Ash, I ve completely lost you

Post #267,748 by Arkadiy 9/16/06 3:14:04 PM Reply	Ash, I ve completely lost you >>>>>>>>>> The problem of rising hooliganism The rise of the uneducable?? <<<<<<<<<< For these two, I'd recommend Theodore Dalrymple, "[link\|http://www.amazon.com/Life-Bottom-Worldview-Makes-Underclass/dp/1566635055/sr=8-2/qid=1158432081/ref=pd_bbs_2/104-4187203-1158330?ie=UTF8&s=books\|Life at the Bottom]". Not excatly the same melieu, but the ideas are rather close. >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobs offering ~religious allegiance to mercenary 'sports' figures; violent images and "music" lyrics permeating omnipresent media for All ages? <<<<<<<<<<<< That is the reverse side of the medal. "Nothing sacred" is rather well mirrored by "Everything is for sale". Just like Communists and Fashists, going in the opposite directions, meet at the same concentration camp, the same way libertines and biznes people meet at the mall. >>>>>>>>>>> Whom Then (besides 'parenting' in general / parents in particular?) Shall we Blame, US or UK versions -??- for both raising and Becoming barely-literate and incompetent as mentors (or as citizens of a democracy?) <<<<<<<<<<< Why, nobody, nobody at all. The parents got to pick their world view, and they communicated it to the children. That's all. The rest of your answer is a nice rant against material abundance("mindless compulsive 'consumers'", "the appetites for the toys are cynically created", "Affluenza was a cute depiction", "limitless acquisition of yet more stuff"). You really dislike it when people have more than "basic daily needs". You ask a very good question: "and how: that-all fits into a small round space-ship's energy budget for ~9B homo-saps?" And you seem to propose the answer, too: "(unless we kill off a whole Lot of the undesirables.) We can do that now. In minutes." I realize that it's not a preferred answer for you. However, it's the only realistic answer. We can't make everybody rich (not yet, any way). And, if you somehow bring the "golden billion" down to the level of the rest of the world, the rest of the world will literally have noting to eat. Plain, animal starvation will ensue. If America starts feeding itself the way China does, China dies of hunger.It is that simple. There will be no need to use any of those "We can do that now. In minutes". If US and Europe, the hated "5%", vanishes today, the population of the world in 10 years will not be 5 billions. It will be 1 billion, if that much. But tell me, you, who is so concerned about the 5% injustice, do you really want the 95%'s lot to improve? Here is what you got to say: >>>>>>>>>>>> Moot point, I expect - we have indeed successfully advertised and exported our endless appetite for More, and the trade-offs to Get That - even to those 'we' never intended should have more than a token-Little! Instead of 5% enjoying the raw materials and cheap labor of the 95%, quite disproportionately: <<<<<<<<<<< How dare they have "endless appetite for More"! It's not them who should live like us. It's us who should live like them. In the olden times, we knew how to live. I've seen it at Colonial Williamsburg. One-room house for family of 12 people. And a mansion for the local memeber of assembly of Burgesses (Secretary of District Comity, Supreme Leader, Mullah Omar, Tribal Sheik - take your pick). You descry our desire for "acquisition of yet more stuff", and you forget that the desire to have more "stuff" had always been with us. Except back then the "stuff" was basicaly slaves. The most versatile "gadget" ever invented - a himan robot. I'd rather live in the times when people desire ownership of things, than in the times when they desire ownership of other people. Your most fundamental misunderstanding of capitalism shows in your words "'we' never intended should have more than a token-Little". "We" intend for everybody to have precisely as much as he can pay for. And the crucial point is, the more people can pay for, the better. It's widely understood that selling more at lower prrice is better than selling less at higher price. That's how you grow a business, the corrupted exceptions norwithstanding. ------ 179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link\|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm\|.]
Post #267,800 by rcareaga 9/17/06 1:57:04 AM Reply	completely lost Ashton? You never had him I've been on this board for three years, Arkidy, and during that time you've struck me as largely clueless on every issue that matters for three out of any given four posts. Have a nice day. cordially, Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.
