“They saw their injured country's woe;
The flaming town, the wasted field;
Then rushed to meet the insulting foe;
They took the spear, - but left the shield.”
―Philip Freneau
.
And by a prudent flight and cunning save A life which valour could not, from the grave. A better buckler I can soon regain, But who can get another life again?
Archilochus
Saturday, October 8, 2022
The Toffler's "Third Wave" Futurism
I grew up in Silicon Valley. This is the future that I expected to one day live....
\\Blogger -FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said... There are irreconcilable obstacles, at present, that must be altered first to make it compatible.
Elaborate?
Well. What I (and Lem, as far as I understand) meaned is building of future through development of technologies. Not social changes. That will happen anyway. In reaction to it.
But "who" should we unleash? Just the "approved" bureaucrats to fund the apparatus which contributes to their advancement, conquests, and rule? Who write laws and regulations and support only the technologies, like weapons, that will remain in their "control"? To give them the power to destroy others, like them? , No, it's time to "lower" the world, and a nation's "aggregate efficiency". Interstate highways and water projects are fine. Information flows? Not a good idea, as "censorship" would appear to be the result. A tool to "depress" technological develop in fields deemed "dangerous" to the status quo power relations of men. That should, IMO, be regulated at a much lower and "regional" level.
Before our "Civil War" we had "State's Rights". It's time we returned to them. No "national" armies. No "Central" Intelligence Agencies. No unrestricted "National Security Agency" information capture and control.
Inefficient? Yes. But the liberty of mankind deserves no less. More "jobs" for men, and less "automation". Capitalism w/o "obsolete" humans receiving a "guaranteed wage" from social welfare.
No, I don't like what "progress" did to the lives of working men/ women. It made them obsolete and unable to participate in the economy at large. It put them on unemployment and welfare. It monopolized all the legal and respectable means of earning a living for people without the benefit of social connections, intelligence and education. The only work available was selling drugs (The Wire) or worse.
The large corporations undersell the small ones. The small ones undersell the mom & pop Main Street shops. Amazon undersells everyone. Efficiency became a curse.
The bigger you are, the bigger the government tax break.
I'm for smaller, less efficient, but more "anti-fragile" businesses. For a complete overhaul of the US tax code limiting how "big" a corporation can get and what they can sell. A playground where everyone can compete. Every man NOT a consumer, but a PROsumer.
I grew up in Silicon valley in the 70's. My neighbor had an NC Milling Machine in his garage. I used to make machine parts for him, and he paid me $5/ hr "under the table". THAT is the America I want back.
Where exactly? Forgive me my ignorance, but I saw nothing like that Utopia image you drew here.
Well. They. In Silicon valley working hard on that Utopia. On the new turn of the spiral of History. On new level. 3D printers. p2p networking. Open Source as commodity. Do you not like it?
But well... that cannot be scaled to a level to compete with Old Good Mass-Production Industry. Because? Because they mass-produce things, you know. ;-)
What *I* trying to talk about... that is like biological things industry. With evolution, cross-breeding, and etc. ;-) Gardening, if you wish.
Well, I cannot promise you it'll be the way you drew... that's impossible to profess. As Lem was uneasy about -- that such tech will be used to make weapon first. And that weapon will be even more devastating and easy to go out of hands than nukes. :-(((
But... and that is what keeping light of desire to make it real burning in me. Such tech have almost unmeasurable capacity of growth, to the level of god-like capabilities.
Like... I will not show weaponised use here, of course.
But thingts like -- clearing all pollution. Maybe even nuclear. Growing towns like a forrests. Making cities even in space... and obviously in the ocean. Non-invasive treatment of our health. Who knows what more. ;-)
Toffler's "The Third Wave"... his vision was that we ALL had those NC machines in our garages and supplied other small businesses like our own over the internet. It wasn't for Amazon.com to control everything through mass-production performed in China. It was for us all to supply each other with "micro"-production custom/ tailored to fit our individual lifestyles.
Because they mass-produce things, you know. ;-)
Yes they gain "economies of scale". So I outlaw the "large scales" and build in "inefficiency" through law and "tariffs". I make sure that corporations can't grow to become "immortal" $1 trillion capitalized behemoths. If they do, they are taxed at 100% I take away their "corporate rights" and make them compete with PEOPLE. I kill all the Strulbruggs in Luggnagg and thereby unleash HUMAN potential in competition with other Mortals.
No more "salaried bourgeoisie" running the world through corporate structures. Empower a REAL bourgeoisie who all have "skin in the game" when it comes to legal and biological liabilities. Humans have a 50 year working life. They, unlike corporations, are "mortal".
To found a great empire for the sole purpose of raising up a people of customers may at first sight appear a project fit only for a nation of shopkeepers. It is, however, a project altogether unfit for a nation of shopkeepers; but extremely fit for a nation whose government is influenced by shopkeepers.
\\\\Blogger -FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said... Where exactly?
\\Toffler's "The Third Wave"...
That Toffler was not technologist, isn't it? The same as Marx. "Fear the danaians who bring gifts". :-)))
\\ So I outlaw the "large scales" and build in "inefficiency" through law and "tariffs". I make sure that corporations can't grow to become "immortal" $1 trillion capitalized behemoths. If they do, they are taxed at 100% I take away their "corporate rights" and make them compete with PEOPLE. I kill all the Strulbruggs in Luggnagg and thereby unleash HUMAN potential in competition with other Mortals.
Yeah... but that is... socialistic agenda. Commie even. So, why you call yourself right? Or that like in a rightful, rightness? ;-)
Every "constitution" is a "socialist agenda". Every corporate charter is also a "socialist agenda". Every business contract is a "socialist agenda". Can we call attach pejorative labels here, or try and solve problems?
Governments both enable economics and then try and offset the damages done by their bad economic policies.
Toffler was a "futurist".
btw - Ever read Plato's opposite, Xenophon? His Oeconomicus? Anabasis?
His Anabasis became Alexander's inspiration for conquering the Persian empire.
Exogamy and democracy go hand-in-hand. Endogamy and socialism go hand-in-hand. The funny thing is that the exogamous cultures dropped the idea of war brides and the endogamous ones adopted it as a defense.
I have always understood humanism as a philosophy of personal improvement and responsibility, quite aside of its social dimension referred to above. Socrates lived this aspect of his philosophy personally, and it got tested on at the least three occasions. The first episode occurred in the year 406, when Socrates was already 64. The Athenians had routed the Spartan fleet at the battle of Arginusae, but its six commanders had failed to give aid to the survivors of their own foundered ships, because they decided instead to chase the retreating Spartans. The people wanted the death penalty for the accused generals, but Socrates' tribe, which on that day held the prytany (executive power) in the boule (the city council), rejected the request. At that point the mob threatened the executive officers themselves with death, and the latter eventually relented. This is where Socrates stepped in. He was epistates (overseer) of the debate, and held veto power, which he exercised on the ground that "in no case would he act except in accordance with the law"5. Needless to say, that stand — which he made on the grounds of his understanding of virtue and moral integrity — could have easily cost him his life.
from Wiki:
Plato and Xenophon An honest man, Xenophon was no trained philosopher.[7] He could neither fully conceptualize nor articulate Socrates's arguments.[8] He admired Socrates for his intelligence, patriotism, and courage on the battlefield.[8] He discusses Socrates in four works: the Memorabilia, the Oeconomicus, the Symposium, and the Apology of Socrates. He also mentions a story featuring Socrates in his Anabasis.[9] Oeconomicus recounts a discussion on practical agricultural issues.[10] Like Plato's Apology, Xenophon's Apologia describes the trial of Socrates, but the works diverge substantially and, according to W. K. C. Guthrie, Xenophon's account portrays a Socrates of "intolerable smugness and complacency".[11] Symposium is a dialogue of Socrates with other prominent Athenians during an after-dinner discussion, but is quite different from Plato's Symposium: there is no overlap in the guest list,[12] In Memorabilia, he defends Socrates from the accusations of corrupting the youth and being against the gods; essentially, it is a collection of various stories gathered together to construct a new apology for Socrates.[13]
Plato's representation of Socrates is not straightforward.[14] Plato was a pupil of Socrates and outlived him by five decades.[15] How trustworthy Plato is in representing the attributes of Socrates is a matter of debate; the view that he did not represent views other than Socrates's own is not shared by many contemporary scholars.[16] A driver of this doubt is the inconsistency of the character of Socrates that he presents.[17] One common explanation of this inconsistency is that Plato initially tried to accurately represent the historical Socrates, while later in his writings he was happy to insert his own views into Socrates's words. Under this understanding, there is a distinction between the Socratic Socrates of Plato's earlier works and the Platonic Socrates of Plato's later writings, although the boundary between the two seems blurred.[18]
Xenophon's and Plato's accounts differ in their presentations of Socrates as a person. Xenophon's Socrates is duller, less humorous and less ironic than Plato's.[8][19] Xenophon's Socrates also lacks the philosophical features of Plato's Socrates—ignorance, the Socratic method or elenchus—and thinks enkrateia (self-control) is of pivotal importance, which is not the case with Plato's Socrates.[20] Generally, logoi Sokratikoi cannot help us to reconstruct the historical Socrates even in cases where their narratives overlap, as authors may have influenced each other's accounts.[21]
Whereas "Helen" in the Iliad was a warning against it and served as a representation of the social "cost/price" of the Western decision in favor of exogamy. I think that at the end of his career Euripide's raised Helen into the "Divine" realm and gave her a "happy" ending.
Let's face it, the Spartans looked upon the tech/martial inventions of Archimedes with disdain, for they knew how they would make 'cowards" out of men. And they have. Hector and Achilles will never again battle as equals... step out of their chariots and fight hand-to-hand.
Look at us today... flinging nuclear weapons at hypersonic speeds instead of meeting them face-to-face on equal terms. Sparta's walls were her men. Athens had "long walls". Britain's walls were the hulls of oaken ships. And America's are of aluminum and carbon-fiber composites which peer down from the heavens.
We 'fight" from ever increasing distances. We no longer grapple hand-to-hand. Xenophon no longer strategizes (as in Cyropedia) to close with the Medes with a gladius to make their peltast and archer's longer range weapons ineffective. We "tech" our solutions.
No wonder the Greeks rejected tech. Archilocus, where are you?
And by a prudent flight and cunning save A life which valour could not, from the grave. A better buckler I can soon regain, But who can get another life again?- Archilochus
\\We 'fight" from ever increasing distances. We no longer grapple hand-to-hand. Xenophon no longer strategizes (as in Cyropedia) to close with the Medes with a gladius to make their peltast and archer's longer range weapons ineffective. We "tech" our solutions.
And? When we was not?
\\No wonder the Greeks rejected tech. Archilocus, where are you?
While building walls and trirems and etc. Archimedes was not Greek? ;-P
Well, they was fighting in between themself. Of course there must be a rules of "fair fight" in such case.
The same as "rules of fair war" devised in Europe. But after Napoleon's blunder nobody honors em. And who we need to say thank you for that. ;-P
\\I suspect that the key to being i "futurist" is to have a good understanding of the past... to be not only multi-cultural, but multi-temporal.
There was no successful one. So, how we'd know? ;-)
\\Yes forecasting technology is something... but forecasting human societies and how those technologies might relate?
Yep. Something Lem tryed to answer.
And his answer is unsettling -- tech changes will facilitate SUCH cultural changes, so we would not be able to relate our experience to that lifestyle.
Imagine even brightest of eggheads pre 19th century... and imagine you explaining to them how you use that thing called Web. ;-)
\\The Spartans were Socialists. The Athenians were Democrats.
I profess meaning of words changed too much through ages. ;-)
\\Every "constitution" is a "socialist agenda". Every corporate charter is also a "socialist agenda". Every business contract is a "socialist agenda". Can we call attach pejorative labels here, or try and solve problems?
You stroming through open doors. I already declared "whatever works is Ok with me". Well, socialism do no work (tm) ;-P
\\btw - Ever read Plato's opposite, Xenophon? His Oeconomicus? Anabasis?
\\His Anabasis became Alexander's inspiration for conquering the Persian empire.
Have no classical education. Sorry. In my part of the world it was sparse and on a level of fairytales. :-)
When the Captain's of the Achaeans would ride out in front of the battle lines and then fight personal challenges before the main battle.
Archimedes was not Greek?
He was a "primarily" a Syracusian/ Sicilian and not a regular Hellene from the Pelloponese. ;)
There was no successful (futurist) one. So, how we'd know? ;-)
We don't. We rely upon "right opinion". We find someone who has never been, but has the right opinion, as to "how to get to Larissa". Today, in our secular age, we call this quality as "someone having charisma" or "charismatic authority" (Max Weber). Then we wait and see if our "faith" in this person (futurist) was justified.
Well, socialism do no work (tm) ;-P
Because we need ways to "escape" it and achieve a certain "social distance" in order to perform as "individuals". The means of escape from the obligations/ duties of communality/ socialism is through "money" and the transforming of social relations from "communality" into one of "reciprocity". Money (and corresponding labour to earn it) becomes a vanishing mediator in social relations and the "products/ commodities", a fetishistic substitute for them.
