75 karma · joined February 23, 2007
It would be to close to hubris? An early indication of loosing touch with reality? Perhaps indicating the onset of psychosis?
Maybe ironically, especially after a less-then-perfect performance ;)
Better to let others do the praising?
Q: How many people where (by others, not family/friends) publicly described as a "genius"?
The problem is our methods of food production: Specialized, concentrated and resource hungry. We might have to become more generalized, distributed and efficient.
[Note: Currently "efficiency" is often mistake to mean "externalizing the cost", "doing less", etc. Here it means "more productive with less resources" and "working smarter not harder"]
Our food lacks any real bio-diversity, it all requires nearly the same conditions to grow. For every joule of food we are currently using more then 10 joule of energy, basically we are turning oil into food. And it's not very mobile.
A quote: "I would like to ask two questions. First, if the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is allowed to continue, shall we arrive at a climate similar to the climate of six thousand years ago when the Sahara was wet? Second, if we could choose between the climate of today with a dry Sahara and the climate of six thousand years ago with a wet Sahara, should we prefer the climate of today? My second heresy answers yes to the first question and no to the second. It says that the warm climate of six thousand years ago with the wet Sahara is to be preferred, and that increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere may help to bring it back. I am not saying that this heresy is true. I am only saying that it will not do us any harm to think about it."
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dysonf07/dysonf07_index.html
They would send you a letter to go serve in the military, You would go to where you where assigned, You objected because of your conscience, They would then send you to a force labor camp or mental institution for a few years, The hard work, unhealthy food and living conditions, lacking health care, medical experiments, and violence among convicts would often destroy your physical and mental health, Then when you where released, They would send you a letter to serve in the military. … Unless, naturally, your conscience would no longer object to serving in the military…
While Apple might be selling less units, each unit she sells represents a much greater US$ value. Therefor from an economic point of view it completely reasonable that Apple gets more attention in the economic section.
For tech news it's all about innovation, again an area where Apple dominates. Naturally then that Apple gets much more attention from the tech news.
The "backdoor" (a intentional bug) will have to be part of the communication protocols and therefor present in every data stream which makes this protocol less secure. Any such backdoor WILL BE in time be open to any hacker, cracker, foreign spy, and anyone who can run a simple script?
What I don't understand is that most ADSL-modems include a router? I usually set it up in bridge-mode, like I did with the ancient Zyxel 650.
Funny development: I will now have to replace the modem because it has become the limiting factor: The maximum throughput of the modem is about 60% of what my current ADSL connection could handle.
We tend to have more power then we think, but its seldom the kind of power we think we need or the kind of power we really want. Often we need to learn how to use the power we have.
The problem for most people is that they never discovered the optimal niche that is fitting to their own unique combination of fitness and variation of abilities. This niche might not even exist yet, which is more or less what startups are all about.
Besides, what is actual power? Consider this: Which "power" is the most powerful? The power to annihilate whole cities or the power to build, rebuild, innovate, and maintain cities regardless of whatever may come?
Still, people like to do stuff they are passionate about?
The only thing that kills passion is struggling to survive. Scarcity eliminates options, reduces freedom, and it forces people to go into a survival mode, leaning powerlessness. Nothing good can come from this. People who struggle to survive will not have the time or energy to look for better employment or to build their own business.
To have a purpose without resources does not realize much. And if all your time is wasted to survive nothing gets done. People often confuse scarcity with necessity? Something might be very necessary but without sufficient resources innovation is impossible. Necessity is the father of invention and abundance is her mother?
History shows that shared abundance gives peace, freedom, and individual autonomy Abundance with purpose gave us enlightenment, abundance with necessity gave us innovation.
There is a whole lot of work being done by the so called unemployed which really needs to be done but for which no-one is going to pay them. If anything open source should have proven is that while there is a lot of valuable work to be done, no-one is willing to pay for it being done, especially not in the startup phase when it's not even clear what you are working on. Fundamental work is often overlooked because it only becomes clear how to make it profitable after it is made.
Many people are payed while they are totally unproductive, while many of the most productive people are not payed any more, often even a lot less, then the unproductive people. Crap often sells better then quality work.
(2) Full employment is an illusion
There will never be 100% employment, more and more people will find themselves unable to find employment. Currently there is no safety net for the self-employed.
(3) An unconditional basic income is about basic freedom and what this means in the 21th century.
With an unconditional basic income we take worrying about survival of the table. Survival is something that should not be a worry in the civilized world. A basic income is a general safety net for any mishap, misfortune and plain bad luck than could happen to anyone.
(4) An unconditional basic income is about human dignity.
Giving people options that they don't have today: The freedom to quite an unhealthy, low paying, dead-end job and to look for something worth doing. Even if this is something like developing open source software, or some other creative endeavor.In the end more value is created even if no-one was told to do it.
The expectation is that people will want to work. Naturally a unconditional basic income will change things: Some will seek employment, others will start a business, and then there are the open source programmers. etc. Another advantage is that one could eliminate minimum wage.
In what way did you mean that?
Either you think we should have to earn a worthy living and to be treated with respect.
Or that we have the innate right to a worthy living and to be treated with respect.
What is it going to be: The law of the jungle or a more civilized world?
All civilization can be explained as "socialism": To be civil to each other, help the needy and not let the strongest take everything?
In most software the default is the anglo-american count, you need to explicitly ask for the ISO 8601 count.
This makes me wonder if "voting" is actually any good, is it really "democratic"? Maybe if a vote was actually an informed choice, but most people just go with whomever is the most popular or promises them the moon on a stick. Realism, reason, legality, etc does not matter. Perhaps "voting" is not democratic at all if the people are basically ignorant, shortsighted, easily swayed by (the illusion of) popularity, fearful, during times of uncertainty and with many doubts about the future; We already see a kind of political aristocracy in most western democracies, the sons of presidents becoming presidents. Maybe that a demarchy would have been a better idea?
[demarchy]: Democracy without voting, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarchy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-bandwidth_Digital_Content_...