).
These are fractious times and emotional comfort of cling to personal preferences of various traditions is strong. I suggest, relax, lend effort to what makes personal sense, do your work and enjoy what you can.
Meanwhile, do get out and about your local politics. There are worse hobbies and divertments.
This. You, I, and others have pointed this out for some time now. While much of the original rev was, or started, top-down (the movers and shakers get pissed off about taxes, the commoners about bivouac laws and taxes) the requirement post establishment was always built upon bottom up.
Side note - rights are factored by responsibility and law. It's a balance, one that needs constant attention and care.
If it's too late, then attending local politics becomes an exercise and training ground for after. If it isn't too late, then it better be done now, and widely. As you say, this would require some real get-off-the-fucking-couch effort. It's also difficult given the paucity of time for two-earner households squeezed by the never-ending debt game of banks, the Fed, and the hoi-polloi represented by those who fell in love with managing their own purse not for the commonweal but for their favorite earmarks and the like.
Even so sufficient time to attend city council meetings, go door to door in the neighborhood organizing, spreading the word of effort, candidate, ordinance, getting out in enough numbers to vote for people who can be trusted rather than those beholden to -ism or the town corporation interests, yeah, it can be done. It will only be done if someone starts the ball rolling. It can and does spread, like an avalanche. I'm old enough to have seen it done. Not just once, not just in one place. It's the way things are supposed to work, and we've lost that. We lost it to the seductive suck of TV amid the post-War complacency of plenty. It revived a bit in '60s and '70s.
I don't think a separate court is necessary, even for FISA warrants and oversight. It's been common enough over the years for _in camera_ sessions as part of otherwise ordinary court proceedings.
from Wikipedia article "Central Intelligence Agency": In September 1947, the National Security Act of 1947 established both the National Security Council and the Central Intelligence Agency.
It is a separate agency. Period. That CIA and DOD cooperate on some matters (transportation, signals, paramilitary training and action, for some examples) is no wise equivalent to control. Each body is quite protective of its own space and prerogatives. Most DCI have been civilian, often with little or even no military experience.
From the Wikipedia article on "National Security Agency": The National Security Agency (NSA) is the central producer and manager of signals intelligence for the United States, operating under the jurisdiction of the Department of Defense.
That's one of the things touched on in Rober S. De Ropp's The Master Game from back early Seventies (well, when I read it).
The pleasure trap is a trip, and it relates well to other addictions, I think. When I look to my own experience with foods, alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, it fits pretty well. The only odd man out for me were with the psychedelics - my rate and dose did not increase over time, my enjoyment remained fairly steady; I simply reached a place where all I could get from them had been gotten. The legal stuffs... well, that's a different story.
Interesting essay and some good links, thanks.
Btw, I own you an apology from a little while back: you posted three lengthy replies to me which I found good but a bit overwhelming. I read some of the linked material, checked out your site(s), and kept wanting to reply but frankly didn't know where to start. And I continue to read on some of it - largely the econ-related things. (Brain I stumbled across by accident earlier this year; Manna makes a good read and a fine cautionary tale.) Anyway, my bad; I could have at least thanked you.
"Future generations' textbooks will be electronic DRM'ed devices that will say what their lords wants them to say."
Damn, that's scary, and disheartening. We've a ways to go to get there, but I see the Texas school boards' textbook selection committee continues to lead the way, for instance.
Well done. "A fervent defense of Apathy" - tasty. Thanks.
Years ago for a poli-sci class we read a thesis concerning voting records for the United Nations. A major, perhaps the central, discovery was the mediating influence of the non-aligned nations in that by their much-criticised (by the Major Powers) middle-of-the-road votes they acted as a balance wheel against extreme positions and actions by the body at large.
Similar to what your American apathetic center does.
"Even the world wars were basically Europe's problem..."
