I lost interest in the article -- but not the objective phenomena -- and didn't even finish it, when it became apparent it's bottom line is: trying to find interesting new ways to make dot.com $$ (go ahead; tell me I'm wrong).
People have to make a living -- but this is ideological -- an irrelevant to many of us.
It's not to be expected that libertarian IT geeks, especially U.S. ones, would have the least comprehension of what communism is all about. Suffice it to say here that U.S.-controlled police states the world-over are every bit as authoritarian -- and then some -- as any past or present 'communist' state.
The point I want to make here is that bourgeois thinkers are constantly re-inventing the wheel, so to speak, when the issue of 'what to do about the chronic crisis of overproduction' inevitably crops up each 'business cycle' (Crisis. You know: mass unemployment time). Every new phase of a capitalist economy seems to invariably produce intellectual schools of thought which reproduce (I would rather say 'ape') the present thinking of the ruling class (but maybe with a new 'angle'). And the solutions proffered always inevitably seek to keep the capitalist system as a whole, intact; but fat chance solving these pressing world problems under a system that refuses to be the least bit honest about how it actually works.
All these newfangled theories which involve 'market forces' suddenly getting religion, are simply attempts to avoid the REAL issue: the unavoidably anarchic nature of capitalist production -- because the obvious solution is a world-wide system of planned production -- i.e. communism. And really: what could be more free than a system where nobody is worrying where their next meal is coming from (the real 'bottom line')?
Marxists have had the solution to these growing world problems for quite some time. Comparing the historically awful practices of supposedly 'communist' states to their richer imperial adversaries only exhibits a gross ignorance of that history, and of the issues.
You've got your free speech, it wasn't supressed at all. Were you thrown in jail, charged with crimes of treason or some such thing?
No?
Then you had free speech. Just because others around you reacted badly to what you had to say, doesn't mean that you were oppressed.
The western world is full of complaisant people like you who don't get it.
They will indeed throw people in jail -- as they begin to 'lose control' of the internal domestic situation. That they've not done it on a level that you recognize as 'police state-ish' is more a reflection of specific U.S. imperial history, than any supposed quality of U.S. democratic values. Many people have indeed been jailed for free speech; even assassinated: check out any 'Anti-Globalization' demo for recent, 'trivial' examples of the former -- or do only long-term, high-profile dissidents pass muster?
The U.S. has always been a 'low-intensity police state' -- and an Evil Empire for that matter: it's simply massacred most of its indigenous peoples, and shipped the rest off to concentration camps/reserves -- where they are militarily assaulted to this very day.
Your much-vaunted right to free speech is pretty much 'for show' only, fella;
soon-to-be-revoked, looks like.
We've already seen massive Puts on airlines just prior to 9/11 as well as high volumes of trading through WTC firms that morning. (Though those may have been US government insiders (CIA, etc.) just picking up some pocket change on the coat-tails of what Bush was going to play dumb about in order to justify his dynastic authoritarian imperial superpower agenda.) But the potential for some real harm caused by seriously hostile intentions for the international financial structure is huge. This is major scary stuff.
These academics typically skirted around an obvious main point of their analysis: that the biggest threat to the world Internet community WILL be the NATO governments themselves -- first and foremost the U.S. government -- at any time they feel like 'taking down' some people's public Internet infrastructure.
People confuse time and matter. Time does not exist in matter, matter exists in time. Time is the control, and matter is just along for the ride.
Personally I don't think time and matter have any interaction. I think time is just a way of measuring intervals of action... and it's not another dimension...
I suppose that some people won't buy the below; I'll just assert it:
Time is merely the 'by-product' of energy/matter in motion. 'Time' is what energy/matter does, 'moment-by-moment', in the space-fabric which is created by energy/matter's merely existing, dimensionally. If energy/matter wasn't structured, it couldn't have 'moved'. There could be no 'clock-tick' to show how one part of a structure created/moved-into another, etc. What would halted energy/matter be, but the absence of time itself? How could energy/matter even exist dimensionally -- i.e. how could space itself exist - if it did not move? To be structured is to have moved previously; and motion is the constant state of energy/matter -- and the measure of that constant motion is time.
