but isn't this exactly what "think globally, act locally" refers to?
Makes sense to me.
I'd suggest that Mr C should try to improve as much of the world as he can, while not killing himself at the world's expense, and take occasional days off for good behaviour.
Re:The renissance was a great time
on
The Renaissance
·
· Score: 1
yeah, every age is full of people who are *convinced* that they are smack in th emiddle of some watershed of humanity.
And it seems to me that the people who *are* living in really crucial points in history generally have no clue, they are too busy having a life.
One day we'll look back and say "ooh wow" perhaps, but right now it's just all too pretentious for words. And then there's the internet.
Is there *really* any evidence that this *won't* happen?
Just history.
... which shows us a gradual bleeding away of the differences between cultures, and a steady erosion of the power imbalance between the rulers and the ruled. History has shown us that you get richer via trade than you do via war, that modern weapons don't just kill people, they kill man-made assets, and trading your way to the top is better than bombing everyone around you to a lower level.
Environmental concerns are global. Yes, we need to consume much less. Our current economic model encourages consumption and environmental damage.
Our current model encourages inefficiency in manufacturing and waste recapture, to maximise profitability. If there was a concerted effort to make every stage of the production cycle as efficient as possible, we'd be able to easily support the world at our (first world) standard of living.
We need to make sacrifices and change our ways, but population growth must also be limited. In order for third world countries to have the option of our standard of living, we need to limit the population.
Absolutely. So let's help them build the best education system possible, and get girls into schools. Educating women is by far the best way to keep birthrates down, and there are all sorts of useful alternatives to traditional farming methods (both mainstream scientific research and weird stuff) and other technological tools we have which might be useful.
Just spamming them with food will make them dependent, sure, but if we spam them with useful info they can sort their own shit out.
And we need to sort our shit out. Don't buy stuff which isn't sustainably produced. If we don't buy it, they won't chop it down or dig it up.
Unfortunately, it's hard to tell how products are produced, usually. But I have ideas, not solutions:-)
Some sort of labelling system might be worth a go.
> The "people of the world" cannot just give away food. We did this here in Canada - we gave massive > grain surpluses to India. Do you know what they did with their cost savings? They started a nuclear > weapons research program, so that now, they can threaten global stability and Pakistan with nukes.
So, hang on. You're suggesting that we let these people starve because it seems that their governments make weapons, like, well, pretty much every other government about?
Doesn't this strike you as a wee tad callous?
>Governments suck.
No shit sherlock. If we ignore the bullshit ideology canards, the 20th century has seen the spectacle of Statism wiping out millions of little people. The sooner we realise that nationalism gives us enormous governments and therefore enormous armed forces the better. Roll on autonomous collectives and city-states.
> Food is one thing, resources are another. We in the 1st world consume most of the resources. > That's just the way it is.
You selfish, narrow-minded, short-sighted dickhead.
How long do you think they are going to put up with this? What will happen when their level of development starts to approach ours? Do you think they will just idly sit back and watch this happen? If they have any sense at all they will arm up and come and take it off selfish bastards like you. The *only* reason you live so comfortably now is due to the happy historical accident of your being born in a wealthy nation. I seriously doubt anything you have done in your life qualifies you for the riches you have at your fingertips. You don't *deserve* your comparative wealth, it might do you some good to be a little more humble about your good fortune.
> To say that all the people in India, Africa and even Asia are going to live like me here in > Canada is just stupid. There aren't enough resources.
What if I told you that 96% of everything dug up, mined etc was wasted? Yup, we use only 4% of these resources. More efficient manufacturing would go a long way towards reducing our need for stupendous amounts of, well, everything.
Then again, so would nanotech:)
> And I, and I doubt you, are going to go live in a >tarpaper project to make sure everyone lives equally. Life sucks, don't it?
You know, I expect to live a long time. One day in the future, when we have sorted out this stupid resource problem (I guess by mining the asteroids or something), comments like this are going to be read with horror, people will ask me "was it *really* like that?"
Step outside your own narrow little worldview for a moment and consider just how selfish and inhuman your comments are. An awful lot of things have died to keep you alive, and are you worth it?
No, if these comments are any sign.
And as for your "tarpaper project" comment, there ARE ways to build cities etc without despoiling the planet. It's just that in the west, resources are so cheap that, fuck it, we can AFFORD to waste 'em. It's not impossible, and it's not uncomfortable, it's just that most people (like you) can't be fucked.
> Maybe I'm being overly cynical,
"callous" is a better word.
> but there are complex issues. You feed a nation's people, you upset > the balance of trade, and that nation can then do things like buy arms to kill people.
So, tell me again: who died and made you god? What right have you to condemn people to death because their government *might* kill some people?
> It isn't cut and dry - obviously the international community needs to help out, > but for there to be long-term solutions these nations need their own development and place controls > on populations, deal with internal strife & conflict, etc etc.