Have no classical education. Sorry.
Neither did I. I'm an autodidact in that field. I spent too much time driving my kids to after-school activities to waste 2-3 day waiting for them at ballet practice or theatre rehearsals and doing nothing before driving them back home.
First I read "The story of Philosophy" by Durant. Then "History of the Peloponnesian War" by Thucydides. Then the Theogony and Works and Days of Hesiod, the "Iliad/ Odyssey" of Homer, the all the works of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. Then Aristophanes. I tried to read "primary sources". I read all of Plato's dialogues, then Xenophon's. I then moved on to the Romans. Chronologically, through history.... trying to see the changes in ideas and events in historical societies. I then skipped ahead to the Italian Renaissance and read all the works of Machiavelli.... and so on. Primary sources, not secondary accounts of them.
Eventually I had a mental melt-down and switched to Psychology.... reading James, Freud, and recently Zizek (to access Lacan which was too difficult for me). I'm now catching up of the French 20th century philosophers.... but fading. It's too easy to Google now and listen to secondary/ tertiary YouTube sources. I've gotten lazy.
\\Blogger -FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said... One book changed my whole life. The Story of Philosophy.
Well... I accessed it all through Lem's backdoor. ;-P
\\Well, socialism do no work (tm) ;-P
Because we need ways to "escape" it and achieve a certain "social distance" in order to perform as "individuals". The means of escape from the obligations/ duties of communality/ socialism is through "money" and the transforming of social relations from "communality" into one of "reciprocity". Money (and corresponding labour to earn it) becomes a vanishing mediator in social relations and the "products/ commodities", a fetishistic substitute for them.
No. :-) Just DO NOT WORK. Historicly. There was Great Socialistic Country -- USSR. And WHERE it is NOW? ;-P That's enough, for starters. Anybody who want to "sell" to me idea "we need socialism" NEED to overcame that hassle and explain HOW his socialism would be ANY DIFFERENT, and better... But nobody would. Proponents of socialism seeking lazy-minded or stoopid folks. Thoughtful questions scaring em off like light scaring that cockrouches. :-)))))
\\We don't. We rely upon "right opinion". We find someone who has never been, but has the right opinion, as to "how to get to Larissa". Today, in our secular age, we call this quality as "someone having charisma" or "charismatic authority" (Max Weber). Then we wait and see if our "faith" in this person (futurist) was justified.
Yeah... "Social Truth" as I'd call it.
\\\\Archimedes was not Greek? \\He was a "primarily" a Syracusian/ Sicilian and not a regular Hellene from the Pelloponese. ;)
Yeah, Not True Scothman. Or well, not true Ellin.
\\When the Captain's of the Achaeans would ride out in front of the battle lines and then fight personal challenges before the main battle.
That was not a war, but war game. What? I am not allowed to use Not True Scothman? ;-P
No. :-) Just DO NOT WORK. Historicly. There was Great Socialistic Country -- USSR. And WHERE it is NOW? ;-P That's enough, for starters. Anybody who want to "sell" to me idea "we need socialism" NEED to overcame that hassle and explain HOW his socialism would be ANY DIFFERENT, and better... But nobody would. Proponents of socialism seeking lazy-minded or stoopid folks. Thoughtful questions scaring em off like light scaring that cockrouches. :-)))))
No "central planning" DID not work "historically"... BEFORE the "Information Age"... before the CyberSyn experiment. NOW it works "perfectly well" provided there is still an access to an "innovating" and "free" market (like China's access to a US/ EU market). It's even "more efficient"... as its' "aggregate efficiencies" benefit from extreme economies of scale.
\\We don't. We rely upon "right opinion"... Yeah... "Social Truth" as I'd call it.
I call that "political correctness". But I was refering more to the "moral" rather than "ethical" component of Sittlichkeit.
That was not a war, but war game. What? I am not allowed to use Not True Scotchman? ;-P
Not really. :P During the Peloponnesian War, Syracuse was a independent (Sicily) "city-state." and Athens (Greek) tried to conquer them. The Syracusans asked Sparta (Greek) for assistance. They sent two Spartan generals, who were able to show the Syracusans how to defend their city and repel the Athenian attack. Many decades later, Archimedes invented many innovative defenses for Syracuse that enabled them to successfully defend their city with "technology"... something that the Spartans would have "objected to" as "cowardly".
Don't get me wrong, I admire the bravery of the Ukrainians and have no doubt that NATO weaponry could help them hold off the Russians. But we're not giving you the weapons you need to win... just the ones to help you "bleed Russia".
Beamish wants to join in and do the job for you.
But Biden/NATO? They want you for "vassals". They won't let you win.
\\No "central planning" DID not work "historically"... BEFORE the "Information Age"... before the CyberSyn experiment. NOW it works "perfectly well" provided there is still an access to an "innovating" and "free" market (like China's access to a US/ EU market). It's even "more efficient"... as its' "aggregate efficiencies" benefit from extreme economies of scale.
Go read de Soto. That is disingenious to try to explain him here.
\\\\\"Social Truth" as I'd call it.
\\I call that "political correctness". But I was refering more to the "moral" rather than "ethical" component of Sittlichkeit.
Then we miscommunicate here. How you differenciate moral from ethic?
PC that is etiquette. Rules of convinience. That ALWAYS used as a means of suppression. Like from the times it was invented -- to separate "nobles" from "peasants"... because for a peasants it was impossible to be intricate with that obscure rules of etiquette... and who will communicate with such a barbaric beasts, isn't it?
And social truth is antithetic to a physical truth. Like "everybody know it, that it's the Sun circling around Earth... AND NOT VISE VERSA!!! Burn that heretic!!!!!" ;-P
\\Don't get me wrong, I admire the bravery of the Ukrainians and have no doubt that NATO weaponry could help them hold off the Russians. But we're not giving you the weapons you need to win... just the ones to help you "bleed Russia".
And what exactly weapon that would be? What would be a victory? What is help?
\\Beamish wants to join in and do the job for you.
And where he is? Seems like he lost any interest in coming here. ;-P
\\But Biden/NATO? They want you for "vassals". They won't let you win.
That exactly vassals are that who have ALL support. If they hesitate for you to win -- that mean you are separate and independent. ;-P
Go read de Soto. That is disingenious to try to explain him here.
Hernando de Soto is a neoliberal globalist free-trader of the Reagan-Thatcher era (80s). Like I've said elsewhere. This has transformied into "Capitalism with Asian Values". You'll do better reading Adam Smith. Or better, Zizek and then Adam Smith.
How you differenciate moral from ethic? Ethics refer to rules provided by an external source, e.g., codes of conduct in workplaces or principles in religions. Morals refer to an individual’s own principles regarding right and wrong.
PC that is etiquette. Rules of convinience. That ALWAYS used as a means of suppression. Like from the times it was invented -- to separate "nobles" from "peasants"... because for a peasants it was impossible to be intricate with that obscure rules of etiquette... and who will communicate with such a barbaric beasts, isn't it?
Indeed. And many times it's based on a "requirement" to "lie" back when "lied" to. And sometimes that goes against one's "morals". The person who seeks "authenticity" (to be true to one's self) instead of "inauthentic politeness" based upon "conformity" and "submission to power"... a "bending of the knee". As in prefacing you response with... "Oh, I'll say the PC thing..."
And social truth is antithetic to a physical truth. Like "everybody know it, that it's the Sun circling around Earth... AND NOT VISE VERSA!!! Burn that heretic!!!!!" ;-P
Indeed. Now how do we get the two to "align"... ;P
And what exactly weapon that would be? What would be a victory? What is help?
Nuclear weapons. JSTARS or JLENS for surveillance/ coordination. Arrow 3&4 missiles and Iron Dome for air defense. Hellfires. Apaches. Cobras. F-18s. A-10s. M-1 Abrams.
I'm mostly a Navy guy so land warfare isn't my thing. I'd just send you a CVBG, a MAB or two, an LHA and give you an SSBN with a few SSN escorts.
\\But Biden/NATO? They want you for "vassals". They won't let you win. That exactly vassals are that who have ALL support. If they hesitate for you to win -- that mean you are separate and independent. ;-P
\\Hernando de Soto is a neoliberal globalist free-trader of the Reagan-Thatcher era (80s). Like I've said elsewhere. This has transformied into "Capitalism with Asian Values". You'll do better reading Adam Smith. Or better, Zizek and then Adam Smith.
My bad.
Socialism, Economic Calculation and Entrepreneurship (New ... www.amazon.com › Socialism-Economic-Calcu...
Socialism, Economic Calculation and Entrepreneurship (New Thinking in Political Economy) [de Soto, Jesus Huerta] on Amazon.com.
Well. Still. I do not care about labels. "Knowing few principles frees from need to remember lots of trivia" (c) Jesus explained it, and I saw it as easy to understand and apply. ;-) (pun intended)
\\How you differenciate moral from ethic? Ethics refer to rules provided by an external source, e.g., codes of conduct in workplaces or principles in religions. Morals refer to an individual’s own principles regarding right and wrong.
Hah. :-)
Well. Still. We need to distinguish such cases too...
\\Indeed. And many times it's based on a "requirement" to "lie" back when "lied" to.
"Many times"? That is defining principle. Of hypocrisy. :-)))
\\As in prefacing you response with... "Oh, I'll say the PC thing..."
Trying to read mind of an opponent is foul tactics. Strawmaning. Not very successful in talk with me. TC can prove my word. ;-P
\\Indeed. Now how do we get the two to "align"... ;P
What for? ;-P
\\\\And what exactly weapon that would be? What would be a victory? What is help?
\\Nuclear weapons. JSTARS or JLENS for surveillance/ coordination. Arrow 3&4 missiles and Iron Dome for air defense. Hellfires. Apaches. Cobras. F-18s. A-10s. M-1 Abrams.
Poof... I thought about something new and mighty. And you listing here 20th century garbage. Nothing strange in that that your sworn arch-enemies (China and Rusha) look at you as on that weakling. ;-P Didn't you know that wisdom of Borderland 'My dear, here we must run as fast as we can, just to stay in place. And if you wish to go anywhere you must run twice as fast as that.'
\\I'm mostly a Navy guy so land warfare isn't my thing.
Yeah. That's obvious. Well, "war is too serious toy, to give it to military" (wide green)
\\I'd just send you a CVBG, a MAB or two, an LHA and give you an SSBN with a few SSN escorts.
As Navy guy you should be scared to send em into such a narrow places. Where em will be nothing but sitting ducks. Not everything can be solved with CVBG. Well, now I see that wisdom, of separation of USA military the way they are. ;-)
\\\\But Biden/NATO? They want you for "vassals". They won't let you win. That exactly vassals are that who have ALL support. If they hesitate for you to win -- that mean you are separate and independent. ;-P
\\Exactly. Spartan "helots".
What "exactly"?
That is anachronical beyond any reasonable account.
"Vassals" that is term from medieval Europe.
Like in "vassal of my vassal is NOT my vassal" -- principle still used in ALL(effective) armies around the world.
Discourse Don Giovanni Parsifal Characteristics Master Don Ottavio Amfortas inauthentic, inconsistent University Leporello Klingsor inauthentic, consistent Hysteric Donna Elvira Kundry authentic, inconsistent Analyst Donna Anna Parsifal authentic, consistent
Poof... I thought about something new and mighty. And you listing here 20th century garbage. Nothing strange in that that your sworn arch-enemies (China and Rusha) look at you as on that weakling. ;-P Didn't you know that wisdom of Borderland 'My dear, here we must run as fast as we can, just to stay in place. And if you wish to go anywhere you must run twice as fast as that.'
\\I'd just send you a CVBG, a MAB or two, an LHA and give you an SSBN with a few SSN escorts. As Navy guy you should be scared to send em into such a narrow places. Where em will be nothing but sitting ducks. Not everything can be solved with CVBG. Well, now I see that wisdom, of separation of USA military the way they are. ;-)
What if they off-loaded just outside of St. Petersberg? You don't think we could do it? :P
\\Exactly. Spartan "helots". What "exactly"?
After a Spartan victory, the Spartans asked their supporting helot troops who their best leaders had been, promising them their freedom. The helots identified their best generals, then the Spartans executed them. The helot's would not have leaders capable of a revolt.
\\\\Indeed. Now how do we get the two to "align"... ;P \\\What for? ;-P
\\Lacan "Four Discourses"
Question was WHY, not HOW. ;-)
\\What if they off-loaded just outside of St. Petersberg? You don't think we could do it? :P
To try to overcome RFia with stupidity? Hardly they'd be impressed. They'll chempion you out in that discipline. ;-P
\\After a Spartan victory, the Spartans asked their supporting helot troops who their best leaders had been, promising them their freedom. The helots identified their best generals, then the Spartans executed them. The helot's would not have leaders capable of a revolt.
So-o-aw... what?
You said that you have read Machiavelli. Have you not read what he wrote about organuzation of military force? ;-)
\\Lacan "Four Discourses" Question was WHY, not HOW. ;-)
It's the only way to come nearer to the truth (see it from ALL sides).