World War II cannot, I think, be fairly considered a basically European problem. Take a gander once at the parties involved, where they were involved, and the scope of that involvement. Factor in the economic interests in the several geographical areas. I believe it safe to say that WWII was the first truly global war in all aspects. While there were areas of relative quiet - South America, except for arms, ores, and espionage - and several nations claimed neutrality, that in no wise diminishes the scope of that war.
One thing to keep in mind is that at the time the parties to our civil war expected that there would be some sort of resolution, an ending. Ditto for WWII.
For decades, the only presumed end to the Cold War was a hot one. That it ended with such a marvelous whimper is a first in history given the extent of the global entanglements, and keeping always in mind the staggering level of forces arrayed. Even towards the end, with the hopes attending the various nuclear force restrictions and later reductions, for instance, a peaceful end to it was hardly a foregone conclusion. While most nowadays credit Reagan for outspending the Soviets, I suggest it was as much the close-run accidental loosing of the nukes on several occasions that sobered up the generals like nothing else, coupled with the simple fact that we were also bankrupting ourselves - we just were better able to cook the books using credit float.
Even with the huge profits throughout the military-industrial complex, amidst planners' requirements to be able to fight 2 1/2 land wars, the bleakness of most forecast ends to the Cold War (including our own impending bankruptcy) forced the complex's acquiescence to that end. So other outlets were needed - the largest arms selling the world has seen, and, just in the nick of time, Sandbox I and II and the side jaunt into Afghan land.
While our economic woes and structural weaknesses preclude Cold War-level spending, we do now at least have two wars without end: The War on Drugs, which has been a steady source for contracts and votes, and The War on Terror, which is a gold mine for many of the players. And, because the second especially is so serious, the requirements for intel are also serious - and so the latter day passing of all comms through NSA in lieu of Stanton's office.
We have always been at war with Eastasia. For those in power, what's not to like?
Oh, OK, thanks for the clarification. Thing is, I think it depends much on looking at the usefulness of a project or research program. Congress folks tend to look at funding/jobs/votes and tend to not give a shit about the worth of anything to the nation at large - if they even have the interest or ability to do so.
I'm only familiar in a passing way with the general kinds of things 'twixt contractors and agencies, mostly from dealing with some milspec bidding decades back. I had enough trouble with all the bloddy paperwork without trying to follow any intricacy of political stuff that may've been involved. I will say that the people I spoke with were for the most part exceeding helpful.
It's the publish and return policy I take issue with: the number of works for which there is no choice for one to decide whether to buy and read because those works no longer exist, unless one should chance to find it in a re-sale shop. Wider market choice is precluded.
Good examples even if obscure or of limited interest to many. You're right, it's not just that many works, scholarly and otherwise are becoming less available, it's worse because the owners of copyright are creating a cultural black hole. A student of cultural history will be going along, following media production from ancient to modern times, then suddenly find a decades-long blank spot. Seems to me that Congress allowing greed to trump public interest is malfeasance on their part.
That a publisher can command such high prices as you describe is also bad. Publish the works electronically, have those interested in obtaining copies do the proof reading gratis, sell the e-books at five or ten bucks a crack, and everyone wins. (If the author is still alive, split the price with him.)
Applying cultural/politically-correct/moral 20/20 hindsight to earlier works does not strike me as useful criterion for deciding whether to allow the preservation and dissemination of those works. On its merits alone, "Song of the South" is a good piece of work. Using your filter, much of Twain would be prohibited, for instance, as would many of the Doris Day style of romantic comedy films from the Fifties. Other examples abound.
As an aside, light pollution in my area is bad enough that it's not easy to see these noctilucent clouds. Between that pollution and clouds, it's nigh impossible to see much of the night sky; I consider that one of the problems afflicting city dwellers is the inability to see the nighttime sky, which might otherwise provide for feeling humility and awe.
Thanks for listing some of those things. I hadn't heard of the of jellyfish thing - that's neat stuff. The main reason I think it's good to point out what you did is it maybe can help counter the great amount of cluelessness amongst people who don't bother to look into or think about things. We live in a mental land chock full of buzzwords and phrases - nuclear, military, intelligence, cloud, etc., and I think it helps to clarify things.