The best way to reduce population is to educate the women. Seriously. That's the single factor which will drop birthrates by the most.
And consider this: most of the trouble these third world nations have, especially in Africa, can be directly related to the Great Powers of the last few centuries (and the first half of this one) screaming in and fucking up completely the existing social and political structure. This is something they are still sorting out, and will probably be sorting out for generations to come. Don't you think there is some moral duty for those of us who have benefitted from these intrusions to help these people out?
Have you seen the figures for how trivial the cost to unfuck these places actually is, compared with the amount of money and wealth in the first world?
God I wish this thing had a spell checker. And wider text entry windows.
I'm paying AUD 40.00 per month for a flat-rate link, it's limited to 4 hours per session, otherwise the hours and downloads are unlimited.
I'm a bit over this crappy 56k speed, though, and Optus@Home told me it'd be 4 weeks for a cable connection, and then a month later told me it'd be a 6-month delay.
So: anyone interested in getting involved in setting up a wireless network in Melbourne?
I'm thinking 802.11 mesh into a broadband leased link somewhere owned (as opposed to rented), pay for your end, share costs of the feed.
I've about 10 people interested so far, but I think it might need more than that to cover Melbourne adequately.
Should be about $100-$200 plus whatever the link works out to. Added advantage beyond speed: it's our link, we can run whatever we like across it.
I read the subject line, and expected an Inferno disussion.
But, no mention so far. Is there anything better suited than Inferno? I'm not a com. sci. person, more "a sophisticated user" as a friend described me, but at first glance it looks pretty yummy.
I'm still finding my way around slashdot, but what I have seen so far is pretty interesting.
But I'm just wondering: has anything like the collaborative weighting Firefly used been tried here? I suppose it'd require some pretty hefty tracking of what people liked and followed, but I wonder if it would work, especially if combined with moderation as well.
"See The Zapatista Tactical FloodNet for a discussion of FloodNet's functionality, interactivity, philosophy, and as a form of conceptual art."
Basically, if you run the java app on your system it regularly sends enough stuff to the remote site to overload it if sufficient people get involved, but not enough to hose your link.
There were some rumours the DoD were crashing it as some sort of counter-electronic-terrorism thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Hah! I've seen it. They demoed one at the Royal Melbourne Show here in Australia when I was a kid, errr, in the 70s or 80s. 70s most likely.
REALLY LOUD!
REALLY FAST!
REALLY REALLY REALLY COOL!!
really short flying time. boo!
but:
REALLY REALLY REALLY COOL!!
Dwayne
but isn't this exactly what "think globally, act locally" refers to?
Makes sense to me.
I'd suggest that Mr C should try to improve as much of the world as he can, while not killing himself at the world's expense, and take occasional days off for good behaviour.
yeah, every age is full of people who are *convinced* that they are smack in th emiddle of some watershed of humanity.
And it seems to me that the people who *are* living in really crucial points in history generally have no clue, they are too busy having a life.
One day we'll look back and say "ooh wow" perhaps, but right now it's just all too pretentious for words. And then there's the internet.
Just history.
... which shows us a gradual bleeding away of the differences between cultures, and a steady erosion of the power imbalance between the rulers and the ruled. History has shown us that you get richer via trade than you do via war, that modern weapons don't just kill people, they kill man-made assets, and trading your way to the top is better than bombing everyone around you to a lower level.
Environmental concerns are global. Yes, we need to consume much less. Our current economic model encourages consumption and environmental damage.
:-)
Our current model encourages inefficiency in manufacturing and waste recapture, to maximise profitability. If there was a concerted effort to make every stage of the production cycle as efficient as possible, we'd be able to easily support the world at our (first world) standard of living.
We need to make sacrifices and change our ways, but population growth must also be limited. In order for third world countries to have the option of our standard of living, we need to limit the population.
Absolutely. So let's help them build the best education system possible, and get girls into schools. Educating women is by far the best way to keep birthrates down, and there are all sorts of useful alternatives to traditional farming methods (both mainstream scientific research and weird stuff) and other technological tools we have which might be useful.
Just spamming them with food will make them dependent, sure, but if we spam them with useful info they can sort their own shit out.
And we need to sort our shit out. Don't buy stuff which isn't sustainably produced. If we don't buy it, they won't chop it down or dig it up.
Unfortunately, it's hard to tell how products are produced, usually. But I have ideas, not solutions
Some sort of labelling system might be worth a go.
Ddraig
> The "people of the world" cannot just give away food. We did this here in Canada - we gave massive
:)
> grain surpluses to India. Do you know what they did with their cost savings? They started a nuclear
> weapons research program, so that now, they can threaten global stability and Pakistan with nukes.
So, hang on. You're suggesting that we let these people starve because it seems that their governments make weapons, like, well, pretty much every other government about?
Doesn't this strike you as a wee tad callous?
>Governments suck.