So what I'm saying is: without energy/matter, what the hell could 'time' be? There is no time without energy/matter. Time is energy/matter in motion.
Slashdot Mirror
I lost interest in the article -- but not the objective phenomena -- and didn't even finish it, when it became apparent it's bottom line is: trying to find interesting new ways to make dot.com $$ (go ahead; tell me I'm wrong).
People have to make a living -- but this is ideological -- an irrelevant to many of us.
It's not to be expected that libertarian IT geeks, especially U.S. ones, would have the least comprehension of what communism is all about. Suffice it to say here that U.S.-controlled police states the world-over are every bit as authoritarian -- and then some -- as any past or present 'communist' state.
The point I want to make here is that bourgeois thinkers are constantly re-inventing the wheel, so to speak, when the issue of 'what to do about the chronic crisis of overproduction' inevitably crops up each 'business cycle' (Crisis. You know: mass unemployment time). Every new phase of a capitalist economy seems to invariably produce intellectual schools of thought which reproduce (I would rather say 'ape') the present thinking of the ruling class (but maybe with a new 'angle'). And the solutions proffered always inevitably seek to keep the capitalist system as a whole, intact; but fat chance solving these pressing world problems under a system that refuses to be the least bit honest about how it actually works.
All these newfangled theories which involve 'market forces' suddenly getting religion, are simply attempts to avoid the REAL issue: the unavoidably anarchic nature of capitalist production -- because the obvious solution is a world-wide system of planned production -- i.e. communism. And really: what could be more free than a system where nobody is worrying where their next meal is coming from (the real 'bottom line')?
Marxists have had the solution to these growing world problems for quite some time. Comparing the historically awful practices of supposedly 'communist' states to their richer imperial adversaries only exhibits a gross ignorance of that history, and of the issues.
Resist the snake-oil salesmen.
The western world is full of complaisant people like you who don't get it.
They will indeed throw people in jail -- as they begin to 'lose control' of the internal domestic situation. That they've not done it on a level that you recognize as 'police state-ish' is more a reflection of specific U.S. imperial history, than any supposed quality of U.S. democratic values. Many people have indeed been jailed for free speech; even assassinated: check out any 'Anti-Globalization' demo for recent, 'trivial' examples of the former -- or do only long-term, high-profile dissidents pass muster?
The U.S. has always been a 'low-intensity police state' -- and an Evil Empire for that matter: it's simply massacred most of its indigenous peoples, and shipped the rest off to concentration camps/reserves -- where they are militarily assaulted to this very day.
Your much-vaunted right to free speech is pretty much 'for show' only, fella;
soon-to-be-revoked, looks like.
These academics typically skirted around an obvious main point of their analysis: that the biggest threat to the world Internet community WILL be the NATO governments themselves -- first and foremost the U.S. government -- at any time they feel like 'taking down' some people's public Internet infrastructure.
People confuse time and matter. Time does not exist in matter, matter exists in time. Time is the control, and matter is just along for the ride.
Personally I don't think time and matter have any interaction. I think time is just a way of measuring intervals of action... and it's not another dimension...
I suppose that some people won't buy the below; I'll just assert it:
Time is merely the 'by-product' of energy/matter in motion. 'Time' is what energy/matter does, 'moment-by-moment', in the space-fabric which is created by energy/matter's merely existing, dimensionally. If energy/matter wasn't structured, it couldn't have 'moved'. There could be no 'clock-tick' to show how one part of a structure created/moved-into another, etc. What would halted energy/matter be, but the absence of time itself? How could energy/matter even exist dimensionally -- i.e. how could space itself exist - if it did not move? To be structured is to have moved previously; and motion is the constant state of energy/matter -- and the measure of that constant motion is time.
So what I'm saying is: without energy/matter, what the hell could 'time' be? There is no time without energy/matter. Time is energy/matter in motion.
And nothing mystical about it.