\\What if they off-loaded just outside of St. Petersberg? You don't think we could do it? :P To try to overcome RFia with stupidity? Hardly they'd be impressed. They'll chempion you out in that discipline. ;-P
Hitler didn't handle a two-front war very well. And he had much better general's than Stalin.
\\After a Spartan victory, the Spartans asked their supporting helot troops who their best leaders had been, promising them their freedom. The helots identified their best generals, then the Spartans executed them. The helot's would not have leaders capable of a revolt. So-o-aw... what?
You wish to be a helot? Hug your chains, then.
You said that you have read Machiavelli. Have you not read what he wrote about organuzation of military force? ;-)
How unreliable a reliance upon foreign allies is? What do you think? I don't need to live "The Life of Castruccio Castracani" to understand that. It's better to be feared than loved.
\\\\Lacan "Four Discourses" \\\Question was WHY, not HOW. ;-) \\It's the only way to come nearer to the truth (see it from ALL sides).
By running away from importan questions? By beating around that bush, instead of diving into it? Yeah. That is how they like to "seek the truth". Lazily. And without scary possibility of being haunted with realisation that Truth is different from agreeable and pleaqsant Social Truth. ;-P Common folks. Small potatoes. Peasant. And court phylosophers, like that Zizek, ready to provide support for such a brave Holy Grail Crucade. :-)))))))))))))))))))
\\Hitler didn't handle a two-front war very well. And he had much better general's than Stalin.
And? What's your point here?
\\You wish to be a helot? Hug your chains, then.
And how it comes out of my words???
\\How unreliable a reliance upon foreign allies is?
Did you have at least hat tipping aquitance with ALL books? ;-)
\\\\Lacan "Four Discourses" \\\Question was WHY, not HOW. ;-) \\It's the only way to come nearer to the truth (see it from ALL sides). ...And court phylosophers, like that Zizek, ready to provide support for such a brave Holy Grail Crucade. :-)))))))))))))))))))
We obviously live in different worlds.
\\Hitler didn't handle a two-front war very well. And he had much better general's than Stalin. And? What's your point here?
They won't let you win. THAT is my point. They keep you in a box... can't attack Russia proper or you won't get NATO weapons... long range weapons. Why is that? To keep you in your box. To be a pawn in their Cold-War NATO game and not become a Hot-War.
\\You wish to be a helot? Hug your chains, then. And how it comes out of my words???
You keep wanting to fight a war that you will not be permitted to win. Ukraine is the leech that bleeds the medievil Russian patient.
\\How unreliable a reliance upon foreign allies is? Did you have at least hat tipping aquitance with ALL books? ;-)
Florence vs. Pisa and the Renaissance wars to unite "Italy". Machiavelli's "Histories". :P
\\They won't let you win. THAT is my point. They keep you in a box... can't attack Russia proper or you won't get NATO weapons... long range weapons. Why is that? To keep you in your box. To be a pawn in their Cold-War NATO game and not become a Hot-War.
And what would be that Victory? What is "success" in M.A.D. game??? What they tought you in your academy about it?
\\You keep wanting to fight a war that you will not be permitted to win. Ukraine is the leech that bleeds the medievil Russian patient.
And you. Who do not know history of Ukraine. History of Rusha. Self-admitedly clueless in land combat. Giving it to me as your *expert* advice? Am I understand you correctly here?
\\Florence vs. Pisa and the Renaissance wars to unite "Italy". Machiavelli's "Histories". :P
Yep. And what did HE said about organization of military force? ;-)
\\They won't let you win. THAT is my point. They keep you in a box... can't attack Russia proper or you won't get NATO weapons... long range weapons. Why is that? To keep you in your box. To be a pawn in their Cold-War NATO game and not become a Hot-War. And what would be that Victory? What is "success" in M.A.D. game??? What they tought you in your academy about it?
The vistory is a weakened Russia. That is all they seek. Not a "victory" for Ukraine. The lesson is to "prevail". Dead people didn't "prevail". Ukraine will NOT prevail. You are the sacrificed pawn.
\\You keep wanting to fight a war that you will not be permitted to win. Ukraine is the leech that bleeds the medievil Russian patient. And you. Who do not know history of Ukraine. History of Rusha. Self-admitedly clueless in land combat. Giving it to me as your *expert* advice? Am I understand you correctly here?
No, I don't know the history of Russia. But I am an 'expert' in the history of America. I am an expert in the use of Naval power, like Britain, like Japan, like Athens. They say that ships turn their land fighters into "cowards"... for when threatened, they always run back to their ships and "leave". THAT is the reliability of "naval" allies. Find some "Spartans" who have no ships to run back to and will stay and fight, to the death. For I, Thersites at least, will run back to the beached bark should the Trojans sally forth in numbers from Priam's fortress.
\\Florence vs. Pisa and the Renaissance wars to unite "Italy". Machiavelli's "Histories". :P Yep. And what did HE said about organization of military force? ;-)
To commit all injustices up front when usurping a kingdom, and then rule it "justly" thereafter.
from my Masthead...the answer to "ἢ τὰν ἢ ἐπὶ τᾶς"...
And by a prudent flight and cunning save A life which valour could not, from the grave. A better buckler I can soon regain, But who can get another life again?
\\The victory is a weakened Russia. Are you trying to "weaken" rabid dog. Or you just shut it?
Please. All they want is 144 million more consumers buying Chinese goods through Amazon.com (and taking a % in US dollars). They already have 44 million new Ukrainian consumers doing the same. Call it a "leveraged buyout". They don't want to shoot anyone. But Russia wants to make and sell its' own products. How presumptive!
Meanwhile, the actual global economy teeters on a near collapse. And Russia knows this. China knows this. The EU knows this. Half of the US now knows this. The halcyon days are over. There are economic storms on the horizon.
None of the ships fly US flags. If they did, they'd need to be manned by US crews. Ever hear of the Jones Act? If not for the Jones Act there would be NO US ships, except the US Navy combat fleet.
People w/o jobs cannot consume even the cheapest products made in other countries. They can only collect welfare and take opiates... like China during the Opium trade days.
\\That globalism kills domestic jobs? I thought that was self-evident.
Many thinfs kill jobs... so what? Are youi ready for Socialism? Under Socialism NOTHING can kill domestic jobs... they die out on their own. ;-P i.e. cure you propose much worse than illness you want to doctor.
\\People w/o jobs cannot consume even the cheapest products made in other countries. They can only collect welfare and take opiates... like China during the Opium trade days.
\\That globalism kills domestic jobs? I thought that was self-evident. Many thinfs kill jobs... so what? Are youi ready for Socialism? Under Socialism NOTHING can kill domestic jobs... they die out on their own. ;-P i.e. cure you propose much worse than illness you want to doctor.
lol! I would let "too big to fail", fail... not try and "smooth" the economy with monetary policy (interest rates to 0). There would be recessions/ depressions, and lots of "going out of business" sales. REAL capitalism where businesses die when they are no longer viable and even investors can be sued and have liability for damages caused. Anarcho-capitalism is much too scary for most people. Mine wouldn't be "exactly" anarcho... but close. Liberty capitalism.
\\People w/o jobs cannot consume even the cheapest products made in other countries. They can only collect welfare and take opiates... like China during the Opium trade days. Bombasticly incorrect historical analogy, again.
Polemical yes. Incorrect? Not quite. State capitalism/ mercantilism is not anyone's friend. It caused the American revolution of 1776. Are you familiar with the Great Bengal famine?
And there'd be NONE in Europe and Chana. Guess, where capital will flee? :-))))))) Or what, you will FORBID it to flee? Than you'd be full-fledged revolutioner and socialist. And USA will become part of Latin America, at last. ;-P They doing it constantly, there. Flip-floping from military huntas into socialistic populism and back. Wanna follow their example? NMP.
\\Polemical yes.
I have NO problem with whatever you throwing into discussion as an argument. I think I showed it enough even in that early "discussion" with TC/Nigero. But... I leave for myself possibility to call white white, black black and shit shit. ;-)
\\Incorrect? Not quite.
Comparation of medieval society with post-modern one... I even do not know where to start, that endless list of incorrectness.
\\ State capitalism/ mercantilism is not anyone's friend. It caused the American revolution of 1776.
State capitalism in late-feudal society? Ehm...
\\ Are you familiar with the Great Bengal famine?
Isn't that example from that Old Good Times you advertise return to?
\\There would be recessions/ depressions And there'd be NONE in Europe and Chana. Guess, where capital will flee? :-))))))) Or what, you will FORBID it to flee? Than you'd be full-fledged revolutioner and socialist. And USA will become part of Latin America, at last. ;-P They doing it constantly, there. Flip-floping from military huntas into socialistic populism and back. Wanna follow their example? NMP.
It can certainly flee. It just won't ever be able to come back and buy-out what remain's here. :)
\\Polemical yes. I have NO problem with whatever you throwing into discussion as an argument. I think I showed it enough even in that early "discussion" with TC/Nigero. But... I leave for myself possibility to call white white, black black and shit shit. ;-)
Be my guest, but you do me no favours by not identifying nor addressing my errors with, in a word, "bullsh*t!".
This... is better... but still not quite helpful:
\\Incorrect? Not quite. Comparation of medieval society with post-modern one... I even do not know where to start, that endless list of incorrectness.
So history does not/ can not repeat? History teaches no lessons?
\\ State capitalism/ mercantilism is not anyone's friend. It caused the American revolution of 1776. State capitalism in late-feudal society? Ehm...
Obviosly not all feudal... a "mixed" economy. Are you saying that circumstances of history must be "identical" in order to form a useful/ representative analogy?
\\ Are you familiar with the Great Bengal famine? Isn't that example from that Old Good Times you advertise return to?
Actually, slightly before. 1770 vs 1786+ (pre/post US Constitution).... the "cause" of the break from the past.
\\Be my guest, but you do me no favours by not identifying nor addressing my errors with, in a word, "bullsh*t!".
If that'll be possible to convey complex missive with a few words... there'd be no books. ;-) I have same problem, very related to my idea (if there is agenda behind my comments, that is not political, economical or historical problematics... I say that so if you feel annoyed, you can give me a wink so I would suppress it). As I come to that question -- let's imagine, I'm billioneire B-) and can buy any profy for work on my goal -- but I still would need to explain and interest a team of people, people with different backgrounds and lifetime experiences... to work on thing that is bigger than their individual horizont of thought. I hope you understand what I am trying to say here.
\\So history does not/ can not repeat?
And you brag about reading that old books (hope, it would be seen as friendly remark here, or am I overdoing it?) Even that old greeks knew that. With sentence like "it's impossible to step into same river twice". Or... with that experiment with potter's rolling device. ;-)
\\History teaches no lessons?
Those who could benefit of em the most... yes.
\\Obviosly not all feudal... a "mixed" economy.
Interesting question... when exactly Capitalism started? :-) Not rethorical question. But not pointed on you too. There somwhere must be some scientific researches on that...
\\Are you saying that circumstances of history must be "identical" in order to form a useful/ representative analogy?
No. Just, the same as theoretical physics -- one need to know WHAT exactly part of phenomena his model idealise, and understand when boundaries of that model crossed.
\\Be my guest, but you do me no favours by not identifying nor addressing my errors with, in a word, "bullsh*t!". If that'll be possible to convey complex missive with a few words... there'd be no books. ;-) I have same problem, very related to my idea (if there is agenda behind my comments, that is not political, economical or historical problematics... I say that so if you feel annoyed, you can give me a wink so I would suppress it). As I come to that question -- let's imagine, I'm billioneire B-) and can buy any profy for work on my goal -- but I still would need to explain and interest a team of people, people with different backgrounds and lifetime experiences... to work on thing that is bigger than their individual horizont of thought. I hope you understand what I am trying to say here.
Maybe, but not completely. Come back in ten month's time when I'll have plenty of time to work on hobbies and pet projects. If not, ;)
\\So history does not/ can not repeat? And you brag about reading that old books (hope, it would be seen as friendly remark here, or am I overdoing it?) Even that old greeks knew that. With sentence like "it's impossible to step into same river twice". Or... with that experiment with potter's rolling device. ;-)
Potter's rolling device? To put patterns/symbols onto the clay jars for decoration? What was the experiment... they did it all the time?
\\History teaches no lessons? Those who could benefit of em the most... yes.
Touche'
\\Obviosly not all feudal... a "mixed" economy. Interesting question... when exactly Capitalism started? :-) Not rethorical question. But not pointed on you too. There somwhere must be some scientific researches on that...
Only one has interested me... the "modern" corporate form of capitalism. The other's have been fairly thouroughly addressed by Adam Smith.
\\Are you saying that circumstances of history must be "identical" in order to form a useful/ representative analogy? No. Just, the same as theoretical physics -- one need to know WHAT exactly part of phenomena his model idealise, and understand when boundaries of that model crossed.
Humans behaviour is seldom accurately "modelled". I know, where's Harry Seldon when you need him.
\\Potter's rolling device? To put patterns/symbols onto the clay jars for decoration? What was the experiment... they did it all the time?
