Pages: 1 … 38 39 40 41 42 … 129

 

2011-07-20 05:16:35
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6729
i'm still questioning whether or not it is genuinely the progress of a civilization if we are wholly dependent on technology for the everyday running of our infrastructure. sure we all benefit from it... but is it 'progress'? i'm questioning what exactly progress means within the context of economically-developed, late-capitalist, western consumerist society. galt i'd like to think the luxury i've been afforded to "read books" because of technologies advances has been better used than the vast majority that choose to sit around at home watching television and working to buy the next 'must have' gadget.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-07-20 05:17:47
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6729

Jay wrote:

the philosophs you admire were ignorant, so they were fearful. No different from the religious.
what exactly do you mean by this? contemporary philosophers are ignorant and fearful?

and some pog navy graduate calling philosophers ignorant? what now? are you going to insult macbeth's course choice again or something?

unending hilarity.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-07-20 05:17:53
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6257|...
Our planet does not have enough resources to provide good living standards for a growing population. Either necessity will drive us into space or we will end up in a second dark age. Mining space rocks would almost exclusively serve people's desires to hoard more wealth, useless gadgets and status symbols. I can agree with that. But at the same time, if we establish a lasting presence in space, those desires will push industries to explore further and refine their techniques to do stuff in space... = progress.

What's also important is expanding the upper class. When people live in a culture of luxury, excess and have lots of time to spare, they start looking towards other things. Historically lots of ambitious idealists and explorers came from upper class families because these gave them the opportunity to do whatever they wanted.

Last edited by Shocking (2011-07-20 05:18:30)

inane little opines
2011-07-20 05:19:49
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6729
but galt hates upper-class people with too much time on their hands, how does this align with his notion of progress? his blue-collar contempt surely contradicts the desirability of 'boosting the upper class'. plus, it's a ludicrous suggestion: in a neoliberal globalized market, the accumulation of wealth only serves to further the top 0.1% of pragmatic, ruthless businessmen. the luxury of modern living isn't producing polymaths and great intellectuals like it was 150 years ago - now it just creates oligarchs that try to outdo one another with bigger yachts. the game has changed.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-07-20 05:20:26
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6257|...
On the other hand it can go in the direction of the ancient Roman Empire where excess and luxury lead to a collapse.... time will tell ey.
inane little opines
2011-07-20 05:23:53
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6257|...

Uzique wrote:

but galt hates upper-class people with too much time on their hands, how does this align with his notion of progress? his blue-collar contempt surely contradicts the desirability of 'boosting the upper class'. plus, it's a ludicrous suggestion: in a neoliberal globalized market, the accumulation of wealth only serves to further the top 0.1% of pragmatic, ruthless businessmen. the luxury of modern living isn't producing polymaths and great intellectuals like it was 150 years ago - now it just creates oligarchs that try to outdo one another with bigger yachts. the game has changed.
I can't see something like space mining only serving the top 0.1% of the population. It's possible but I find it improbable. Everything will become cheaper = people enjoy a higher standard of living in general, which means you'll have a larger middle & upper class.

While the last part of your statement is true I hope that opening up space to the public will help inspire people to do something with their lives...
inane little opines
2011-07-20 05:24:03
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5616|London, England

Uzique wrote:

i'm still questioning whether or not it is genuinely the progress of a civilization if we are wholly dependent on technology for the everyday running of our infrastructure. sure we all benefit from it... but is it 'progress'? i'm questioning what exactly progress means within the context of economically-developed, late-capitalist, western consumerist society. galt i'd like to think the luxury i've been afforded to "read books" because of technologies advances has been better used than the vast majority that choose to sit around at home watching television and working to buy the next 'must have' gadget.
So what? Some people choose to sit at home and watch Idol. Others choose to obsess over space and rocketry. Your line of thinking is that the Idol watchers would be better off if we stripped away their toys and sent them back to the fields. Who are you to make that call?

What people choose to do in their free time has little impact on me. We'd be better off as a whole if pissants stopped trying to dictate how others should live. Glass houses etc.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-20 05:24:14
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6933|Canberra, AUS

Uzique wrote:

i'm still questioning whether or not it is genuinely the progress of a civilization if we are wholly dependent on technology for the everyday running of our infrastructure. sure we all benefit from it... but is it 'progress'? i'm questioning what exactly progress means within the context of economically-developed, late-capitalist, western consumerist society. galt i'd like to think the luxury i've been afforded to "read books" because of technologies advances has been better used than the vast majority that choose to sit around at home watching television and working to buy the next 'must have' gadget.
But then what is progress? Is eliminating smallpox progress? Is the invention of the transistor and its derivatives progress? I'm not actually sure what you mean by "progress" here, tbh.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2011-07-20 05:27:07
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6364|eXtreme to the maX