This bit with the e. coli looks interesting; one has to wonder at just how more usefully it and similar organisms and techniques might could be used.
Abrade the old bumps, use nail polish to make new ones. I suggest nail polish 'cuz it is often easily gotten, and fairly easy to remove - providing acetone doesn't mess with the key caps themselves. Use clear for looks, maybe.
This might also be a use for a 3-D printer, if finished detail were possible and one had access.
I haven't done due diligence in searching, so I have to wonder how long ago the possibility of avalanches on the assorted rubbled asteroids was raised. You knew, but that may not qualify as being able to assume it was a notion up for wider discussion. Perhaps the author of the piece that led to the submission didn't bother searching either.
I think it's an interesting question and I admire that bit of mind that first asked it. Now I have to wonder just who first wondered about it. Geez, thanks, hey.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, one of the elephants in the room. Bravo.
Given rise of robotics, expert systems, eventually crude and partial AI and maybe later progress there, the current imponderable of productions and distribution of sufficient cheap energy based on blend of stuff that works to increase capacity and balance load (that includes lots of nukes, especially thorium cycle; also methane cycle stuff, and despite the large initial costs and long ROI, solar-power sats), planetary distribution of work, gradual planetary shift to post-Industrial - all this calls into question the apathetic acceptance of unexamined traditional apportionments of who owns what and what precisely that ownership entails especially in regard rights and responsibilities. I note a doubling of population can apply some pressures here.
I dislike to add in the word, but it applies. Given requirement of cheap abundant energy, adequate robotics, a paradigm shift in econ is necessary for the betterment of all and not just the traditional privileged, else the control of large serf class becomes more than just problematic.
I see the need, the possibles, the eventuality at least as potential, I just don't see it happening - not soon, anyway. Give it thirty years, then come back and tell me what you see (addressed to the doubters).
These are fractious times and emotional comfort of cling to personal preferences of various traditions is strong. I suggest, relax, lend effort to what makes personal sense, do your work and enjoy what you can.
Meanwhile, do get out and about your local politics. There are worse hobbies and divertments.
This.
You, I, and others have pointed this out for some time now. While much of the original rev was, or started, top-down (the movers and shakers get pissed off about taxes, the commoners about bivouac laws and taxes) the requirement post establishment was always built upon bottom up.
Side note - rights are factored by responsibility and law. It's a balance, one that needs constant attention and care.
If it's too late, then attending local politics becomes an exercise and training ground for after. If it isn't too late, then it better be done now, and widely. As you say, this would require some real get-off-the-fucking-couch effort. It's also difficult given the paucity of time for two-earner households squeezed by the never-ending debt game of banks, the Fed, and the hoi-polloi represented by those who fell in love with managing their own purse not for the commonweal but for their favorite earmarks and the like.
Even so sufficient time to attend city council meetings, go door to door in the neighborhood organizing, spreading the word of effort, candidate, ordinance, getting out in enough numbers to vote for people who can be trusted rather than those beholden to -ism or the town corporation interests, yeah, it can be done. It will only be done if someone starts the ball rolling. It can and does spread, like an avalanche. I'm old enough to have seen it done. Not just once, not just in one place. It's the way things are supposed to work, and we've lost that. We lost it to the seductive suck of TV amid the post-War complacency of plenty. It revived a bit in '60s and '70s.
So who will get off the couch?
Say what? What's wrong with a good descriptive noun, the original in fact.
Blog? Sounds like something you wipe yourself after.
Often with better doughnuts, also.
I don't think a separate court is necessary, even for FISA warrants and oversight. It's been common enough over the years for _in camera_ sessions as part of otherwise ordinary court proceedings.
from Wikipedia article "Central Intelligence Agency":
In September 1947, the National Security Act of 1947 established both the National Security Council and the Central Intelligence Agency.