Pottery circles. Yeah, Google not enough smart to help with that. Needs lots of semantic web improvments. :-) Story was like that, to prove how life of different humans cannot be the same, no matter how similar they are, two of them was instructed to put their fingers on a rolling pottery circle. No, I do not remember names.
\\\\\\History teaches no lessons? \\\\Those who could benefit of em the most... yes. \\Touche'
Well. Historical process unrolling before our eyes. It is shame to not watch it closely and not convey own conclusions. Like about parallels with Nazis forming. And etc. That is answer to your question about analogies too. ;-)
\\Only one has interested me... the "modern" corporate form of capitalism.
Yap. That's it. And when did it started? ;-)
\\ The other's have been fairly thouroughly addressed by Adam Smith.
That was Capitalism?
\\Humans behaviour is seldom accurately "modelled". I know, where's Harry Seldon when you need him.
Azimov was greatly misunderstood. He was talking about modeling of sociological processes. That's why he made that setup with miriads of planets with mostly identical human infabitants -- to increase sheer number, that would make statistical processes work flawlessly. But then he started to destroy that idilia in later texts. In favour of borg-like socium of Gaia. ;-P
And well, there is no problem with modelling humans -- one just need to set em under certain conditions... like from the gates... and to furnaces. ;-P See. People do behave as ideal gas, that way.
\\Potter's rolling device? To put patterns/symbols onto the clay jars for decoration? What was the experiment... they did it all the time? Pottery circles. Yeah, Google not enough smart to help with that. Needs lots of semantic web improvments. :-) Story was like that, to prove how life of different humans cannot be the same, no matter how similar they are, two of them was instructed to put their fingers on a rolling pottery circle. No, I do not remember names.
\\Only one has interested me... the "modern" corporate form of capitalism. Yap. That's it. And when did it started? ;-)
According to the link I sent, the Catholic Church.... and independence from the king and his taxes. "Private church property". Also, are you familiar with the "City of London Corporation"? Established by the Magna Carta in 1067. It limited the King's jurisdiction. Ever heard of the Temple bar where the Inns at Court were located? Most of America's colonial families were educated at the "Middle Temple". It has some very interesting traditions. It's power/influence were celebrated in two poems by the American author, Herman Melville (of "Moby Dick" fame), in "The Paradise of the Bachelors" and the "Tartaus of the Maids".
\\ The other's have been fairly thouroughly addressed by Adam Smith. That was Capitalism?
The beginnings, but mostly a screed against British "mercantilism" (what it's becoming now).
\\Humans behaviour is seldom accurately "modelled". I know, where's Harry Seldon when you need him. Azimov was greatly misunderstood. He was talking about modeling of sociological processes. That's why he made that setup with miriads of planets with mostly identical human infabitants -- to increase sheer number, that would make statistical processes work flawlessly. But then he started to destroy that idilia in later texts. In favour of borg-like socium of Gaia. ;-P
Sounds like you are much better read on the subject than I am. I read the Foundation series, but spared myself it's merger with the earlier (and later) "Robot" series.
And well, there is no problem with modelling humans -- one just need to set em under certain conditions... like from the gates... and to furnaces. ;-P See. People do behave as ideal gas, that way.
@@ Sorry. I was nore interested in psychohistory from the standpoint of influences of an individual leader on the mass and resulting mass psychosis. Hitler/Bismark/Petain...
\\According to the link I sent, the Catholic Church.... and independence from the king and his taxes. "Private church property". Also, are you familiar with the "City of London Corporation"? Established by the Magna Carta in 1067. It limited the King's jurisdiction.
Is it similar to "magdeburg law"?
\\ Herman Melville (of "Moby Dick" fame), in "The Paradise of the Bachelors" and the "Tartaus of the Maids"
I kin enough to associate name Melville with that Moby. But mostly oblivious to other things. Blame your popular culture. ;-P I guess average Ams is the same.
\\Sounds like you are much better read on the subject than I am. I read the Foundation series, but spared myself it's merger with the earlier (and later) "Robot" series.
Ehm... that's puzzling.
\\ was nore interested in psychohistory from the standpoint of influences of an individual leader on the mass and resulting mass psychosis. Hitler/Bismark/Petain...
Exactly. History that unfolds today -- shows that was not any "psychosis". Just mere stupidity.
Hanlon's razor - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia simple.wikipedia.org › wiki › Hanlon's_razor Hanlon's razor is a saying that reads: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
\\Maybe, but not completely. Come back in ten month's time when I'll have plenty of time to work on hobbies and pet projects. If not, ;)
Correct me, if I'm wrong. That in your culture inventors shown as some freaky crazy scientists, in their secluded secret hideouts/labs/caves (but mostly, garages) making mostly doomsday devices, with duct tape and toasters? :-)))
But, there is little problem. From standpoint of technological progress. Pool of inventions that could be made on that level is mostly ended.
And. There is much more adequate ways -- like Elon Musk do. Stating goal before whole bunch of specialists in their spheres. Neither SpaceX, nor Tesla could be made any other way...
But what to do for an inventor who are not billioneire, and far from millioneire even? ;-P
And how to reassure possibility of progress... as quite few of billionares have such a big drive for "invention".
That is what Lem pointed out -- from mouth of his Golem... that such a prominent artifacts as it/him, cn be created ONLY through deliverate application of engineering ingenuity...
But well, what could be a seed for such ingenuity? How to bootstrap it? Is regular(?) procedure of creating startup, new R&D division, would be enough?
\\According to the link I sent, the Catholic Church.... and independence from the king and his taxes. "Private church property". Also, are you familiar with the "City of London Corporation"? Established by the Magna Carta in 1067. It limited the King's jurisdiction. Is it similar to "magdeburg law"?
Exactly. Like a symbolic paper "herm" at the porticos/ gates of ancient Greek homes... yes. From the ancient "societies of sovereignty" days, replaced by "Disciplinary Societies" and then "Societies of Control". Welcome to our new heterotopia, where even inside of our skulls cannot escape, nor at times, even "get in".
\\ Herman Melville (of "Moby Dick" fame), in "The Paradise of the Bachelors" and the "Tartaus of the Maids" I kin enough to associate name Melville with that Moby. But mostly oblivious to other things. Blame your popular culture. ;-P I guess average Ams is the same.
Hollywood culture is quite ubiquitous.
\\Sounds like you are much better read on the subject than I am. I read the Foundation series, but spared myself it's merger with the earlier (and later) "Robot" series. Ehm... that's puzzling.
I may have loved Asimov in the 70's/80's, but if I wanted to read him I needed a "hard/ print copy". Not like today.
\\ was nore interested in psychohistory from the standpoint of influences of an individual leader on the mass and resulting mass psychosis. Hitler/Bismark/Petain... Exactly. History that unfolds today -- shows that was not any "psychosis". Just mere stupidity.
Stupidity is all around us. "The mother of idiots is always pregnant".
Hanlon's razor - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia simple.wikipedia.org › wiki › Hanlon's_razor Hanlon's razor is a saying that reads: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Observant fellow that Hanlon...
\\Maybe, but not completely. Come back in ten month's time when I'll have plenty of time to work on hobbies and pet projects. If not, ;) Correct me, if I'm wrong. That in your culture inventors shown as some freaky crazy scientists, in their secluded secret hideouts/labs/caves (but mostly, garages) making mostly doomsday devices, with duct tape and toasters? :-)))
No that was the 19th/early 20th century. That disappeared with the German "University" and the "Government Grant". Now, it's multidisciplinary teams contributing to digital models.
But, there is little problem. From standpoint of technological progress. Pool of inventions that could be made on that level is mostly ended.
No argument here, unless you're attempting "revolutionary/ extraordinary" science.
And. There is much more adequate ways -- like Elon Musk do. Stating goal before whole bunch of specialists in their spheres. Neither SpaceX, nor Tesla could be made any other way...
Yep. Because this is "Normal Science".
But what to do for an inventor who are not billioneire, and far from millioneire even? ;-P
And how to reassure possibility of progress... as quite few of billionares have such a big drive for "invention".
Believe me when I say, they usually only do it with government grant money, not their own.
That is what Lem pointed out -- from mouth of his Golem... that such a prominent artifacts as it/him, cn be created ONLY through deliverate application of engineering ingenuity...
But well, what could be a seed for such ingenuity? How to bootstrap it? Is regular(?) procedure of creating startup, new R&D division, would be enough?
Start small... and win a contract posted in the Commerce Business Daily (CBD). It helps if you are a qualified small business or 8A firm. I work for one.
\\Welcome to our new heterotopia, where even inside of our skulls cannot escape, nor at times, even "get in".
Well. Always have a chance to take refuge into less developed societies. ;-)
\\I may have loved Asimov in the 70's/80's, but if I wanted to read him I needed a "hard/ print copy". Not like today.
Ehm... public libraries?
\\Stupidity is all around us.
The same as matter around us consist not from elements of water, fire and etc, as ancient phylosophers thought, but from very distinctive chems and their compaunds. Same with stupidity, I presume. That is the answer to my interest in poking TC/Nigero. Well, if that annoys you, I'll try to thwart that urge. :-)
\\No that was the 19th/early 20th century. That disappeared with the German "University" and the "Government Grant". Now, it's multidisciplinary teams contributing to digital models.
Dunno. How can I know such details? Well, Elon acquered his first millions in time of Dot Com bum. After that I do not know same big rise from dust into... unicorns. ;-) But, society of goldminers... aka startuppers still only continue to grow. In all accordance of Lem's schema of any "science".
Ehm? Well, Lem depicted it in his Summa Technologiae. In year Anno Domini 1964. And then in his scifi works. Modern scifi stuck in depicting exactly that future. Half of the time while it not stuck in lame fantasy-world-building. But... yeah, it need some kind ***ing revolution for World to make that next (relatively little IMHO) step of the Progress... So, yeah, you can call me Ishma... err, revolutioner, if you see it suiting.
\\Believe me when I say, they usually only do it with government grant money, not their own.
Whatever.
\\So go work for NASA, or anything affiliated with the National Science Foundation. They set the priorities for funding.
"Planned miracles"? Well, for Nicolo Tesla it didn't work.
\\Bureaucracies. You can't live with them, and you can't live with them.
108 comments:
Why not make your own Future?
Well, Lem's idea. ;-)
There are irreconcilable obstacles, at present, that must be altered first to make it compatible.
...but yes, that' the idea.
\\Blogger -FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...
There are irreconcilable obstacles, at present, that must be altered first to make it compatible.
Elaborate?
Well. What I (and Lem, as far as I understand) meaned is building of future through development of technologies.
Not social changes.
That will happen anyway. In reaction to it.
But "who" should we unleash? Just the "approved" bureaucrats to fund the apparatus which contributes to their advancement, conquests, and rule? Who write laws and regulations and support only the technologies, like weapons, that will remain in their "control"? To give them the power to destroy others, like them?
,
No, it's time to "lower" the world, and a nation's "aggregate efficiency". Interstate highways and water projects are fine. Information flows? Not a good idea, as "censorship" would appear to be the result. A tool to "depress" technological develop in fields deemed "dangerous" to the status quo power relations of men. That should, IMO, be regulated at a much lower and "regional" level.
Before our "Civil War" we had "State's Rights". It's time we returned to them. No "national" armies. No "Central" Intelligence Agencies. No unrestricted "National Security Agency" information capture and control.
Inefficient? Yes. But the liberty of mankind deserves no less. More "jobs" for men, and less "automation". Capitalism w/o "obsolete" humans receiving a "guaranteed wage" from social welfare.
Mankind as "Prosumer" NOT "Consumer".
Where "Too Big to Fail" never is allowed to become "too big" in the first place.
Meden agan!
Prevent men from getting too big for their britches. Giving them a "self-defining limit".
And since there are no gods to do it...
Perhaps, you say, it's too late. The cats already out of the bag.
Perhaps we need to try and catch the cat, instead of blindly feeding it. Fail, but fail better.
Well, interesting part about techs Lem propheted... they are self-sustainable. ;-) Interested? (I have blueprints)
What tech did Lem advocate for?
More like approach for a bunch of new ones. ;-)
You known, like in Civilization (tn), it was called Future Tech 1, 2, 3 and etc. ;-)
Well, Ok.
Ideas of technological progress do not warm your heart.
Possibly because of progress you saw was of cold and soulless kind.
Bombs and rockets.
Or. Because progress as it was promised to you didn't happened?
Like that Bright Future of Star Trek? Or you like Star Wars better?
Well, that was flashy, but not realistic.
No, I don't like what "progress" did to the lives of working men/ women. It made them obsolete and unable to participate in the economy at large. It put them on unemployment and welfare. It monopolized all the legal and respectable means of earning a living for people without the benefit of social connections, intelligence and education. The only work available was selling drugs (The Wire) or worse.
The large corporations undersell the small ones. The small ones undersell the mom & pop Main Street shops. Amazon undersells everyone. Efficiency became a curse.
The bigger you are, the bigger the government tax break.
I'm for smaller, less efficient, but more "anti-fragile" businesses. For a complete overhaul of the US tax code limiting how "big" a corporation can get and what they can sell. A playground where everyone can compete. Every man NOT a consumer, but a PROsumer.
