31–40 of 76 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook is a technology. Someone designed and built it.
Only in a pedantic sense. Facebook is a use of technology, not really a technology in its own rite.
Facebook is a tool designed and built to solve a set of problems. If that is not technology in a core sense, I don't know what is.
Communication is not Facebook. Non-Facebook users have an equal interpersonal experience to that of a user. It is frustrating to see how much of the online English speaking world feels locked into Facebook. No one is locked in. We are free to spend our time seeking satisfaction any way we like, and it is nearly always more efficient to communicate using other tools.
The coming anti-tech counterculture? My girlfriend is adamant about keeping her old crusty flip phone with a broken hinge that doesn't have a real keyboard on it, or even the internet! The majority of my friends almost refuse to own televisions. I own a kindle, but almost never use it in favor of paper. I also own several prosumer digital SLRs, but favor my old vivitar 35mm camera from high school. etc. etc. The list…
It's quite possible that smart phones, televisions, and kindles don't make your life any better. But MRI machines, efficient vehicles, green energy, plastic money, RFID toll booths, the GPS satellite constellation, and the internet probably do. Being anti technology means that you resist things that would improve your life for no other reason than that they are new. It's fine to use old things, as long as you keep an open mind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. And I think people who work in tech are more aware of the problems "bad" technology creates and are more likely to avoid it, even as the rest of society starts "coming online" in the sense that they have some kind of a personal web presence.
Reminds me of an article I read (maybe here) that described how doctors are less likely to pursue aggressive treatments for themselves when faced with late term cancer or similar diseases.
Reading the article, the things should jump out to you: 1. all of the points are no secret! 2. All of those points are the mainstream. Frankly. Facebook was cool, I don't know, 5, 6 years ago? The crusade against Facebook started 2 years ago already, and the anti industrial food started at least a decade ago. All of these believes are now, surprised!, mainstream. 3. all of the listed end notes are common sense that every single fucking person will agree to.
So, what's so "coming" about those things? what's so "counter"-culture about those things?
Ah, the US-ian mind. What a wonderfully ignorant thing.
I suppose this is one possible counterculture, but I'm not sure why it's more likely than any of a myriad of other possible countercultures. Why this counterculture, apart from what the author would like to see develop? I mean, I'd personally like to see an anti-urban, anti-density counterculture enabled by technology, but I'm not under the illusion that that's going to happen just because it appeals to me.
I'd love to see a cultural movement towards anti-urban, anti-density enabled by technology. You're not alone :) In my view we would use technology to empower people to form stronger community bonds. The author mentions food industry tech, and that's a major part of my vision also. I think we need to move towards a locally grown seasonal food source instead of shipping food to all corners of the globe just because we…
However, the local food movement needs to talk more about yield. It doesn't appear that humanity can sustain itself this way - small communities perhaps, but it's a first world luxury.
Also, "food miles" is a BS metric, the biggest energy sink is fertilizer (by far!). Ammonium Nitrate is made by fossil fuel + air - you are mostly eating energy from natural gas, not the sun, it would seem.
Clever use of AJAX isn't interesting. A decentralized and open network of self-bootstrapped 3d-printers suited for everything from making electronics to replacement kidneys? That's a different story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd love to see a cultural movement towards anti-urban, anti-density enabled by technology. You're not alone :) In my view we would use technology to empower people to form stronger community bonds. The author mentions food industry tech, and that's a major part of my vision also. I think we need to move towards a locally grown seasonal food source instead of shipping food to all corners of the globe just because we…
Though I would expect that from "militiaman21" ;-) However, the local food movement needs to talk more about yield. It doesn't appear that humanity can sustain itself this way - small communities perhaps, but it's a first world luxury. Also, "food miles" is a BS metric, the biggest energy sink is fertilizer (by far!). Ammonium Nitrate is made by fossil fuel + air - you are mostly eating energy from natural gas, not t…
Admittedly, it's too expensive to set up to be used commercially for anything except... well, high-margin cash crops, let us say. But those costs should go down.
The coming anti-tech counterculture? My girlfriend is adamant about keeping her old crusty flip phone with a broken hinge that doesn't have a real keyboard on it, or even the internet! The majority of my friends almost refuse to own televisions. I own a kindle, but almost never use it in favor of paper. I also own several prosumer digital SLRs, but favor my old vivitar 35mm camera from high school. etc. etc. The list…