Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 579

Not to be a smart ass, but a "population reduction war" is, by virtue of the words placed in that order, a war fought to reduce population. It is, I posit, a logical conjecture about a hypothetical future war. It's not too difficult to foresee something like this. Combine the prime problem of exponentially growing population pressure with the exacerbating factors of dwindling resources, kin selection, religious friction, ideological conflicts between neighbors, and energy-dense technology proliferation and you have the perfect ingredients for a return to our species roots as genocidal monsters.

A war fought for territory, or for honor, religion, or for ideology would be completely different than a "population reduction war." A "population reduction war" would be a war fought specifically to reduce the population on the Earth. Whether this ultimate goal is know or hidden from the participants is irrelevant. In a population reduction war killing the enemy's armed forces is not done to force compliance, depose the government leaders, or to gain territory. Killing the enemy would not be a means to an end in a war like this. Killing the enemy is the end. And, as such, the means would be different than in other wars. Combatants would not be the main targets, they would be tactical obstacles between you and the strategic goals of large populations of civilians.

Comment Re:Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 579

Well then that's all we need! We have provided our decedents with more knowledge in this generation than all of our cumulative generations previous to this one. Conserving any resources is irrelevant!

Thanks for proving my point, again lol!

Seriously though, Leary and Wilson call inherited knowledge you are referring to the "time-binding semantic circuit" of human consciousness. It is an inalienable trait of being a human. Making a societal decision for conservation of resources for future generations is totally different than the automatic accumulation of human knowledge as a by product of language using monkeys playing with tools. It is even father afield from the results of reproductive pressures expressed in future generations that you refer to.

There really is no way to compare them. Its like comparing geology and satellites. Their Venn diagrams aren't even on the same plane.

Comment Re:I read the version with the photos (Score 1) 4

Yes, it was. I had the maid show me how to work the coffeemaker later. I'd have known if I'd bothered to read the coffee packet.

Some of the blur may have been because I was so shaky after hiking outside with all those books and falling down. That last photo is bad because there wasn't much light,

Comment Re:Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 579

Goes well with the old adage, "necessity is the mother of invention." Force our future generations into devising increasingly ingenious ways of staying ahead of the extinction curve. No one handed our distant Paleolithic ancestors a leg up, same goes for every generation since. This attitude served us well up to this point, in that we aren't dead yet..

Also goes along well with the "intelligence implies belligerence" adage, though as a cause of the intelligence. A harsher environment will lead to greater intelligence, which will, in turn, reinforce the behavior of molding our environment to our wishes. (Intentional digression) at a certain point I think that deliberate adaptation of our environment will reach a place of diminishing returns. Somewhere along that asymptotic curve it will become more cost and energy effective to deliberately modify the human element of the survival equation.

Not supporting his position per se. Just exploring the taste of that mind filter out loud here. What would I use as rationalization and ancillary support if I were to adopt that thought as valid. As always, even the most ludicrous shit can be justified through human "reasoning" and "logic."

Comment Re:I read the version with the photos (Score 1) 4

The blurry pics are from Patty's new Samsung. I reduced resolution as well, because when I run out of hosting space at mcgrewbooks.com where the photos actually are (they won't fit in the mcgrew.info's 10 megs) it will cost a lot more. The Sith is cropped way down, he was across the room.

That first picture, the worldcon logo, came from Google. The covers to "Random Scribblings" are GIMPed photos I took with the same phone I took to Worldcon.

I would have probably made a fool of myself if I'd gone to the first Midamericon in 1969 in St. Louis, but I was seventeen.

Comment It's because drugs AREN'T fine. (Score 1) 2

Most of today's junkies are far different than they use to be, although old school junkies still exist. These days, the drug pushers are doctors and pharmaceutical companies who are handing out very potent, addictive drugs like candy. Once the oxycodone gets you, you discover that heroin bought on the street is a lot cheaper than what "Doctor Pusher" is pushing.

So your garden variety "would never take drugs" upstanding citizen winds up dead of a heroin overdose. Having a place like that might save some lives and get addiction treatment for some of them.

It's hard for people to be rational about drugs.

Comment Re: Pixels density (Score 1) 152

why wouldn't you use a mid-priced prosumer camera like the 5d mark iv primarily for web? there's professional photography done for web only, and you're right - something like an 1d or a phase one back on a medium format camera would probably be overkill.

If you're shooting ONLY for the web, which is mainly what I was referring to...then a DSLR like the 5Dx is overkill.

Now, I do realize that most any great image taken, for print, etc...will *also* likely end up on the web too, no problem.....always nice in the pro area to shoot for print and down-res as needed. But I took the "shoot FOR web" to be someone only shooting for their private website, etc....and in general, these DSLRs would be overkill for them.

And if you consider close to $4K a pop for body ONLY...to be mid priced...whew, you have more disposable income than I do.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you do something right once, someone will ask you to do it again.

Working...