Post #267,957 by Arkadiy 9/18/06 1:22:47 PM Reply	The feeling is warmly reciprocated ------ 179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link\|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm\|.]
Post #268,027 by rcareaga 9/18/06 10:44:14 PM Reply	nichto problemo, kid I've got Russian emigre friends in the meatworld who are fully as deluded as you are, and we get along like a house on fire. hugs and kisses, Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.
Post #267,965 by bepatient 9/18/06 1:51:21 PM Reply	Seems to me he made a pretty decent attempt to decipher the indecipherable. Of course, not all have an Ashtonizer built into our babelfish...and ark is babelfishing exponentially more than yourself by at least one degree. Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #267,804 by Ashton 9/17/06 4:23:34 AM Reply	Lost? Oh well.. Jeez, Arkadiy - you've experienced Two dystopias, within one lifetime! shouldn't you be a bit ahead of the curve? What's so difficult about this progression (?): "I am impatient with stupidity.. My people have learned to live without it." -- Klaatu, speaking to a pol in Wash DC, The Day the Earth Stood Still A 1950 'truthiness'-sci-fi; we have many many Better nukes today - except that, no Gort-robot could get us off the hook - then or now. What's worth fighting / dying for? How does (should?) a sentient homo-sap reconcile animal~instinctive urges with the desires of (cerebral) imagination? How does a dominant species ensure its / thus the Planet's / continued survival -- as the sole available Nest, (reachable via any means other than metaphysical abstraction, that is.) I think anyone can construct her own utopian blueprint from those and only a few more.. Questions (already asked by Sages, early-on; merely refined across the centuries.) Rarely do we notice or utter Anything remotely-new IMhO. Still, that which few of these psych (and psyche-) analyses ever folded into each's Rorschach shorthand, was -- any concept of "preserving the nest" -- in the largest sense, the whole Planet. That just wasn't in the <named-classes> from which each philosopher started writing code for utopias deemed worth trying for. When the bellicose old world discovered All This 'Free' Real Estate, they instantly realized that their weapons-techno could easily dispatch its inhabitants; could (and did) also disregard / ridicule the attitude of the aborigines toward their World - this not-yet despoiled Brand New and Stealable 'Planet' (as filtered by those jaded, cynical, mercenary alien eyes -> homing in on.. GOLD! Natch.) The aborigines' attitudes towards animals they ate, their reverence for The Land (The World) - exemplified by daily habits like, ..tread lightly across the land; leave it with no sign that a one had travelled through it.. These were concepts so alien to the Conquerors, those gonocidists-sans-'label' -- that their Only response was that of every ignorant and uncurious savage (as they liked to call anyone not-them): ridicule all which you fail to comprehend. ... We know the tedious, bloody, mercenary history since. Emulate the Euros, but fight harder for even More stuff. Move on to '06 - and we can no longer escape facing Malthus re. our massive populations, and enhanced voraciousness. And all are forced, by the possibilities now seen (of a runaway people-assisted seppuku for many species) -- to also re-Ask the questions above; especially those re. our 'Economics'. The goals of personal and unlimited accretion of hoarded resources/Power, as practised, refined, transformed into social Class all along - always ignored the Nest. No one (well, periodically - a few) Imagined! that we Could and-so-Would literally. Trash. the. Nest. Now we do (imagine that, for Seeing processes, at varying stages.. which we now know how to extrapolate, however imprecisely.) Think we can retain the same mindset which has defined social status, via those means which are precipitating disintegration - much longer? My position on this question should be clear-enough for government work: No. We can't continue via this mindset -- perhaps may not wait even that proverbial 'generation' -- for some leisurely, comfortable awakening? / reassessment to dawn. Just maybe we can argue faster (I seriously doubt that. $$ Are the Universal 'God' for most, whom we've trained-up.) New and credible data flows in daily, at accelerating rates. Why.. it's even noted and considered! by the usual 1-2% (?) It's a start. But extrapolations are already more-than-'suggesting' that, even 20 years of inaction look to be scary for those plots at the knee going exponential: against that old Y=time axis. As to.. Your most