Uzique wrote:

but galt hates upper-class people with too much time on their hands, how does this align with his notion of progress? his blue-collar contempt surely contradicts the desirability of 'boosting the upper class'. plus, it's a ludicrous suggestion: in a neoliberal globalized market, the accumulation of wealth only serves to further the top 0.1% of pragmatic, ruthless businessmen. the luxury of modern living isn't producing polymaths and great intellectuals like it was 150 years ago - now it just creates oligarchs that try to outdo one another with bigger yachts. the game has changed.
He confuses Watts with Joules too.
Fuck Israel
2011-07-20 05:28:56
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5616|London, England

Uzique wrote:

Jay wrote:

the philosophs you admire were ignorant, so they were fearful. No different from the religious.
what exactly do you mean by this? contemporary philosophers are ignorant and fearful?

and some pog navy graduate calling philosophers ignorant? what now? are you going to insult macbeth's course choice again or something?

unending hilarity.
Those are your insults? POG means Person Other than Grunt. Non-infantry. Where did you do your combat tour?

Maritime College trains officers for the commercial shipping industry, not the navy. It has a fantastic engineering program.

Your insults don't bother me. Your ignorance does. Shouldn't you be getting ready for your job in the IT industry? (now that's irony)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-20 05:29:55
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6364|eXtreme to the maX

Spark wrote:

But then what is progress? Is eliminating smallpox progress? Is the invention of the transistor and its derivatives progress? I'm not actually sure what you mean by "progress" here, tbh.
Eradicating smallpox is progress.

A ballooning population wholly dependent on cheap oil, machines and drugs for day-to-day survival is not progress.

Mining moon-rocks to produce fusion power would be progress.

Using fusion power to broadcast soap-opera and twitter feeds to every corner of the earth would not be progress.
Fuck Israel
2011-07-20 05:30:49
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6364|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:

It has a fantastic engineering program.
Apparently not.
Fuck Israel
2011-07-20 05:31:48
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5616|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

Uzique wrote:

but galt hates upper-class people with too much time on their hands, how does this align with his notion of progress? his blue-collar contempt surely contradicts the desirability of 'boosting the upper class'. plus, it's a ludicrous suggestion: in a neoliberal globalized market, the accumulation of wealth only serves to further the top 0.1% of pragmatic, ruthless businessmen. the luxury of modern living isn't producing polymaths and great intellectuals like it was 150 years ago - now it just creates oligarchs that try to outdo one another with bigger yachts. the game has changed.
He confuses Watts with Joules too.
No, I don't. Joules are energy, watts are power. When discussing machinery that allows humans free time, watts are the most appropriate unit.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-20 05:35:42
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6729

Jay wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Jay wrote:

the philosophs you admire were ignorant, so they were fearful. No different from the religious.
what exactly do you mean by this? contemporary philosophers are ignorant and fearful?

and some pog navy graduate calling philosophers ignorant? what now? are you going to insult macbeth's course choice again or something?

unending hilarity.
Those are your insults? POG means Person Other than Grunt. Non-infantry. Where did you do your combat tour?

Maritime College trains officers for the commercial shipping industry, not the navy. It has a fantastic engineering program.

Your insults don't bother me. Your ignorance does. Shouldn't you be getting ready for your job in the IT industry? (now that's irony)
you mean a 2 month summer contract making incredibly good wages so i can go back to university and do a prestigious course?

yeah i'll get changed now, brb
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-07-20 05:36:57
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6859|132 and Bush

Spark wrote:

Uzique wrote:

i'm still questioning whether or not it is genuinely the progress of a civilization if we are wholly dependent on technology for the everyday running of our infrastructure. sure we all benefit from it... but is it 'progress'? i'm questioning what exactly progress means within the context of economically-developed, late-capitalist, western consumerist society. galt i'd like to think the luxury i've been afforded to "read books" because of technologies advances has been better used than the vast majority that choose to sit around at home watching television and working to buy the next 'must have' gadget.
But then what is progress? Is eliminating smallpox progress? Is the invention of the transistor and its derivatives progress? I'm not actually sure what you mean by "progress" here, tbh.
If prolonged survival doesn't fall under progress I don't know what does. But I think the bigger point he's making is that future space exploration is irrelevant to' progress'. That it will only serve the wealthy few. Personally I don't know. I'd like to think that progress and capitalism can co-exist on some level, but I can't predict what will happen once space is industrialized. That has more to do with human behavior, which unfortunately is often illogical and unpredictable.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2011-07-20 05:38:18
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6729

Dilbert_X wrote:

Spark wrote:

But then what is progress? Is eliminating smallpox progress? Is the invention of the transistor and its derivatives progress? I'm not actually sure what you mean by "progress" here, tbh.
Eradicating smallpox is progress.