THAT is the future I was promised.
I grew up in Silicon valley in the 70's. My neighbor had an NC Milling Machine in his garage. I used to make machine parts for him, and he paid me $5/ hr "under the table". THAT is the America I want back.
//THAT is the future I was promised.
Where exactly? Forgive me my ignorance, but I saw nothing like that Utopia image you drew here.
Well. They. In Silicon valley working hard on that Utopia. On the new turn of the spiral of History.
On new level.
3D printers. p2p networking. Open Source as commodity.
Do you not like it?
But well... that cannot be scaled to a level to compete with Old Good Mass-Production Industry.
Because?
Because they mass-produce things, you know. ;-)
What *I* trying to talk about... that is like biological things industry. With evolution, cross-breeding, and etc. ;-) Gardening, if you wish.
Well, I cannot promise you it'll be the way you drew... that's impossible to profess.
As Lem was uneasy about -- that such tech will be used to make weapon first.
And that weapon will be even more devastating and easy to go out of hands than nukes. :-(((
But... and that is what keeping light of desire to make it real burning in me.
Such tech have almost unmeasurable capacity of growth, to the level of god-like capabilities.
Like... I will not show weaponised use here, of course.
But thingts like -- clearing all pollution. Maybe even nuclear.
Growing towns like a forrests.
Making cities even in space... and obviously in the ocean.
Non-invasive treatment of our health.
Who knows what more. ;-)
Where exactly?
Toffler's "The Third Wave"... his vision was that we ALL had those NC machines in our garages and supplied other small businesses like our own over the internet. It wasn't for Amazon.com to control everything through mass-production performed in China. It was for us all to supply each other with "micro"-production custom/ tailored to fit our individual lifestyles.
Because they mass-produce things, you know. ;-)
Yes they gain "economies of scale". So I outlaw the "large scales" and build in "inefficiency" through law and "tariffs". I make sure that corporations can't grow to become "immortal" $1 trillion capitalized behemoths. If they do, they are taxed at 100% I take away their "corporate rights" and make them compete with PEOPLE. I kill all the Strulbruggs in Luggnagg and thereby unleash HUMAN potential in competition with other Mortals.
No more "salaried bourgeoisie" running the world through corporate structures. Empower a REAL bourgeoisie who all have "skin in the game" when it comes to legal and biological liabilities. Humans have a 50 year working life. They, unlike corporations, are "mortal".
:)
Here's the "original" promise...
To found a great empire for the sole purpose of raising up a people of customers may at first sight appear a project fit only for a nation of shopkeepers. It is, however, a project altogether unfit for a nation of shopkeepers; but extremely fit for a nation whose government is influenced by shopkeepers.
— Adam Smith, "The Wealth of Nations"
\\\\Blogger -FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...
Where exactly?
\\Toffler's "The Third Wave"...
That Toffler was not technologist, isn't it?
The same as Marx.
"Fear the danaians who bring gifts". :-)))
\\ So I outlaw the "large scales" and build in "inefficiency" through law and "tariffs". I make sure that corporations can't grow to become "immortal" $1 trillion capitalized behemoths. If they do, they are taxed at 100% I take away their "corporate rights" and make them compete with PEOPLE. I kill all the Strulbruggs in Luggnagg and thereby unleash HUMAN potential in competition with other Mortals.
Yeah... but that is... socialistic agenda. Commie even.
So, why you call yourself right? Or that like in a rightful, rightness? ;-)
Well, my idea compatible with such views still.
Every "constitution" is a "socialist agenda". Every corporate charter is also a "socialist agenda". Every business contract is a "socialist agenda". Can we call attach pejorative labels here, or try and solve problems?
Governments both enable economics and then try and offset the damages done by their bad economic policies.
Toffler was a "futurist".
btw - Ever read Plato's opposite, Xenophon? His Oeconomicus? Anabasis?
His Anabasis became Alexander's inspiration for conquering the Persian empire.
You've heard the word "xenophobia"?
He was a Danaian who bore no gifts....a true son of Hypernmnestra.
are you familiar with the differences between exogamous and endogamous cultures? Europeans/ Danaians are exogamous.
Did you ever read Aeschylus' "Suppliant Maidens". It is the story of the Danaians.
Oeconomicus
Anabasis
The Suppliants
The Spartans were Socialists. The Athenians were Democrats.
Xenophon identified as "both".
Exogamy and democracy go hand-in-hand. Endogamy and socialism go hand-in-hand. The funny thing is that the exogamous cultures dropped the idea of war brides and the endogamous ones adopted it as a defense.
Euripdes "Andromache" lay out the arguments.
Are you familiar with the ten "tribes" of Athens? Kingdom-Phylum-Class-Order-Family
On Socrates and his "tribe"
I have always understood humanism as a philosophy of personal improvement and responsibility, quite aside of its social dimension referred to above. Socrates lived this aspect of his philosophy personally, and it got tested on at the least three occasions. The first episode occurred in the year 406, when Socrates was already 64. The Athenians had routed the Spartan fleet at the battle of Arginusae, but its six commanders had failed to give aid to the survivors of their own foundered ships, because they decided instead to chase the retreating Spartans. The people wanted the death penalty for the accused generals, but Socrates' tribe, which on that day held the prytany (executive power) in the boule (the city council), rejected the request. At that point the mob threatened the executive officers themselves with death, and the latter eventually relented. This is where Socrates stepped in. He was epistates (overseer) of the debate, and held veto power, which he exercised on the ground that "in no case would he act except in accordance with the law"5. Needless to say, that stand — which he made on the grounds of his understanding of virtue and moral integrity — could have easily cost him his life.
from Wiki:
Plato and Xenophon
An honest man, Xenophon was no trained philosopher.[7] He could neither fully conceptualize nor articulate Socrates's arguments.[8] He admired Socrates for his intelligence, patriotism, and courage on the battlefield.[8] He discusses Socrates in four works: the Memorabilia, the Oeconomicus, the Symposium, and the Apology of Socrates. He also mentions a story featuring Socrates in his Anabasis.[9] Oeconomicus recounts a discussion on practical agricultural issues.[10] Like Plato's Apology, Xenophon's Apologia describes the trial of Socrates, but the works diverge substantially and, according to W. K. C. Guthrie, Xenophon's account portrays a Socrates of "intolerable smugness and complacency".[11] Symposium is a dialogue of Socrates with other prominent Athenians during an after-dinner discussion, but is quite different from Plato's Symposium: there is no overlap in the guest list,[12] In Memorabilia, he defends Socrates from the accusations of corrupting the youth and being against the gods; essentially, it is a collection of various stories gathered together to construct a new apology for Socrates.[13]
Plato's representation of Socrates is not straightforward.[14] Plato was a pupil of Socrates and outlived him by five decades.[15] How trustworthy Plato is in representing the attributes of Socrates is a matter of debate; the view that he did not represent views other than Socrates's own is not shared by many contemporary scholars.[16] A driver of this doubt is the inconsistency of the character of Socrates that he presents.[17] One common explanation of this inconsistency is that Plato initially tried to accurately represent the historical Socrates, while later in his writings he was happy to insert his own views into Socrates's words. Under this understanding, there is a distinction between the Socratic Socrates of Plato's earlier works and the Platonic Socrates of Plato's later writings, although the boundary between the two seems blurred.[18]
Xenophon's and Plato's accounts differ in their presentations of Socrates as a person. Xenophon's Socrates is duller, less humorous and less ironic than Plato's.[8][19] Xenophon's Socrates also lacks the philosophical features of Plato's Socrates—ignorance, the Socratic method or elenchus—and thinks enkrateia (self-control) is of pivotal importance, which is not the case with Plato's Socrates.[20] Generally, logoi Sokratikoi cannot help us to reconstruct the historical Socrates even in cases where their narratives overlap, as authors may have influenced each other's accounts.[21]
The Suppliants represents a denunciation of endogamy, much as the Iliad represents a denunciation of exogamy. The "West" eventually became exogamous.
We "followed" the Danaian's path. Where "women" like Hypermnestra were empowered to participate in the game of sexual selection.
Whereas "Helen" in the Iliad was a warning against it and served as a representation of the social "cost/price" of the Western decision in favor of exogamy. I think that at the end of his career Euripide's raised Helen into the "Divine" realm and gave her a "happy" ending.
...and signalled the "end" of great Greek "tragedy".
I suspect that the key to being i "futurist" is to have a good understanding of the past... to be not only multi-cultural, but multi-temporal.
Yes forecasting technology is something... but forecasting human societies and how those technologies might relate?
Let's face it, the Spartans looked upon the tech/martial inventions of Archimedes with disdain, for they knew how they would make 'cowards" out of men. And they have. Hector and Achilles will never again battle as equals... step out of their chariots and fight hand-to-hand.
Look at us today... flinging nuclear weapons at hypersonic speeds instead of meeting them face-to-face on equal terms. Sparta's walls were her men. Athens had "long walls". Britain's walls were the hulls of oaken ships. And America's are of aluminum and carbon-fiber composites which peer down from the heavens.
We 'fight" from ever increasing distances. We no longer grapple hand-to-hand. Xenophon no longer strategizes (as in Cyropedia) to close with the Medes with a gladius to make their peltast and archer's longer range weapons ineffective. We "tech" our solutions.
No wonder the Greeks rejected tech. Archilocus, where are you?
Bring back honour to mankind!
ἢ τὰν ἢ ἐπὶ τᾶς - A Spartan mother
And by a prudent flight and cunning save
A life which valour could not, from the grave.
A better buckler I can soon regain,
But who can get another life again?- Archilochus
Two opposing virtues...
Odysseus vs Thersites
It's best to be a socialist in war, and a democrat in peace. Orwell realized/ knew that better than most.
:P
On the Great Reset...
First of all... what a barrage of comments. :-)
\\We 'fight" from ever increasing distances. We no longer grapple hand-to-hand. Xenophon no longer strategizes (as in Cyropedia) to close with the Medes with a gladius to make their peltast and archer's longer range weapons ineffective. We "tech" our solutions.
And? When we was not?
\\No wonder the Greeks rejected tech. Archilocus, where are you?
While building walls and trirems and etc.
Archimedes was not Greek? ;-P
Well, they was fighting in between themself. Of course there must be a rules of "fair fight" in such case.
The same as "rules of fair war" devised in Europe. But after Napoleon's blunder nobody honors em.
And who we need to say thank you for that. ;-P
\\I suspect that the key to being i "futurist" is to have a good understanding of the past... to be not only multi-cultural, but multi-temporal.
There was no successful one. So, how we'd know? ;-)
\\Yes forecasting technology is something... but forecasting human societies and how those technologies might relate?
Yep. Something Lem tryed to answer.
And his answer is unsettling -- tech changes will facilitate SUCH cultural changes, so we would not be able to relate our experience to that lifestyle.
Imagine even brightest of eggheads pre 19th century... and imagine you explaining to them how you use that thing called Web. ;-)
\\The Spartans were Socialists. The Athenians were Democrats.
I profess meaning of words changed too much through ages. ;-)
\\Every "constitution" is a "socialist agenda". Every corporate charter is also a "socialist agenda". Every business contract is a "socialist agenda". Can we call attach pejorative labels here, or try and solve problems?
You stroming through open doors.
I already declared "whatever works is Ok with me".
Well, socialism do no work (tm) ;-P
\\btw - Ever read Plato's opposite, Xenophon? His Oeconomicus? Anabasis?
\\His Anabasis became Alexander's inspiration for conquering the Persian empire.
Have no classical education. Sorry.
In my part of the world it was sparse and on a level of fairytales. :-)
And? When we was not?
When the Captain's of the Achaeans would ride out in front of the battle lines and then fight personal challenges before the main battle.
Archimedes was not Greek?
He was a "primarily" a Syracusian/ Sicilian and not a regular Hellene from the Pelloponese. ;)
There was no successful (futurist) one. So, how we'd know? ;-)
We don't. We rely upon "right opinion". We find someone who has never been, but has the right opinion, as to "how to get to Larissa". Today, in our secular age, we call this quality as "someone having charisma" or "charismatic authority" (Max Weber). Then we wait and see if our "faith" in this person (futurist) was justified.
Well, socialism do no work (tm) ;-P
Because we need ways to "escape" it and achieve a certain "social distance" in order to perform as "individuals". The means of escape from the obligations/ duties of communality/ socialism is through "money" and the transforming of social relations from "communality" into one of "reciprocity". Money (and corresponding labour to earn it) becomes a vanishing mediator in social relations and the "products/ commodities", a fetishistic substitute for them.
Have no classical education. Sorry.
Neither did I. I'm an autodidact in that field. I spent too much time driving my kids to after-school activities to waste 2-3 day waiting for them at ballet practice or theatre rehearsals and doing nothing before driving them back home.
First I read "The story of Philosophy" by Durant. Then "History of the Peloponnesian War" by Thucydides. Then the Theogony and Works and Days of Hesiod, the "Iliad/ Odyssey" of Homer, the all the works of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. Then Aristophanes. I tried to read "primary sources". I read all of Plato's dialogues, then Xenophon's. I then moved on to the Romans. Chronologically, through history.... trying to see the changes in ideas and events in historical societies. I then skipped ahead to the Italian Renaissance and read all the works of Machiavelli.... and so on. Primary sources, not secondary accounts of them.
One book changed my whole life. The Story of Philosophy.
Eventually I had a mental melt-down and switched to Psychology.... reading James, Freud, and recently Zizek (to access Lacan which was too difficult for me). I'm now catching up of the French 20th century philosophers.... but fading. It's too easy to Google now and listen to secondary/ tertiary YouTube sources. I've gotten lazy.
All the works over a hundred years old are free... here.
They've all outlived the Lindy Effect. ;)
\\Blogger -FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...
One book changed my whole life. The Story of Philosophy.
Well... I accessed it all through Lem's backdoor. ;-P
\\Well, socialism do no work (tm) ;-P
Because we need ways to "escape" it and achieve a certain "social distance" in order to perform as "individuals". The means of escape from the obligations/ duties of communality/ socialism is through "money" and the transforming of social relations from "communality" into one of "reciprocity". Money (and corresponding labour to earn it) becomes a vanishing mediator in social relations and the "products/ commodities", a fetishistic substitute for them.
No. :-) Just DO NOT WORK. Historicly.
There was Great Socialistic Country -- USSR.
And WHERE it is NOW? ;-P
That's enough, for starters.
Anybody who want to "sell" to me idea "we need socialism" NEED to overcame that hassle and explain HOW his socialism would be ANY DIFFERENT, and better...
But nobody would.
Proponents of socialism seeking lazy-minded or stoopid folks. Thoughtful questions scaring em off like light scaring that cockrouches. :-)))))
\\We don't. We rely upon "right opinion". We find someone who has never been, but has the right opinion, as to "how to get to Larissa". Today, in our secular age, we call this quality as "someone having charisma" or "charismatic authority" (Max Weber). Then we wait and see if our "faith" in this person (futurist) was justified.
Yeah...
"Social Truth" as I'd call it.
\\\\Archimedes was not Greek?
\\He was a "primarily" a Syracusian/ Sicilian and not a regular Hellene from the Pelloponese. ;)
Yeah, Not True Scothman. Or well, not true Ellin.
\\When the Captain's of the Achaeans would ride out in front of the battle lines and then fight personal challenges before the main battle.
That was not a war, but war game. What? I am not allowed to use Not True Scothman? ;-P
No. :-) Just DO NOT WORK. Historicly.
There was Great Socialistic Country -- USSR.
And WHERE it is NOW? ;-P
That's enough, for starters.
Anybody who want to "sell" to me idea "we need socialism" NEED to overcame that hassle and explain HOW his socialism would be ANY DIFFERENT, and better...
But nobody would.
Proponents of socialism seeking lazy-minded or stoopid folks. Thoughtful questions scaring em off like light scaring that cockrouches. :-)))))
No "central planning" DID not work "historically"... BEFORE the "Information Age"... before the CyberSyn experiment. NOW it works "perfectly well" provided there is still an access to an "innovating" and "free" market (like China's access to a US/ EU market). It's even "more efficient"... as its' "aggregate efficiencies" benefit from extreme economies of scale.
\\We don't. We rely upon "right opinion"...
Yeah...
"Social Truth" as I'd call it.
I call that "political correctness". But I was refering more to the "moral" rather than "ethical" component of Sittlichkeit.
That was not a war, but war game. What? I am not allowed to use Not True Scotchman? ;-P
Not really. :P During the Peloponnesian War, Syracuse was a independent (Sicily) "city-state." and Athens (Greek) tried to conquer them. The Syracusans asked Sparta (Greek) for assistance. They sent two Spartan generals, who were able to show the Syracusans how to defend their city and repel the Athenian attack. Many decades later, Archimedes invented many innovative defenses for Syracuse that enabled them to successfully defend their city with "technology"... something that the Spartans would have "objected to" as "cowardly".
Don't get me wrong, I admire the bravery of the Ukrainians and have no doubt that NATO weaponry could help them hold off the Russians. But we're not giving you the weapons you need to win... just the ones to help you "bleed Russia".
Beamish wants to join in and do the job for you.
But Biden/NATO? They want you for "vassals". They won't let you win.
\\No "central planning" DID not work "historically"... BEFORE the "Information Age"... before the CyberSyn experiment. NOW it works "perfectly well" provided there is still an access to an "innovating" and "free" market (like China's access to a US/ EU market). It's even "more efficient"... as its' "aggregate efficiencies" benefit from extreme economies of scale.
Go read de Soto.
That is disingenious to try to explain him here.
\\\\\"Social Truth" as I'd call it.
\\I call that "political correctness". But I was refering more to the "moral" rather than "ethical" component of Sittlichkeit.
Then we miscommunicate here.
How you differenciate moral from ethic?
PC that is etiquette. Rules of convinience. That ALWAYS used as a means of suppression.
Like from the times it was invented -- to separate "nobles" from "peasants"... because for a peasants it was impossible to be intricate with that obscure rules of etiquette... and who will communicate with such a barbaric beasts, isn't it?
And social truth is antithetic to a physical truth.
Like "everybody know it, that it's the Sun circling around Earth... AND NOT VISE VERSA!!! Burn that heretic!!!!!" ;-P
\\Don't get me wrong, I admire the bravery of the Ukrainians and have no doubt that NATO weaponry could help them hold off the Russians. But we're not giving you the weapons you need to win... just the ones to help you "bleed Russia".
And what exactly weapon that would be?
What would be a victory?
What is help?
\\Beamish wants to join in and do the job for you.
And where he is? Seems like he lost any interest in coming here. ;-P
\\But Biden/NATO? They want you for "vassals". They won't let you win.
That exactly vassals are that who have ALL support.
If they hesitate for you to win -- that mean you are separate and independent. ;-P
Go read de Soto.
That is disingenious to try to explain him here.
Hernando de Soto is a neoliberal globalist free-trader of the Reagan-Thatcher era (80s). Like I've said elsewhere. This has transformied into "Capitalism with Asian Values". You'll do better reading Adam Smith. Or better, Zizek and then Adam Smith.
How you differenciate moral from ethic?
Ethics refer to rules provided by an external source, e.g., codes of conduct in workplaces or principles in religions. Morals refer to an individual’s own principles regarding right and wrong.
PC that is etiquette. Rules of convinience. That ALWAYS used as a means of suppression.
Like from the times it was invented -- to separate "nobles" from "peasants"... because for a peasants it was impossible to be intricate with that obscure rules of etiquette... and who will communicate with such a barbaric beasts, isn't it?
Indeed. And many times it's based on a "requirement" to "lie" back when "lied" to. And sometimes that goes against one's "morals". The person who seeks "authenticity" (to be true to one's self) instead of "inauthentic politeness" based upon "conformity" and "submission to power"... a "bending of the knee". As in prefacing you response with... "Oh, I'll say the PC thing..."
And social truth is antithetic to a physical truth.
Like "everybody know it, that it's the Sun circling around Earth... AND NOT VISE VERSA!!! Burn that heretic!!!!!" ;-P
Indeed. Now how do we get the two to "align"... ;P
And what exactly weapon that would be?
What would be a victory?
What is help?
Nuclear weapons. JSTARS or JLENS for surveillance/ coordination. Arrow 3&4 missiles and Iron Dome for air defense. Hellfires. Apaches. Cobras. F-18s. A-10s. M-1 Abrams.
I'm mostly a Navy guy so land warfare isn't my thing. I'd just send you a CVBG, a MAB or two, an LHA and give you an SSBN with a few SSN escorts.
\\But Biden/NATO? They want you for "vassals". They won't let you win.
That exactly vassals are that who have ALL support.
If they hesitate for you to win -- that mean you are separate and independent. ;-P
Exactly. Spartan "helots".
\\Hernando de Soto is a neoliberal globalist free-trader of the Reagan-Thatcher era (80s). Like I've said elsewhere. This has transformied into "Capitalism with Asian Values". You'll do better reading Adam Smith. Or better, Zizek and then Adam Smith.
My bad.
Socialism, Economic Calculation and Entrepreneurship (New ...
www.amazon.com › Socialism-Economic-Calcu...
Socialism, Economic Calculation and Entrepreneurship (New Thinking in Political Economy) [de Soto, Jesus Huerta] on Amazon.com.
Well. Still.
I do not care about labels.
"Knowing few principles frees from need to remember lots of trivia" (c)
Jesus explained it, and I saw it as easy to understand and apply. ;-) (pun intended)
\\How you differenciate moral from ethic?
Ethics refer to rules provided by an external source, e.g., codes of conduct in workplaces or principles in religions. Morals refer to an individual’s own principles regarding right and wrong.
Hah. :-)
Well. Still. We need to distinguish such cases too...
\\Indeed. And many times it's based on a "requirement" to "lie" back when "lied" to.
"Many times"? That is defining principle.
Of hypocrisy. :-)))
\\As in prefacing you response with... "Oh, I'll say the PC thing..."
Trying to read mind of an opponent is foul tactics.
Strawmaning.
Not very successful in talk with me. TC can prove my word. ;-P
\\Indeed. Now how do we get the two to "align"... ;P
What for? ;-P
\\\\And what exactly weapon that would be?
What would be a victory?
What is help?
\\Nuclear weapons. JSTARS or JLENS for surveillance/ coordination. Arrow 3&4 missiles and Iron Dome for air defense. Hellfires. Apaches. Cobras. F-18s. A-10s. M-1 Abrams.
Poof... I thought about something new and mighty.
And you listing here 20th century garbage.
Nothing strange in that that your sworn arch-enemies (China and Rusha) look at you as on that weakling. ;-P
Didn't you know that wisdom of Borderland
'My dear, here we must run as fast as we can, just to stay in place. And if you wish to go anywhere you must run twice as fast as that.'
\\I'm mostly a Navy guy so land warfare isn't my thing.
Yeah.
That's obvious.
Well, "war is too serious toy, to give it to military" (wide green)
\\I'd just send you a CVBG, a MAB or two, an LHA and give you an SSBN with a few SSN escorts.
As Navy guy you should be scared to send em into such a narrow places. Where em will be nothing but sitting ducks.
Not everything can be solved with CVBG.
Well, now I see that wisdom, of separation of USA military the way they are. ;-)
\\\\But Biden/NATO? They want you for "vassals". They won't let you win.
That exactly vassals are that who have ALL support.
If they hesitate for you to win -- that mean you are separate and independent. ;-P
\\Exactly. Spartan "helots".
What "exactly"?
That is anachronical beyond any reasonable account.
"Vassals" that is term from medieval Europe.
Like in "vassal of my vassal is NOT my vassal" -- principle still used in ALL(effective) armies around the world.
\\Indeed. Now how do we get the two to "align"... ;P
What for? ;-P
Lacan "Four Discourses"
Discourse Don Giovanni Parsifal Characteristics
Master Don Ottavio Amfortas inauthentic, inconsistent
University Leporello Klingsor inauthentic, consistent
Hysteric Donna Elvira Kundry authentic, inconsistent
Analyst Donna Anna Parsifal authentic, consistent
Poof... I thought about something new and mighty.
And you listing here 20th century garbage.
Nothing strange in that that your sworn arch-enemies (China and Rusha) look at you as on that weakling. ;-P
Didn't you know that wisdom of Borderland
'My dear, here we must run as fast as we can, just to stay in place. And if you wish to go anywhere you must run twice as fast as that.'
Have you ever eaten the cheesecake at Lindy's?
\\I'd just send you a CVBG, a MAB or two, an LHA and give you an SSBN with a few SSN escorts.
As Navy guy you should be scared to send em into such a narrow places. Where em will be nothing but sitting ducks.
Not everything can be solved with CVBG.
Well, now I see that wisdom, of separation of USA military the way they are. ;-)
What if they off-loaded just outside of St. Petersberg? You don't think we could do it? :P
\\Exactly. Spartan "helots".
What "exactly"?
After a Spartan victory, the Spartans asked their supporting helot troops who their best leaders had been, promising them their freedom. The helots identified their best generals, then the Spartans executed them. The helot's would not have leaders capable of a revolt.
\\\\Indeed. Now how do we get the two to "align"... ;P
\\\What for? ;-P
\\Lacan "Four Discourses"
Question was WHY, not HOW. ;-)
\\What if they off-loaded just outside of St. Petersberg? You don't think we could do it? :P
To try to overcome RFia with stupidity?
Hardly they'd be impressed.
They'll chempion you out in that discipline. ;-P
\\After a Spartan victory, the Spartans asked their supporting helot troops who their best leaders had been, promising them their freedom. The helots identified their best generals, then the Spartans executed them. The helot's would not have leaders capable of a revolt.
So-o-aw... what?
You said that you have read Machiavelli.
Have you not read what he wrote about organuzation of military force? ;-)
\\Lacan "Four Discourses"
Question was WHY, not HOW. ;-)
It's the only way to come nearer to the truth (see it from ALL sides).
\\What if they off-loaded just outside of St. Petersberg? You don't think we could do it? :P
To try to overcome RFia with stupidity?
Hardly they'd be impressed.
They'll chempion you out in that discipline. ;-P
Hitler didn't handle a two-front war very well. And he had much better general's than Stalin.
\\After a Spartan victory, the Spartans asked their supporting helot troops who their best leaders had been, promising them their freedom. The helots identified their best generals, then the Spartans executed them. The helot's would not have leaders capable of a revolt.
So-o-aw... what?
You wish to be a helot? Hug your chains, then.
You said that you have read Machiavelli.
Have you not read what he wrote about organuzation of military force? ;-)
How unreliable a reliance upon foreign allies is? What do you think? I don't need to live "The Life of Castruccio Castracani" to understand that. It's better to be feared than loved.
\\\\Lacan "Four Discourses"
\\\Question was WHY, not HOW. ;-)
\\It's the only way to come nearer to the truth (see it from ALL sides).
By running away from importan questions? By beating around that bush, instead of diving into it?
Yeah. That is how they like to "seek the truth".
Lazily. And without scary possibility of being haunted with realisation that Truth is different from agreeable and pleaqsant Social Truth. ;-P
Common folks. Small potatoes. Peasant.
And court phylosophers, like that Zizek, ready to provide support for such a brave Holy Grail Crucade. :-)))))))))))))))))))
\\Hitler didn't handle a two-front war very well. And he had much better general's than Stalin.
And?
What's your point here?
\\You wish to be a helot? Hug your chains, then.
And how it comes out of my words???
\\How unreliable a reliance upon foreign allies is?
Did you have at least hat tipping aquitance with ALL books? ;-)
\\\\Lacan "Four Discourses"
\\\Question was WHY, not HOW. ;-)
\\It's the only way to come nearer to the truth (see it from ALL sides).
...And court phylosophers, like that Zizek, ready to provide support for such a brave Holy Grail Crucade. :-)))))))))))))))))))
We obviously live in different worlds.
\\Hitler didn't handle a two-front war very well. And he had much better general's than Stalin.
And?
What's your point here?
They won't let you win. THAT is my point. They keep you in a box... can't attack Russia proper or you won't get NATO weapons... long range weapons. Why is that? To keep you in your box. To be a pawn in their Cold-War NATO game and not become a Hot-War.
\\You wish to be a helot? Hug your chains, then.
And how it comes out of my words???
You keep wanting to fight a war that you will not be permitted to win. Ukraine is the leech that bleeds the medievil Russian patient.
\\How unreliable a reliance upon foreign allies is?
Did you have at least hat tipping aquitance with ALL books? ;-)
Florence vs. Pisa and the Renaissance wars to unite "Italy". Machiavelli's "Histories". :P
\\We obviously live in different worlds.
Now you (cos)playing Captain Obvious, yes? :-)
\\They won't let you win. THAT is my point. They keep you in a box... can't attack Russia proper or you won't get NATO weapons... long range weapons. Why is that? To keep you in your box. To be a pawn in their Cold-War NATO game and not become a Hot-War.
And what would be that Victory?
What is "success" in M.A.D. game???
What they tought you in your academy about it?
\\You keep wanting to fight a war that you will not be permitted to win. Ukraine is the leech that bleeds the medievil Russian patient.
And you. Who do not know history of Ukraine. History of Rusha.
Self-admitedly clueless in land combat.
Giving it to me as your *expert* advice? Am I understand you correctly here?
\\Florence vs. Pisa and the Renaissance wars to unite "Italy". Machiavelli's "Histories". :P
Yep. And what did HE said about organization of military force? ;-)
\\They won't let you win. THAT is my point. They keep you in a box... can't attack Russia proper or you won't get NATO weapons... long range weapons. Why is that? To keep you in your box. To be a pawn in their Cold-War NATO game and not become a Hot-War.
And what would be that Victory?
What is "success" in M.A.D. game???
What they tought you in your academy about it?
The vistory is a weakened Russia. That is all they seek. Not a "victory" for Ukraine.
The lesson is to "prevail". Dead people didn't "prevail". Ukraine will NOT prevail. You are the sacrificed pawn.
\\You keep wanting to fight a war that you will not be permitted to win. Ukraine is the leech that bleeds the medievil Russian patient.
And you. Who do not know history of Ukraine. History of Rusha.
Self-admitedly clueless in land combat.
Giving it to me as your *expert* advice? Am I understand you correctly here?
No, I don't know the history of Russia. But I am an 'expert' in the history of America. I am an expert in the use of Naval power, like Britain, like Japan, like Athens. They say that ships turn their land fighters into "cowards"... for when threatened, they always run back to their ships and "leave". THAT is the reliability of "naval" allies. Find some "Spartans" who have no ships to run back to and will stay and fight, to the death. For I, Thersites at least, will run back to the beached bark should the Trojans sally forth in numbers from Priam's fortress.
\\Florence vs. Pisa and the Renaissance wars to unite "Italy". Machiavelli's "Histories". :P
Yep. And what did HE said about organization of military force? ;-)
To commit all injustices up front when usurping a kingdom, and then rule it "justly" thereafter.
from my Masthead...the answer to "ἢ τὰν ἢ ἐπὶ τᾶς"...
And by a prudent flight and cunning save A life which valour could not, from the grave. A better buckler I can soon regain, But who can get another life again?
- Archilochus
\\The vistory is a weakened Russia.
Are you trying to "weaken" rabid dog. Or you just shut it?
\\The victory is a weakened Russia.
Are you trying to "weaken" rabid dog. Or you just shut it?
Please. All they want is 144 million more consumers buying Chinese goods through Amazon.com (and taking a % in US dollars). They already have 44 million new Ukrainian consumers doing the same. Call it a "leveraged buyout". They don't want to shoot anyone. But Russia wants to make and sell its' own products. How presumptive!
Meanwhile, the actual global economy teeters on a near collapse. And Russia knows this. China knows this. The EU knows this. Half of the US now knows this. The halcyon days are over. There are economic storms on the horizon.
\\They don't want to shoot anyone. But Russia wants to make and sell its' own products. How presumptive!
Clearly, you not fit for CIA/secret services at all. Counter-intelligence.
You think only on terms of your own biases.
\\Meanwhile, the actual global economy teeters on a near collapse.
Aha... somehow, cheepest way of transportstion.
Suddenly will disappear. :-)))))))))))))))))
No... China Belt & Road Initiative. They will provide all "aggregate efficiencies" for free. Up to the US border, anyway. :)
Things will get VERY inefficient on OUR side of the border.
Go Google for some info. About of costs of different types of transport. ;-)
e.i. Try to base your claims on facts. Who knows, maybe you'd like it.
You think that a former merchant mariner knows nothing of cheap transport? I may not know your background, but you certainly know mine.
Then WHY you keep claiming such a countre-factual things???
Perhaps you can point an inaccurate statement first.
I made it several times already -- where cheapest transport will disappear???
Or is it not that obvious HOW it relates to your claim "the actual global economy teeters on a near collapse."
Nope, not that obvious. Please elaborate.
What makes globalism possible?
Isn't that is gloabal trade?
What makes global trade possible?
Global transport? Like the Nord Strem pipeline?
Sounds more like it depends upon a willingness of States to trade.
Go double-check -- who owns more trade ships? ;-P
Panama, Liberia, Marshall Is., Bahamas?
None of the ships fly US flags. If they did, they'd need to be manned by US crews. Ever hear of the Jones Act? If not for the Jones Act there would be NO US ships, except the US Navy combat fleet.
Does we came to the roots? Or need to chop the tree and dig a hole deep down?
Perhaps you should just explain your point. ;P
Isn't that is your point... all way down, here.
That globalism kills domestic jobs? I thought that was self-evident.
People w/o jobs cannot consume even the cheapest products made in other countries. They can only collect welfare and take opiates... like China during the Opium trade days.
\\That globalism kills domestic jobs? I thought that was self-evident.
Many thinfs kill jobs... so what?
Are youi ready for Socialism?
Under Socialism NOTHING can kill domestic jobs... they die out on their own. ;-P
i.e. cure you propose much worse than illness you want to doctor.
\\People w/o jobs cannot consume even the cheapest products made in other countries. They can only collect welfare and take opiates... like China during the Opium trade days.
Bombasticly incorrect historical analogy, again.
\\That globalism kills domestic jobs? I thought that was self-evident.
Many thinfs kill jobs... so what?
Are youi ready for Socialism?
Under Socialism NOTHING can kill domestic jobs... they die out on their own. ;-P
i.e. cure you propose much worse than illness you want to doctor.
lol! I would let "too big to fail", fail... not try and "smooth" the economy with monetary policy (interest rates to 0). There would be recessions/ depressions, and lots of "going out of business" sales. REAL capitalism where businesses die when they are no longer viable and even investors can be sued and have liability for damages caused. Anarcho-capitalism is much too scary for most people. Mine wouldn't be "exactly" anarcho... but close. Liberty capitalism.
\\People w/o jobs cannot consume even the cheapest products made in other countries. They can only collect welfare and take opiates... like China during the Opium trade days.
Bombasticly incorrect historical analogy, again.
Polemical yes. Incorrect? Not quite. State capitalism/ mercantilism is not anyone's friend. It caused the American revolution of 1776. Are you familiar with the Great Bengal famine?
\\There would be recessions/ depressions
And there'd be NONE in Europe and Chana.
Guess, where capital will flee? :-)))))))
Or what, you will FORBID it to flee?
Than you'd be full-fledged revolutioner and socialist.
And USA will become part of Latin America, at last. ;-P
They doing it constantly, there. Flip-floping from military huntas into socialistic populism and back. Wanna follow their example? NMP.
\\Polemical yes.
I have NO problem with whatever you throwing into discussion as an argument.
I think I showed it enough even in that early "discussion" with TC/Nigero.
But... I leave for myself possibility to call white white, black black and shit shit. ;-)
\\Incorrect? Not quite.
Comparation of medieval society with post-modern one... I even do not know where to start, that endless list of incorrectness.
\\ State capitalism/ mercantilism is not anyone's friend. It caused the American revolution of 1776.
State capitalism in late-feudal society? Ehm...
\\ Are you familiar with the Great Bengal famine?
Isn't that example from that Old Good Times you advertise return to?
\\There would be recessions/ depressions
And there'd be NONE in Europe and Chana.
Guess, where capital will flee? :-)))))))
Or what, you will FORBID it to flee?
Than you'd be full-fledged revolutioner and socialist.
And USA will become part of Latin America, at last. ;-P
They doing it constantly, there. Flip-floping from military huntas into socialistic populism and back. Wanna follow their example? NMP.
It can certainly flee. It just won't ever be able to come back and buy-out what remain's here. :)
\\Polemical yes.
I have NO problem with whatever you throwing into discussion as an argument.
I think I showed it enough even in that early "discussion" with TC/Nigero.
But... I leave for myself possibility to call white white, black black and shit shit. ;-)
Be my guest, but you do me no favours by not identifying nor addressing my errors with, in a word, "bullsh*t!".
This... is better... but still not quite helpful:
\\Incorrect? Not quite.
Comparation of medieval society with post-modern one... I even do not know where to start, that endless list of incorrectness.
So history does not/ can not repeat? History teaches no lessons?
\\ State capitalism/ mercantilism is not anyone's friend. It caused the American revolution of 1776.
State capitalism in late-feudal society? Ehm...
Obviosly not all feudal... a "mixed" economy. Are you saying that circumstances of history must be "identical" in order to form a useful/ representative analogy?
\\ Are you familiar with the Great Bengal famine?
Isn't that example from that Old Good Times you advertise return to?
Actually, slightly before. 1770 vs 1786+ (pre/post US Constitution).... the "cause" of the break from the past.
\\Be my guest, but you do me no favours by not identifying nor addressing my errors with, in a word, "bullsh*t!".
If that'll be possible to convey complex missive with a few words... there'd be no books. ;-)
I have same problem, very related to my idea (if there is agenda behind my comments, that is not political, economical or historical problematics... I say that so if you feel annoyed, you can give me a wink so I would suppress it). As I come to that question -- let's imagine, I'm billioneire B-) and can buy any profy for work on my goal -- but I still would need to explain and interest a team of people, people with different backgrounds and lifetime experiences... to work on thing that is bigger than their individual horizont of thought.
I hope you understand what I am trying to say here.
\\So history does not/ can not repeat?
And you brag about reading that old books (hope, it would be seen as friendly remark here, or am I overdoing it?)
Even that old greeks knew that.
With sentence like "it's impossible to step into same river twice".
Or... with that experiment with potter's rolling device. ;-)
\\History teaches no lessons?
Those who could benefit of em the most... yes.
\\Obviosly not all feudal... a "mixed" economy.
Interesting question... when exactly Capitalism started? :-)
Not rethorical question.
But not pointed on you too.
There somwhere must be some scientific researches on that...
\\Are you saying that circumstances of history must be "identical" in order to form a useful/ representative analogy?
No. Just, the same as theoretical physics -- one need to know WHAT exactly part of phenomena his model idealise, and understand when boundaries of that model crossed.
\\Be my guest, but you do me no favours by not identifying nor addressing my errors with, in a word, "bullsh*t!".
If that'll be possible to convey complex missive with a few words... there'd be no books. ;-)
I have same problem, very related to my idea (if there is agenda behind my comments, that is not political, economical or historical problematics... I say that so if you feel annoyed, you can give me a wink so I would suppress it). As I come to that question -- let's imagine, I'm billioneire B-) and can buy any profy for work on my goal -- but I still would need to explain and interest a team of people, people with different backgrounds and lifetime experiences... to work on thing that is bigger than their individual horizont of thought.
I hope you understand what I am trying to say here.
Maybe, but not completely. Come back in ten month's time when I'll have plenty of time to work on hobbies and pet projects. If not, ;)
\\So history does not/ can not repeat?
And you brag about reading that old books (hope, it would be seen as friendly remark here, or am I overdoing it?)
Even that old greeks knew that.
With sentence like "it's impossible to step into same river twice".
Or... with that experiment with potter's rolling device. ;-)
Potter's rolling device? To put patterns/symbols onto the clay jars for decoration? What was the experiment... they did it all the time?
\\History teaches no lessons?
Those who could benefit of em the most... yes.
Touche'
\\Obviosly not all feudal... a "mixed" economy.
Interesting question... when exactly Capitalism started? :-)
Not rethorical question.
But not pointed on you too.
There somwhere must be some scientific researches on that...
Only one has interested me... the "modern" corporate form of capitalism. The other's have been fairly thouroughly addressed by Adam Smith.
\\Are you saying that circumstances of history must be "identical" in order to form a useful/ representative analogy?
No. Just, the same as theoretical physics -- one need to know WHAT exactly part of phenomena his model idealise, and understand when boundaries of that model crossed.
Humans behaviour is seldom accurately "modelled". I know, where's Harry Seldon when you need him.
\\Potter's rolling device? To put patterns/symbols onto the clay jars for decoration? What was the experiment... they did it all the time?
Pottery circles.
Yeah, Google not enough smart to help with that. Needs lots of semantic web improvments. :-)
Story was like that, to prove how life of different humans cannot be the same, no matter how similar they are, two of them was instructed to put their fingers on a rolling pottery circle.
No, I do not remember names.
\\\\\\History teaches no lessons?
\\\\Those who could benefit of em the most... yes.
\\Touche'
Well. Historical process unrolling before our eyes.
It is shame to not watch it closely and not convey own conclusions.
Like about parallels with Nazis forming. And etc.
That is answer to your question about analogies too. ;-)
\\Only one has interested me... the "modern" corporate form of capitalism.
Yap. That's it. And when did it started? ;-)
\\ The other's have been fairly thouroughly addressed by Adam Smith.
That was Capitalism?
\\Humans behaviour is seldom accurately "modelled". I know, where's Harry Seldon when you need him.
Azimov was greatly misunderstood.
He was talking about modeling of sociological processes.
That's why he made that setup with miriads of planets with mostly identical human infabitants -- to increase sheer number, that would make statistical processes work flawlessly.
But then he started to destroy that idilia in later texts. In favour of borg-like socium of Gaia. ;-P
And well, there is no problem with modelling humans -- one just need to set em under certain conditions... like from the gates... and to furnaces. ;-P
See. People do behave as ideal gas, that way.
\\Potter's rolling device? To put patterns/symbols onto the clay jars for decoration? What was the experiment... they did it all the time?
Pottery circles.
Yeah, Google not enough smart to help with that. Needs lots of semantic web improvments. :-)
Story was like that, to prove how life of different humans cannot be the same, no matter how similar they are, two of them was instructed to put their fingers on a rolling pottery circle.
No, I do not remember names.
Close enough... a "potter's wheel". I was thinking of the decoration rollers
\\Only one has interested me... the "modern" corporate form of capitalism.
Yap. That's it. And when did it started? ;-)
According to the link I sent, the Catholic Church.... and independence from the king and his taxes. "Private church property". Also, are you familiar with the "City of London Corporation"? Established by the Magna Carta in 1067. It limited the King's jurisdiction. Ever heard of the Temple bar where the Inns at Court were located? Most of America's colonial families were educated at the "Middle Temple". It has some very interesting traditions. It's power/influence were celebrated in two poems by the American author, Herman Melville (of "Moby Dick" fame), in "The Paradise of the Bachelors" and the "Tartaus of the Maids".
\\ The other's have been fairly thouroughly addressed by Adam Smith.
That was Capitalism?
The beginnings, but mostly a screed against British "mercantilism" (what it's becoming now).
\\Humans behaviour is seldom accurately "modelled". I know, where's Harry Seldon when you need him.
Azimov was greatly misunderstood.
He was talking about modeling of sociological processes.
That's why he made that setup with miriads of planets with mostly identical human infabitants -- to increase sheer number, that would make statistical processes work flawlessly.
But then he started to destroy that idilia in later texts. In favour of borg-like socium of Gaia. ;-P
Sounds like you are much better read on the subject than I am. I read the Foundation series, but spared myself it's merger with the earlier (and later) "Robot" series.
And well, there is no problem with modelling humans -- one just need to set em under certain conditions... like from the gates... and to furnaces. ;-P
See. People do behave as ideal gas, that way.
@@ Sorry. I was nore interested in psychohistory from the standpoint of influences of an individual leader on the mass and resulting mass psychosis. Hitler/Bismark/Petain...
:P
\\Close enough... a "potter's wheel".
Well, curse that Google. ;-P
\\According to the link I sent, the Catholic Church.... and independence from the king and his taxes. "Private church property". Also, are you familiar with the "City of London Corporation"? Established by the Magna Carta in 1067. It limited the King's jurisdiction.
Is it similar to "magdeburg law"?
\\ Herman Melville (of "Moby Dick" fame), in "The Paradise of the Bachelors" and the "Tartaus of the Maids"
I kin enough to associate name Melville with that Moby.
But mostly oblivious to other things.
Blame your popular culture. ;-P
I guess average Ams is the same.
\\Sounds like you are much better read on the subject than I am. I read the Foundation series, but spared myself it's merger with the earlier (and later) "Robot" series.
Ehm... that's puzzling.
\\ was nore interested in psychohistory from the standpoint of influences of an individual leader on the mass and resulting mass psychosis. Hitler/Bismark/Petain...
Exactly.
History that unfolds today -- shows that was not any "psychosis".
Just mere stupidity.
Hanlon's razor - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
simple.wikipedia.org › wiki › Hanlon's_razor
Hanlon's razor is a saying that reads: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
\\Maybe, but not completely. Come back in ten month's time when I'll have plenty of time to work on hobbies and pet projects. If not, ;)
Correct me, if I'm wrong. That in your culture inventors shown as some freaky crazy scientists, in their secluded secret hideouts/labs/caves (but mostly, garages) making mostly doomsday devices, with duct tape and toasters? :-)))
But, there is little problem. From standpoint of technological progress.
Pool of inventions that could be made on that level is mostly ended.
And. There is much more adequate ways -- like Elon Musk do.
Stating goal before whole bunch of specialists in their spheres.
Neither SpaceX, nor Tesla could be made any other way...
But what to do for an inventor who are not billioneire, and far from millioneire even? ;-P
And how to reassure possibility of progress...
as quite few of billionares have such a big drive for "invention".
That is what Lem pointed out -- from mouth of his Golem... that such a prominent artifacts as it/him, cn be created ONLY through deliverate application of engineering ingenuity...
But well, what could be a seed for such ingenuity? How to bootstrap it?
Is regular(?) procedure of creating startup, new R&D division, would be enough?
\\According to the link I sent, the Catholic Church.... and independence from the king and his taxes. "Private church property". Also, are you familiar with the "City of London Corporation"? Established by the Magna Carta in 1067. It limited the King's jurisdiction.
Is it similar to "magdeburg law"?
Exactly. Like a symbolic paper "herm" at the porticos/ gates of ancient Greek homes... yes. From the ancient "societies of sovereignty" days, replaced by "Disciplinary Societies" and then "Societies of Control". Welcome to our new heterotopia, where even inside of our skulls cannot escape, nor at times, even "get in".
\\ Herman Melville (of "Moby Dick" fame), in "The Paradise of the Bachelors" and the "Tartaus of the Maids"
I kin enough to associate name Melville with that Moby.
But mostly oblivious to other things.
Blame your popular culture. ;-P
I guess average Ams is the same.
Hollywood culture is quite ubiquitous.
\\Sounds like you are much better read on the subject than I am. I read the Foundation series, but spared myself it's merger with the earlier (and later) "Robot" series.
Ehm... that's puzzling.
I may have loved Asimov in the 70's/80's, but if I wanted to read him I needed a "hard/ print copy". Not like today.
\\ was nore interested in psychohistory from the standpoint of influences of an individual leader on the mass and resulting mass psychosis. Hitler/Bismark/Petain...
Exactly.
History that unfolds today -- shows that was not any "psychosis".
Just mere stupidity.
Stupidity is all around us. "The mother of idiots is always pregnant".
Hanlon's razor - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
simple.wikipedia.org › wiki › Hanlon's_razor
Hanlon's razor is a saying that reads: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Observant fellow that Hanlon...
\\Maybe, but not completely. Come back in ten month's time when I'll have plenty of time to work on hobbies and pet projects. If not, ;)
Correct me, if I'm wrong. That in your culture inventors shown as some freaky crazy scientists, in their secluded secret hideouts/labs/caves (but mostly, garages) making mostly doomsday devices, with duct tape and toasters? :-)))
No that was the 19th/early 20th century. That disappeared with the German "University" and the "Government Grant". Now, it's multidisciplinary teams contributing to digital models.
But, there is little problem. From standpoint of technological progress.
Pool of inventions that could be made on that level is mostly ended.
No argument here, unless you're attempting "revolutionary/ extraordinary" science.
And. There is much more adequate ways -- like Elon Musk do.
Stating goal before whole bunch of specialists in their spheres.
Neither SpaceX, nor Tesla could be made any other way...
Yep. Because this is "Normal Science".
But what to do for an inventor who are not billioneire, and far from millioneire even? ;-P
Apply for a MacArthur "Genius" grant?
And how to reassure possibility of progress...
as quite few of billionares have such a big drive for "invention".
Believe me when I say, they usually only do it with government grant money, not their own.
That is what Lem pointed out -- from mouth of his Golem... that such a prominent artifacts as it/him, cn be created ONLY through deliverate application of engineering ingenuity...
So go work for NASA, or anything affiliated with the National Science Foundation. They set the priorities for funding.
But well, what could be a seed for such ingenuity? How to bootstrap it?
Is regular(?) procedure of creating startup, new R&D division, would be enough?
Start small... and win a contract posted in the Commerce Business Daily (CBD). It helps if you are a qualified small business or 8A firm. I work for one.
Our government LOVES to throw taxpayer money at sh*t to keep "too big to fail" from keeling over.
NASA lobbies to get its' pet-projects included here, in the Decadal Survey.
It helps to have Nobel laureates on the boards/ committees and in the "good ole boy" science networks.
Bureaucracies. You can't live with them, and you can't live with them.
...and you're welcome! ;P
\\Welcome to our new heterotopia, where even inside of our skulls cannot escape, nor at times, even "get in".
Well.
Always have a chance to take refuge into less developed societies. ;-)
\\I may have loved Asimov in the 70's/80's, but if I wanted to read him I needed a "hard/ print copy". Not like today.
Ehm... public libraries?
\\Stupidity is all around us.
The same as matter around us consist not from elements of water, fire and etc, as ancient phylosophers thought, but from very distinctive chems and their compaunds.
Same with stupidity, I presume.
That is the answer to my interest in poking TC/Nigero.
Well, if that annoys you, I'll try to thwart that urge. :-)
\\No that was the 19th/early 20th century. That disappeared with the German "University" and the "Government Grant". Now, it's multidisciplinary teams contributing to digital models.
Dunno. How can I know such details?
Well, Elon acquered his first millions in time of Dot Com bum.
After that I do not know same big rise from dust into... unicorns. ;-)
But, society of goldminers... aka startuppers still only continue to grow.
In all accordance of Lem's schema of any "science".
\\No argument here, unless you're attempting "revolutionary/ extraordinary" science.
Ehm? Well, Lem depicted it in his Summa Technologiae. In year Anno Domini 1964.
And then in his scifi works.
Modern scifi stuck in depicting exactly that future. Half of the time while it not stuck in lame fantasy-world-building.
But... yeah, it need some kind ***ing revolution for World to make that next (relatively little IMHO) step of the Progress...
So, yeah, you can call me Ishma... err, revolutioner, if you see it suiting.
\\Believe me when I say, they usually only do it with government grant money, not their own.
Whatever.
\\So go work for NASA, or anything affiliated with the National Science Foundation. They set the priorities for funding.
"Planned miracles"?
Well, for Nicolo Tesla it didn't work.
\\Bureaucracies. You can't live with them, and you can't live with them.
Have you met newest variant? Digital one. ;-)
No comments?
Post a Comment