It is a separate agency. Period. That CIA and DOD cooperate on some matters (transportation, signals, paramilitary training and action, for some examples) is no wise equivalent to control. Each body is quite protective of its own space and prerogatives. Most DCI have been civilian, often with little or even no military experience.
See also the short http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Act_of_1947
See also https://www.cia.gov/kids-page/6-12th-grade/operation-history/history-of-the-cia.html
While it has "kids" in the title it nonetheless gives a concise accounting of formation and scope of CIA.
In sum: CIA ain't run by the military.
From the Wikipedia article on "National Security Agency":
The National Security Agency (NSA) is the central producer and manager of signals intelligence for the United States, operating under the jurisdiction of the Department of Defense.
So, one no, one yes.
That's one of the things touched on in Rober S. De Ropp's The Master Game from back early Seventies (well, when I read it).
The pleasure trap is a trip, and it relates well to other addictions, I think. When I look to my own experience with foods, alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, it fits pretty well. The only odd man out for me were with the psychedelics - my rate and dose did not increase over time, my enjoyment remained fairly steady; I simply reached a place where all I could get from them had been gotten. The legal stuffs... well, that's a different story.
Interesting essay and some good links, thanks.
Btw, I own you an apology from a little while back: you posted three lengthy replies to me which I found good but a bit overwhelming. I read some of the linked material, checked out your site(s), and kept wanting to reply but frankly didn't know where to start. And I continue to read on some of it - largely the econ-related things. (Brain I stumbled across by accident earlier this year; Manna makes a good read and a fine cautionary tale.) Anyway, my bad; I could have at least thanked you.
All through the thread I had the nagging thought that something was missing. Thanks for the reminder and a better memory than I have.
"Future generations' textbooks will be electronic DRM'ed devices that will say what their lords wants them to say."
Damn, that's scary, and disheartening. We've a ways to go to get there, but I see the Texas school boards' textbook selection committee continues to lead the way, for instance.
Well done. "A fervent defense of Apathy" - tasty. Thanks.
Years ago for a poli-sci class we read a thesis concerning voting records for the United Nations. A major, perhaps the central, discovery was the mediating influence of the non-aligned nations in that by their much-criticised (by the Major Powers) middle-of-the-road votes they acted as a balance wheel against extreme positions and actions by the body at large.
Similar to what your American apathetic center does.
shouldn't that be "baa"?
"Even the world wars were basically Europe's problem..."
World War II cannot, I think, be fairly considered a basically European problem. Take a gander once at the parties involved, where they were involved, and the scope of that involvement. Factor in the economic interests in the several geographical areas. I believe it safe to say that WWII was the first truly global war in all aspects. While there were areas of relative quiet - South America, except for arms, ores, and espionage - and several nations claimed neutrality, that in no wise diminishes the scope of that war.
One thing to keep in mind is that at the time the parties to our civil war expected that there would be some sort of resolution, an ending. Ditto for WWII.
For decades, the only presumed end to the Cold War was a hot one. That it ended with such a marvelous whimper is a first in history given the extent of the global entanglements, and keeping always in mind the staggering level of forces arrayed. Even towards the end, with the hopes attending the various nuclear force restrictions and later reductions, for instance, a peaceful end to it was hardly a foregone conclusion. While most nowadays credit Reagan for outspending the Soviets, I suggest it was as much the close-run accidental loosing of the nukes on several occasions that sobered up the generals like nothing else, coupled with the simple fact that we were also bankrupting ourselves - we just were better able to cook the books using credit float.
Even with the huge profits throughout the military-industrial complex, amidst planners' requirements to be able to fight 2 1/2 land wars, the bleakness of most forecast ends to the Cold War (including our own impending bankruptcy) forced the complex's acquiescence to that end. So other outlets were needed - the largest arms selling the world has seen, and, just in the nick of time, Sandbox I and II and the side jaunt into Afghan land.