A ballooning population wholly dependent on cheap oil, machines and drugs for day-to-day survival is not progress.

Mining moon-rocks to produce fusion power would be progress.

Using fusion power to broadcast soap-opera and twitter feeds to every corner of the earth would not be progress.
i pretty much agree with this. eradicating smallpox has a huge humanitarian benefit. same with mining for (efficient) fuel.

when we're all consuming far more than we need to do shit like "broadcast soap-operas", you have to really ask what we're progressing towards. that good old buzzword, 'decadence', the fin-de-siecle phenomenon before the collapse? yeah, great progress.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-07-20 05:40:54
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5616|London, England

Uzique wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Spark wrote:

But then what is progress? Is eliminating smallpox progress? Is the invention of the transistor and its derivatives progress? I'm not actually sure what you mean by "progress" here, tbh.
Eradicating smallpox is progress.

A ballooning population wholly dependent on cheap oil, machines and drugs for day-to-day survival is not progress.

Mining moon-rocks to produce fusion power would be progress.

Using fusion power to broadcast soap-opera and twitter feeds to every corner of the earth would not be progress.
i pretty much agree with this. eradicating smallpox has a huge humanitarian benefit. same with mining for (efficient) fuel.

when we're all consuming far more than we need to do shit like "broadcast soap-operas", you have to really ask what we're progressing towards. that good old buzzword, 'decadence', the fin-de-siecle phenomenon before the collapse? yeah, great progress.
In what way are you helping remedy the situation you envision?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-20 05:41:42
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6933|Canberra, AUS

Dilbert_X wrote:

They aren't that complicated TBH, the systems you mention are practically steady-state, nothing too complex there.
A single 286 would run the average power plant just fine.

Its consumer goods which absorb the huge volumes of materials, not a few simple computers managing our infrastructure.
You speak of them as if they are completely separate. They are not. The staggering pace of research and development in computers, computer science, especially at an exceptionally high level - AI and the like - is only possible due to consumerism. Simply put, Intel and IBM didn't make processors to help automate critical systems. They made them to sell, sell, sell. It's not pretty, but it's how it works.  You cannot separate the two.

Likewise, the search for a cheap very-high-temperature superconductor, which would cause staggering change, a large part of which would be undeniable progress, would be a lot slower if not for the money involved in doing so. Again it's not pretty, but it's how it works. If you want the good stuff you gotta deal with the excess as well.

Not having that excess is less a question of technological progress and much more a question of society's inherent mindset/attitude towards, well, everything. Basically.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2011-07-20 05:42:09
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6729

Jay wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Jay wrote:

the philosophs you admire were ignorant, so they were fearful. No different from the religious.
what exactly do you mean by this? contemporary philosophers are ignorant and fearful?

and some pog navy graduate calling philosophers ignorant? what now? are you going to insult macbeth's course choice again or something?

unending hilarity.
Those are your insults? POG means Person Other than Grunt. Non-infantry. Where did you do your combat tour?

Maritime College trains officers for the commercial shipping industry, not the navy. It has a fantastic engineering program.

Your insults don't bother me. Your ignorance does. Shouldn't you be getting ready for your job in the IT industry? (now that's irony)
your college is also completely vocational and entirely non-academic in its profile "(now that's irony)" because you always seem to bitch about colleges and universities that are worthless and award worthless degrees. over here we have apprenticeships for people that want to slot straight into some vocation or trade. we (mostly, traditionally) keep universities for academia and actual research. perhaps this is why you're so ill-versed and snide about contemporary philosophy (21st century philosophers of late-capitalism are "ignorant and afraid", yet the guy that went to a totally non-academic college is somehow 'enlightenened and brave')...

Last edited by Uzique (2011-07-20 05:42:25)

libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-07-20 05:43:21
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6364|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Uzique wrote:

but galt hates upper-class people with too much time on their hands, how does this align with his notion of progress? his blue-collar contempt surely contradicts the desirability of 'boosting the upper class'. plus, it's a ludicrous suggestion: in a neoliberal globalized market, the accumulation of wealth only serves to further the top 0.1% of pragmatic, ruthless businessmen. the luxury of modern living isn't producing polymaths and great intellectuals like it was 150 years ago - now it just creates oligarchs that try to outdo one another with bigger yachts. the game has changed.
He confuses Watts with Joules too.
No, I don't. Joules are energy, watts are power. When discussing machinery that allows humans free time, watts are the most appropriate unit.
every watt harnessed is one less joule expended by humans
Sorry, wrong.
every watt harnessed is one less joule expended by humans every second
Would be correct, except its Watts and Joules, and you don't really harness a Watt.
Fuck Israel
2011-07-20 05:43:45
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6729

Jay wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:


Eradicating smallpox is progress.