fundamental misunderstanding of capitalism shows in your words "'we' never intended should have more than a token-Little". "We" intend for everybody to have precisely as much as he can pay for. And the crucial point is, the more people can pay for, the better. It's widely understood that selling more at lower prrice is better than selling less at higher price. That's how you grow a business, the corrupted exceptions norwithstanding. We have a now lethally-familiar name for Unlimited Growth: cancer - a metaphor which overlays well on Unlimited Greed too, I wot. Redefining simply, "better = __?" - will be a large part of our reeducation, I also wot. Your example-Title (Life/Bottom) illustrates well the 'unintended consequences' of this particular and perverse 'Econ'-guided dystopia. We have recently moved much of that famous Capital from low and middle-rank hands into the oligarchies which actually 'govern' - assuring that there will be 'More..' alright: More of the subjects in this study. (Does anyone Not-realize that 'Godzilla' is a metaphor - does one have to be Japanese to get it?) Personally, I'd like to see some sign of somnolence being shaken off, well within that nom. 20 yr.? period, so I too might make an intelligent guess about this coin flip. 'Course I don't Need to know if/how/when we might actually kill off All and Everything -??- but, you know.. we're curious addlepated creatures. Disintegration can be as interesting as integration, if a one is not identified with the outcome. But most of us do have a preference, don't we? HTH I Who Be
Post #267,972 by Arkadiy 9/18/06 2:37:13 PM Reply	Re: Lost? Oh well.. Jeez, Arkadiy - you've experienced Two dystopias, within one lifetime! shouldn't you be a bit ahead of the curve? What's so difficult about this progression (?): I don't think what we have here (my "second" experience) is a distopia. It's life, left to its natural devices. This would take us back to things like Original Sin, and I do believe we discussed them before. "I am impatient with stupidity.. My people have learned to live without it." Bullshit. Stupidity will always be with us (or with whatever alien race we'll ever find) What's worth fighting / dying for? How does (should?) a sentient homo-sap reconcile animal~instinctive urges with the desires of (cerebral) imagination? How does a dominant species ensure its / thus the Planet's / continued survival -- as the sole available Nest, (reachable via any means other than metaphysical abstraction, that is.) I think anyone can construct her own utopian blueprint from those and only a few more.. Questions (already asked by Sages, early-on; merely refined across the centuries.) Rarely do we notice or utter Anything remotely-new IMhO. Still, that which few of these psych (and psyche-) analyses ever folded into each's Rorschach shorthand, was -- any concept of "preserving the nest" -- in the largest sense, the whole Planet. That just wasn't in the <named-classes> from which each philosopher started writing code for utopias deemed worth trying for. Let me make sure I understand you. I can see 2 interpretations of the paragraphs above: 1. everybody has different answers to the question on top, and all answers are equally valid (if not new). 2. or, the only valid answer is that that ensures "preserving the nest" - the whole planet. Since (2) seems more likely (otherwise, why are you arguing?), I'll assume (2). If I missed some (3), (4), (N)... please let me know. I have two answers here. First, the minor reason I disagree with "preserving the whole Planet" is because there are parts of said Planet that I really want to chnage. Moreover, some of those parts are very much concerned with not preserving me. Second, more abstract answer, is, "what about the bird?" Is the nest worth preserving when the bird is dead? Do you want to preserve the Planet for Kim Il Seng (sp?)an Fidel? For Calif Bin Laden and Shari'a boys? Will the planet be really preserved? When the bellicose old world discovered All This 'Free' Real Estate, they instantly realized that their weapons-techno could easily dispatch its inhabitants; could (and did) also disregard / ridicule the attitude of the aborigines toward their World - this not-yet despoiled Brand New and Stealable 'Planet' (as filtered by those jaded, cynical, mercenary alien eyes -> homing in on.. GOLD! Natch.) The aborigines' attitudes towards animals they ate, their reverence for The Land (The World) - exemplified by daily habits like, ..tread lightly across the land; leave it with no sign that a one had travelled through it.. These were concepts so alien to the Conquerors, those gonocidists-sans-'label' -- that their Only response was that of every ignorant and uncurious savage (as they liked to call anyone not-them): ridicule all which you fail to comprehend. Ahh, the "Noble Savage" myth. The aborigines had their own evils, just like we do now. They were less lethal than us, but not for the lack of trying. Ashton, the problems you ascribe to "bellicose old world" are simply human nature. If Indians had the technology that Europe had, they would be just as savage. And if you tell me that the technology should not have been invented in the first place, I'd have to say - "Tough luck. Human nature again". Taking it away now is obviously not the answer, even though Taliban tried. It's a god way to kill off 90% of Earth's population, though. ... We know the tedious, bloody, mercenary history since. Emulate the Euros, but fight harder for even More stuff. That's all you remember of the history of US? I hope that's not so, otherwise I'd have to pity you. Move on to '06 - and we can no longer escape facing Malthus re. our massive populations, and enhanced voraciousness. And all are forced, by the possibilities now seen (of a runaway people-assisted seppuku for many species) -- to also re-Ask the questions above; especially those re. our 'Economics'. Oh, "we" can escape Maltus very well. It's North Korea and Cuba who have the trouble with the old gentleman. Even India seems to have the apparition under control. Again, what is your alternative? The Chinese Way - one kid per family, and a convenient well nearby in case it's a girl? The Medieval Europe way - with epidemics, hunger and Crusades? The Ottoman way, with massacres and children kidnapped and turned into soldiers? The goals of personal and unlimited accretion of hoarded resources/Power, as practised, refined, transformed into social Class all along - always ignored the Nest. No one (well, periodically - a few) Imagined! that we Could and-so-Would literally. Trash. the. Nest. Now we do (imagine that, for Seeing processes, at varying stages.. which we now know how to extrapolate, however imprecisely.) Think we can retain the same mindset which has defined social status, via those means which are precipitating disintegration - much longer? My position on this question should be clear-enough for government work: No. We can't continue via this mindset -- perhaps may not wait even that proverbial 'generation' -- for some leisurely, comfortable awakening? / reassessment to dawn. Just maybe we can argue faster (I seriously doubt that. $$ Are the Universal 'God' for most, whom we've trained-up.) New and credible data flows in daily, at accelerating rates. Fine. You think that inventing and _buying_ new machines that allow fewer and fewer people to feed, clothe and entertain the multitudes cannot go on. There may be a valid side to this arguent. May be the pace of invention is too slow, and can't catch up to the population growth (although statistics so far do not confirm that). May be we're running out of money (resurcers) to buy the machines. But, what the hell else can we do? Anything less than growth (be it growth by technology, or growth by conquest, as in Soviet Union destroyed and converted to many nasty copies of the nastiest Western states) will result in people dying off in huge numbers. How can you prevent this? Why.. it's even noted and considered! by the usual 1-2% (?) It's a start. But extrapolations are already more-than-'suggesting' that, even 20 years of inaction look to be scary for those plots at the knee going exponential: against that old Y=time axis. As to.. Your most fundamental misunderstanding of capitalism shows in your words "'we' never intended should have more than a token-Little". "We" intend for everybody to have precisely as much as he can pay for. And the crucial point is, the more people can pay for, the better. It's widely understood that selling more at lower prrice is better than selling less at higher price. That's how you grow a business, the corrupted exceptions norwithstanding. We have a now lethally-familiar name for Unlimited Growth: cancer - a metaphor which overlays well on Unlimited Greed too, I wot. Redefining simply, "better = __?" - will be a large part of our reeducation, I also wot. Your example-Title (Life/Bottom) illustrates well the 'unintended consequences' of this particular and perverse 'Econ'-guided dystopia. We have recently moved much of that famous Capital from low and middle-rank hands into the oligarchies which actually 'govern' - assuring that there will be 'More..' alright: More of the subjects in this study. (Does anyone Not-realize that 'Godzilla' is a metaphor - does one have to be Japanese to get it?) I don't know... After the "oligarchies" (as an aside, don't use the word "[link\|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_oligarch\|oligarch]" to someone from Russia) - are done with their palaces and yachts and orgies (and we all know that People's Representatives don't have first, secon and third, don't we), they still can't waste as much money as little People's Bureucrat can. Why, just look at our Federal Govt. 300,000,000,000 down the drain in 5 years. I challenge you to find a single tycoon capable of such feat. Personally, I'd like to see some sign of somnolence being shaken off, well within that nom. 20 yr.? period, so I too might make an intelligent guess about this coin flip. 