31–40 of 71 posts
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Complex-Societies-Studies-Ar...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But a paper system which uses mail also has huge dependencies. You rely on a transportation and post office infrastructure that can also have problems. In fact, the internet was funded by DARPA to deal with disruption of the conventional communication network.
> also has huge dependencies True, but they are different dependencies. One of the goals is to eliminate the risk of common-mode failure[1]. One failure that makes the internet inoperable also takes out everything that depended on it, which shouldn't be "everything". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_cause_and_special_cause...
While the current structure may not reflect this (and, to the extent it doesn't, this is a problem), a central part of the idea of the internet is that it should be structured so that a single failure would at most make a minor part of the internet unusable, and perhaps cause a two-way partition between remaining usable parts, not make "the internet" unusable in a general way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't want to seem mean, but you're like a caricature of a country person. People are living things which grow to suit their environment, everyone thinks their way is the best way and that their hometown is the coolest. When you say things like "city people care more about money" and "city people are mean" you sound like a bumpkin.
Maybe he's a caricature, but he's 100% right. I grew up going to school in the burbs, all summer in a small home-town - and have lived in several major cities. 'City people' are definitely more about the money. Small towns are communities. Everyone knows everyone - often for multiple generations. Families have ties - not just people. You can't 'not care about' someone you've known for 40 years, even if you don't know…
Please like Munich, Frankfurt feel pretty 'small town' relatively speaking. People tend to stay put a lot longer (like forever, even hundreds of years over generations), and the geography of those cities are completely different as well.
The article doesn't answer the question stated in the title.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
This is the fundamental premise that object oriented thinking was created to solve. You cannot understand a sufficiently advanced system from both an overview and granular view. You have to either see the overview and trust the granular objects, or specialize in one granular object and then trust your adjacent objects. Its a problem written about in detail by Marcus Aurelius in Meditations when he comments on running…
You've hit the nail on the head with the trust and responsibility. There does need to be overall planning and co-ordination; but solutions cannot be dictated at a large scale. Instead /goals/ must be dictated, strive for X, prevent Y, co-operate with Z to prevent unwanted unintended consequences. Larger governing bodies need to provide a basic framework, the minimum standard and boundary for the system's operation. P…
I don't think it's that simple. The "goals" of a city are the goals of the people living in it, which are as complicated as the city itself. Your example is actually a great illustration of how large-scale decision making can go wrong: the sprawl met someone's goals, or it wouldn't have happened, but it didn't match the needs of the actual people living in the city. In general, how do you know the goals you're dictating are the right ones? A better focus would be on ways for individuals and communities within cities to organize, communicate their needs and get resources to solve their unique problems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't want to seem mean, but you're like a caricature of a country person. People are living things which grow to suit their environment, everyone thinks their way is the best way and that their hometown is the coolest. When you say things like "city people care more about money" and "city people are mean" you sound like a bumpkin.
Maybe he's a caricature, but he's 100% right. I grew up going to school in the burbs, all summer in a small home-town - and have lived in several major cities. 'City people' are definitely more about the money. Small towns are communities. Everyone knows everyone - often for multiple generations. Families have ties - not just people. You can't 'not care about' someone you've known for 40 years, even if you don't know…
I feel like I got the worst of all of the worlds. There wasn't a real sense of community, but there was also a major lack of opportunity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe he's a caricature, but he's 100% right. I grew up going to school in the burbs, all summer in a small home-town - and have lived in several major cities. 'City people' are definitely more about the money. Small towns are communities. Everyone knows everyone - often for multiple generations. Families have ties - not just people. You can't 'not care about' someone you've known for 40 years, even if you don't know…
FYI I should say 'large cities' - especially North American ones. Please like Munich, Frankfurt feel pretty 'small town' relatively speaking. People tend to stay put a lot longer (like forever, even hundreds of years over generations), and the geography of those cities are completely different as well.
Because I look at this:
> 'City people' are definitely more about the money.
And then I look at Berlin (3.5 million people!). And I just laugh.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reminds me of the trope that the choice should ALWAYS be left with consumers. Every consumer is a 'rational actor'. Reality is most humans have too many things going on, too many choices with not adequate info and are emotional actors.
Yet solutions emerge, even if individual agents have zero intelligence http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/Gode%20and%20Sunder-JP... Your lack of belief in the force of the free hand is troubling, especially when it can be proved by computer models and reality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't want to seem mean, but you're like a caricature of a country person. People are living things which grow to suit their environment, everyone thinks their way is the best way and that their hometown is the coolest. When you say things like "city people care more about money" and "city people are mean" you sound like a bumpkin.
Maybe he's a caricature, but he's 100% right. I grew up going to school in the burbs, all summer in a small home-town - and have lived in several major cities. 'City people' are definitely more about the money. Small towns are communities. Everyone knows everyone - often for multiple generations. Families have ties - not just people. You can't 'not care about' someone you've known for 40 years, even if you don't know…
I'm flipping quickly through a copy of Arbesman's The Half-Life of Facts and am disappointed to see that he (or his editors) have fallen prey to the gross misconception that numbered footnotes and bibliographies somehow diminish a book's value. Quite the opposite. (THLoF has end notes, but they're not indicated within the text, and insted reference pages and passages, which is a form of torture to be included in a future revision of the Geneva Convention.)