A ballooning population wholly dependent on cheap oil, machines and drugs for day-to-day survival is not progress.

Mining moon-rocks to produce fusion power would be progress.

Using fusion power to broadcast soap-opera and twitter feeds to every corner of the earth would not be progress.
i pretty much agree with this. eradicating smallpox has a huge humanitarian benefit. same with mining for (efficient) fuel.

when we're all consuming far more than we need to do shit like "broadcast soap-operas", you have to really ask what we're progressing towards. that good old buzzword, 'decadence', the fin-de-siecle phenomenon before the collapse? yeah, great progress.
In what way are you helping remedy the situation you envision?
what are you doing yourself? i'm admitting all of our culpability and involvement. commenting on the way things are doesn't mean i have to go live in a cave in the foothills of the himalayas to be credible. retarded argument, as ever.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-07-20 05:44:24
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6729

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:


He confuses Watts with Joules too.
No, I don't. Joules are energy, watts are power. When discussing machinery that allows humans free time, watts are the most appropriate unit.
every watt harnessed is one less joule expended by humans
Sorry, wrong.
every watt harnessed is one less joule expended by humans every second
Would be correct, except its Watts and Joules, and you don't really harness a Watt.

Galt wrote:

you should have taken physics, uzique

Galt wrote:

i did a remarkable engineering course
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-07-20 05:44:49
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6933|Canberra, AUS

Uzique wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Spark wrote:

But then what is progress? Is eliminating smallpox progress? Is the invention of the transistor and its derivatives progress? I'm not actually sure what you mean by "progress" here, tbh.
Eradicating smallpox is progress.

A ballooning population wholly dependent on cheap oil, machines and drugs for day-to-day survival is not progress.

Mining moon-rocks to produce fusion power would be progress.

Using fusion power to broadcast soap-opera and twitter feeds to every corner of the earth would not be progress.
i pretty much agree with this. eradicating smallpox has a huge humanitarian benefit. same with mining for (efficient) fuel.

when we're all consuming far more than we need to do shit like "broadcast soap-operas", you have to really ask what we're progressing towards. that good old buzzword, 'decadence', the fin-de-siecle phenomenon before the collapse? yeah, great progress.
Above post applies.

If you can find a way of doing all those wonderful things that I want as well, such as mass-scale H3 fusion mining for, I don't know, interstellar colonization or something without the excess, and without fundamentally re-orienting society's attitude towards everything, please, tell us.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2011-07-20 05:45:26
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6364|eXtreme to the maX

Spark wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

They aren't that complicated TBH, the systems you mention are practically steady-state, nothing too complex there.
A single 286 would run the average power plant just fine.

Its consumer goods which absorb the huge volumes of materials, not a few simple computers managing our infrastructure.
You speak of them as if they are completely separate. They are not. The staggering pace of research and development in computers, computer science, especially at an exceptionally high level - AI and the like - is only possible due to consumerism. Simply put, Intel and IBM didn't make processors to help automate critical systems. They made them to sell, sell, sell. It's not pretty, but it's how it works.  You cannot separate the two.

Likewise, the search for a cheap very-high-temperature superconductor, which would cause staggering change, a large part of which would be undeniable progress, would be a lot slower if not for the money involved in doing so. Again it's not pretty, but it's how it works. If you want the good stuff you gotta deal with the excess as well.

Not having that excess is less a question of technological progress and much more a question of society's inherent mindset/attitude towards, well, everything. Basically.
For a decade or two computers sold only to corporations, high end computers still do.
Consumers were irrelevant in that part of the progress, and still are in terms of real progress.
Fuck Israel
2011-07-20 05:45:45
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5616|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:


He confuses Watts with Joules too.
No, I don't. Joules are energy, watts are power. When discussing machinery that allows humans free time, watts are the most appropriate unit.
every watt harnessed is one less joule expended by humans
Sorry, wrong.
every watt harnessed is one less joule expended by humans every second
Would be correct, except its Watts and Joules, and you don't really harness a Watt.
A joule is rather useless without a force attached. I work in watts.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

 

Pages: 1 … 38 39 40 41 42 … 129

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard