Recent Posts

91
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Old Politicians
« Last post by stack on August 05, 2022, 05:46:49 PM »
Humanity has been making less important revolutions and inventions as time goes on.

By what measure? Yours?

The Fourth Industrial Revolution: what it means, how to respond

The First Industrial Revolution used water and steam power to mechanize production. The Second used electric power to create mass production. The Third used electronics and information technology to automate production. Now a Fourth Industrial Revolution is building on the Third, the digital revolution that has been occurring since the middle of the last century. It is characterized by a fusion of technologies that is blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres.

There are three reasons why today’s transformations represent not merely a prolongation of the Third Industrial Revolution but rather the arrival of a Fourth and distinct one: velocity, scope, and systems impact. The speed of current breakthroughs has no historical precedent. When compared with previous industrial revolutions, the Fourth is evolving at an exponential rather than a linear pace. Moreover, it is disrupting almost every industry in every country. And the breadth and depth of these changes herald the transformation of entire systems of production, management, and governance.
92
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Old Politicians
« Last post by ohplease on August 05, 2022, 05:23:51 PM »
Points 3 and 4 represent the creation of fundamentally new technologies. The Digital Age in on point 5 represents people doing the same things they were already doing, but on a computer.

For someone to say that a personal computer or even the internet was not revolutionary is insane.

We went from the Harvard Mark I in the 40's:



To this, way more powerful, in the oughts:



And that's not revolutionary?

Actually I did say it was revolutionary. I also said that it wasn't as important as the technologies that revolutionized society in the early to mid 1900's.

My main criticism was that the applications used are largely just digital replicas of things which already existed. People already had encyclopedias in their homes and had library passes. People already could compose documents, order things from catalogues, and send letters and notes to each other. Now you can do all of that on a computer with emojis. It provided a convenient platform, but people were still doing the same things they were doing before.
People have been traveling around the planet since being able to walk so according to Tom being able to move yourself or goods anywhere within a few hours (or days for bulk items) is really just the same thing.  Obviously false.

The computer in your pocket can tell you where you are anywhere on the planet.  Even if you delude yourself to think that GPS does not utilize a network of satellites, you can not deny that it works.  That is revolutionary.

Having access to information without having to go to a library or for physical volumes to have to be written and published allows information not only to be universally accessible but also up to date.  That is revolutionary.   It of course also allows false information to be widely distributed.  All aspects of a revolution do not have to be beneficial to be revolutionary.

Not only access to information but access to services like micro banking is revolutionary.  Poor producers can not only sell their goods at prices that match global markets but accept payment safety without the risks of cash.

All that that does not even get to the original purpose of the mobile phone.  Reaching anyone anywhere is pretty revolutionary all by itself.
93
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Old Politicians
« Last post by Tom Bishop on August 05, 2022, 04:44:14 PM »
If thats the criteria then, well, none of the tech you listed is revolutionary either.

Automobile: we already used horses.  Cars were just us moving faster and longer. 
Radio: we already could send messages wirelessly via sound waves.  So this was just doing it with another wave.
Airplanes: we already had hot air balloons.  Putting a fan on the front to move isn't a big change.
Etc...

Correct. On their own those technologies weren't that big of a change. But if you combine radio, television, telephone, automobile, airplane, automated manufacturing, home appliances, it becomes a very significant change to human society in that era. We were comparing that era to the modern era. I specified that the era and time period represented a period of new useful technologies and impactful change to society, as compared to recent years in which it has been less so.

tom i hate to burst your bubble, but people born in the first half of the 20th century didn't actually invent books, libraries, and post offices. those things have been around for some time.

I did not claim that the early 20th century invented language and the written word. The invention of language and the written word was arguably even more important than the revolutions to society between the early to mid 1900's.

Humanity has been making less important revolutions and inventions as time goes on.
94
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Old Politicians
« Last post by garygreen on August 05, 2022, 04:35:05 PM »
tom i hate to burst your bubble, but people born in the first half of the 20th century didn't actually invent books, libraries, and post offices. those things have been around for some time.
95
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Old Politicians
« Last post by Lord Dave on August 05, 2022, 03:58:37 PM »
Points 3 and 4 represent the creation of fundamentally new technologies. The Digital Age in on point 5 represents people doing the same things they were already doing, but on a computer.

For someone to say that a personal computer or even the internet was not revolutionary is insane.

We went from the Harvard Mark I in the 40's:



To this, way more powerful, in the oughts:



And that's not revolutionary?

Actually I did say it was revolutionary. I also said that it wasn't as important as the technologies that revolutionized society in the early to mid 1900's.

My main criticism was that the applications used are largely just digital replicas of things which already existed. People already had encyclopedias in their homes and had library passes. People already could compose documents, order things from catalogues, and send letters and notes to each other. Now you can do all of that on a computer with emojis. It provided a convenient platform, but people were still doing the same things they were doing before.

If thats the criteria then, well, none of the tech you listed is revolutionary either.

Automobile: we already used horses.  Cars were just us moving faster and longer. 
Radio: we already could send messages wirelessly via sound waves.  So this was just doing it with another wave.
Airplanes: we already had hot air balloons.  Putting a fan on the front to move isn't a big change.
Etc...
96
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Old Politicians
« Last post by Tom Bishop on August 05, 2022, 03:13:51 PM »
Points 3 and 4 represent the creation of fundamentally new technologies. The Digital Age in on point 5 represents people doing the same things they were already doing, but on a computer.

For someone to say that a personal computer or even the internet was not revolutionary is insane.

We went from the Harvard Mark I in the 40's:



To this, way more powerful, in the oughts:



And that's not revolutionary?

Actually I did say it was revolutionary. I also said that it wasn't as important as the technologies that revolutionized society in the early to mid 1900's.

My main criticism was that the applications used are largely just digital replicas of things which already existed. People already had encyclopedias in their homes and had library passes. People already could compose documents, order things from catalogues, and send letters and notes to each other. Now you can do all of that on a computer with emojis. It provided a convenient platform, but people were still doing the same things they were doing before.
97
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion
« Last post by stack on August 05, 2022, 03:02:41 PM »
You clearly do.  You said you think they're undersampling low density areas.  So just want to know what you consider to be accurate sampling.
I wrote no such thing.

Wouldn't this mean the converse:

Polls cannot help but oversample populations with higher population density.
(my bold)

Meaning, Polls cannot help but undersample populations with lower population density?
98
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion
« Last post by Action80 on August 05, 2022, 10:27:04 AM »
You clearly do.  You said you think they're undersampling low density areas.  So just want to know what you consider to be accurate sampling.
I wrote no such thing.

To me, an adequate sampling would be none at all.

Polls, and the reports thereof, are an example of "tail wagging the dog," thus falling within the realm of unnatural events.
99
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Old Politicians
« Last post by ohplease on August 05, 2022, 06:12:58 AM »
Yeah.  It's unfortunate that Russia doesn't have a real film industry.  I would love to see ww2 war movies from their perspective.

They'd just show a gazillion Russian army soldiers blasting away Germans with only a few token losses.
Maybe, but maybe not.  Russian losses are well established as the most of any nation in either world war, its not even close.  That (from what little I know about it) is well incorporated into the Russian Heroic stories the nation (like all nations) tells itself.  In their case it is that they defeated the Germans by making a huge Russian sacrifice (and are "owed").
100
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Old Politicians
« Last post by BillO on August 05, 2022, 05:45:30 AM »
How do these practically zombified 70-80 year olds conduct political business?

Sorry for being late to this game.

Age has nothing to do with it, unless you are old enough to be dead.  There is precious little difference between politicians and whores.  Politicians sell themselves for favors, whores sell them selves for money.  The whores come out ahead.  Political favors have the life span of a mayfly.  Money rules.  So politicians play their little games endlessly thinking they are doin' stuff.  They aren't.  It usually amounts to rhetoric and media ops.  Anyone from 8 to 88 can deal with it.  The real power is not in the public arena.  Let the conspiracies flow...