'Course I don't Need to know if/how/when we might actually kill off All and Everything -??- but, you know.. we're curious addlepated creatures. Disintegration can be as interesting as integration, if a one is not identified with the outcome. But most of us do have a preference, don't we? HTH I Who Be Well, snap out of your "God-Observer" mode and tell me what the hell is the alternative to the "cancer" that served us so well for so many years. What sort of distopia is _yours_? I, for myself, believe in that "cancer" of yours. We will grow out of our present difficulties. We will, eventually, outgrow the nest, but not in the way you're seeing it happen. We'll learn to create decent life in the ocean, in the orbit, or in virtual reality. The nest will be like national parks today - nice to visit, but who would want to live there? ------ 179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link\|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm\|.]
Post #267,976 by boxley 9/18/06 3:11:52 PM Reply	slightly OT on one quote .tread lightly across the land; leave it with no sign that a one had travelled through it.. I was travelling thru the nantahalia gorge with my wife, she was in awe over all the tree's. "good thing my people arn't here, they would have it all cut down and stacked behind their "qiyiuuqk" (sweat lodges)" hehehe thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #268,039 by Ashton 9/19/06 6:42:33 AM Reply	Sorry Ark, nothing new on the waste front All the snappy quips which capture some dimension of the folly of humans becoming dung beetles (forever rolling-up More Stuff until the day of the funeral) - have been uttered, and by so many brilliant observers - I see that the (n + 1)th version isn't apt to be useful, either. I offer nuance and you immediately construct odious 'opposites' such as, implying a Luddite's view of 'techno' (even most fools discern that techno has become indispensable, even settling for bare-survival level.) No point in rebutting your characterizations above; you want digital Right/Wrongs. You have lots of company - most people on the planet believe you can learn how to live a life - by following this or that manual, Exactly, no brain required. Those manuals are about me-me-me and not about planetary housekeeping. And: it shows. I can't conceive how the rubric of Unlimited Growth can be satisfied - planetwide, or even if just reserved for us Hegemons. I'm looking at the planet from a physics perspective, while noticing our ingrained habits of Conspicuous Waste (as one large slice of Social Status: the more you can 'afford' to generate, the more Brownie points. What Else is a fleet of Hummers good for?) That conceit is of course, anathema to any closed energy-system extant. That's where we differ in any probabilities re. species survival. I see Denial; you see Limitless Opportunity. 'Exponential' - a math concept with a certain ring to it, no? Besides.. to change such habits would be like taking your kid's Teddy bear away - probably need one of those Epiphany things first, especially for the changes in consciousness to occur soon enough, before irreversible physics laws manifest so starkly that ... even a CIEIO would actually Notice Stuff. Like NY harbor on Wall St.? (I suspect that your model will prevail, right on through any remaining breathing room - a topic of considerable uncertainty, in any case.) Pretty safe bet IMO - that we will avoid facing anything that portends a slowed daily-comfort rate-of-increase. The popular view will be more fun, initially. And yes, I know: we just don't Do "long term". If stupidity Must be always with us, and also prevail? - cool. Makes for a shorter epitaph, if a rather nasty one. Let all who build beware The load, the shock, the pressure Material can bear. So, when the buckled girder Lets down the grinding span, The blame of loss, or murder, Is laid upon the man. Not on the Stuff - the Man! -- Rudyard Kipling, \ufffdHymn of Breaking Strain.\ufffd

Welcome to IWETHEY!