No shit sherlock. If we ignore the bullshit ideology canards, the 20th century has seen the spectacle of Statism wiping out millions of little people. The sooner we realise that nationalism gives us enormous governments and therefore enormous armed forces the better. Roll on autonomous collectives and city-states.
> Food is one thing, resources are another. We in the 1st world consume most of the resources.
> That's just the way it is.
You selfish, narrow-minded, short-sighted dickhead.
How long do you think they are going to put up with this? What will happen when their level of development starts to approach ours? Do you think they will just idly sit back and watch this happen? If they have any sense at all they will arm up and come and take it off selfish bastards like you. The *only* reason you live so comfortably now is due to the happy historical accident of your being born in a wealthy nation. I seriously doubt anything you have done in your life qualifies you for the riches you have at your fingertips. You don't *deserve* your comparative wealth, it might do you some good to be a little more humble about your good fortune.
> To say that all the people in India, Africa and even Asia are going to live like me here in
> Canada is just stupid. There aren't enough resources.
What if I told you that 96% of everything dug up, mined etc was wasted? Yup, we use only 4% of these resources. More efficient manufacturing would go a long way towards reducing our need for stupendous amounts of, well, everything.
Then again, so would nanotech
> And I, and I doubt you, are going to go live in a
>tarpaper project to make sure everyone lives equally. Life sucks, don't it?
You know, I expect to live a long time. One day in the future, when we have sorted out this stupid resource problem (I guess by mining the asteroids or something), comments like this are going to be read with horror, people will ask me "was it *really* like that?"
Step outside your own narrow little worldview for a moment and consider just how selfish and inhuman your comments are. An awful lot of things have died to keep you alive, and are you worth it?
No, if these comments are any sign.
And as for your "tarpaper project" comment, there ARE ways to build cities etc without despoiling the planet. It's just that in the west, resources are so cheap that, fuck it, we can AFFORD to waste 'em. It's not impossible, and it's not uncomfortable, it's just that most people (like you) can't be fucked.
> Maybe I'm being overly cynical,
"callous" is a better word.
> but there are complex issues. You feed a nation's people, you upset
> the balance of trade, and that nation can then do things like buy arms to kill people.
So, tell me again: who died and made you god?
What right have you to condemn people to death because their government *might* kill some people?
> It isn't cut and dry - obviously the international community needs to help out,
> but for there to be long-term solutions these nations need their own development and place controls
> on populations, deal with internal strife & conflict, etc etc.
The best way to reduce population is to educate the women. Seriously. That's the single factor which will drop birthrates by the most.
And consider this: most of the trouble these third world nations have, especially in Africa, can be directly related to the Great Powers of the last few centuries (and the first half of this one) screaming in and fucking up completely the existing social and political structure. This is something they are still sorting out, and will probably be sorting out for generations to come. Don't you think there is some moral duty for those of us who have benefitted from these intrusions to help these people out?
Have you seen the figures for how trivial the cost to unfuck these places actually is, compared with the amount of money and wealth in the first world?
God I wish this thing had a spell checker. And wider text entry windows.
Ddraig
Um,
I'm paying AUD 40.00 per month for a flat-rate link, it's limited to 4 hours per session, otherwise the hours and downloads are unlimited.
I'm a bit over this crappy 56k speed, though, and Optus@Home told me it'd be 4 weeks for a cable connection, and then a month later told me it'd be a 6-month delay.
So: anyone interested in getting involved in setting up a wireless network in Melbourne?
I'm thinking 802.11 mesh into a broadband leased link somewhere owned (as opposed to rented), pay for your end, share costs of the feed.
I've about 10 people interested so far, but I think it might need more than that to cover Melbourne adequately.
Should be about $100-$200 plus whatever the link works out to. Added advantage beyond speed: it's our link, we can run whatever we like across it.
Mail me if you're interested.
ddraig
well,
I read the subject line, and expected an Inferno disussion.
But, no mention so far.
Is there anything better suited than Inferno? I'm not a com. sci. person, more "a sophisticated user" as a friend described me, but at first glance it looks pretty yummy.
Ddraig
Hi
I'm still finding my way around slashdot, but what I have seen so far is pretty interesting.
But I'm just wondering: has anything like the collaborative weighting Firefly used been tried here? I suppose it'd require some pretty hefty tracking of what people liked and followed, but I wonder if it would work, especially if combined with moderation as well.
Dwayne
um,
isn't this a variant on the FloodNet java app which is drifting about?
From: http://www.thing.net/~rdom/ecd/floodnet.html
"See The Zapatista Tactical FloodNet for a discussion of FloodNet's functionality, interactivity, philosophy, and as a form of conceptual art."
Basically, if you run the java app on your system it regularly sends enough stuff to the remote site to overload it if sufficient people get involved, but not enough to hose your link.
There were some rumours the DoD were crashing it as some sort of counter-electronic-terrorism thing.
Dwayne