While our economic woes and structural weaknesses preclude Cold War-level spending, we do now at least have two wars without end: The War on Drugs, which has been a steady source for contracts and votes, and The War on Terror, which is a gold mine for many of the players. And, because the second especially is so serious, the requirements for intel are also serious - and so the latter day passing of all comms through NSA in lieu of Stanton's office.
We have always been at war with Eastasia. For those in power, what's not to like?
Wonderful, ain't it? The only thing Disney has in common with the one I grew up with is the name.
I'm more'n ready to have the whole system go back to a flat seven years for everything - and none for anything that got public monies.
Oh, OK, thanks for the clarification. Thing is, I think it depends much on looking at the usefulness of a project or research program. Congress folks tend to look at funding/jobs/votes and tend to not give a shit about the worth of anything to the nation at large - if they even have the interest or ability to do so.
I'm only familiar in a passing way with the general kinds of things 'twixt contractors and agencies, mostly from dealing with some milspec bidding decades back. I had enough trouble with all the bloddy paperwork without trying to follow any intricacy of political stuff that may've been involved. I will say that the people I spoke with were for the most part exceeding helpful.
re echo chamber, a good, overlooked point. Too much customization restricts worldview, which I don't see as a good thing.
It's the publish and return policy I take issue with: the number of works for which there is no choice for one to decide whether to buy and read because those works no longer exist, unless one should chance to find it in a re-sale shop. Wider market choice is precluded.
That is one sad story. Multiply by.... It shouldn't be a matter of that, though. All those works should simply be public domain.
Good examples even if obscure or of limited interest to many. You're right, it's not just that many works, scholarly and otherwise are becoming less available, it's worse because the owners of copyright are creating a cultural black hole. A student of cultural history will be going along, following media production from ancient to modern times, then suddenly find a decades-long blank spot. Seems to me that Congress allowing greed to trump public interest is malfeasance on their part.
That a publisher can command such high prices as you describe is also bad. Publish the works electronically, have those interested in obtaining copies do the proof reading gratis, sell the e-books at five or ten bucks a crack, and everyone wins. (If the author is still alive, split the price with him.)
Applying cultural/politically-correct/moral 20/20 hindsight to earlier works does not strike me as useful criterion for deciding whether to allow the preservation and dissemination of those works. On its merits alone, "Song of the South" is a good piece of work. Using your filter, much of Twain would be prohibited, for instance, as would many of the Doris Day style of romantic comedy films from the Fifties. Other examples abound.
Wow, thanks, haven't espied one of those in decades.
This.
As an aside, light pollution in my area is bad enough that it's not easy to see these noctilucent clouds. Between that pollution and clouds, it's nigh impossible to see much of the night sky; I consider that one of the problems afflicting city dwellers is the inability to see the nighttime sky, which might otherwise provide for feeling humility and awe.
Thanks for listing some of those things. I hadn't heard of the of jellyfish thing - that's neat stuff. The main reason I think it's good to point out what you did is it maybe can help counter the great amount of cluelessness amongst people who don't bother to look into or think about things. We live in a mental land chock full of buzzwords and phrases - nuclear, military, intelligence, cloud, etc., and I think it helps to clarify things.
This bit with the e. coli looks interesting; one has to wonder at just how more usefully it and similar organisms and techniques might could be used.
Abrade the old bumps, use nail polish to make new ones. I suggest nail polish 'cuz it is often easily gotten, and fairly easy to remove - providing acetone doesn't mess with the key caps themselves. Use clear for looks, maybe.
This might also be a use for a 3-D printer, if finished detail were possible and one had access.
Not until you asked. Tnx, I think.
I haven't done due diligence in searching, so I have to wonder how long ago the possibility of avalanches on the assorted rubbled asteroids was raised. You knew, but that may not qualify as being able to assume it was a notion up for wider discussion. Perhaps the author of the piece that led to the submission didn't bother searching either.
I think it's an interesting question and I admire that bit of mind that first asked it. Now I have to wonder just who first wondered about it. Geez, thanks, hey.