Re: The Destructiveness of High Technology

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Bombadil wrote:
Jim Cochrane <allergic-to-spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2009-05-06, Bombadil <justme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jim Cochrane <allergic-to-spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
(Sorry if this is the wrong group to ask this in. I don't see a more
appropriate group in the list of comp.os.linux.* groups I have.)

After wasting a good chunk of time googling for internet/online TV
options and only finding ones that use proprietary/windows formats, I
thought I might be able to get better results asking here.

Has anyone found a good solution for watching TV online in the US on a
Linux system (either free or for a fee)? I'd prefer not to use wine,
but if that's the only option, I'm willing to consider it.
Well Balwinder. Here we have with a guy with a computer on the internet,
which is the most incredible, interactive communications and teaching and
learning and academic research tool that has ever existed.

And what does this guy want to do with it? Watch TV. He wants to turn it
into a fucking BOOB TUBE.
That's funny; but I get the feeling you're not joking.

A computer is a wonderful multi-purpose tool. There's no reason to
limit its uses to a small subset of what it can do (and, no, dogmatism
is not a reason) and there's no reason for Microsoft to have a monopoly on
any of these uses.

Yes. There is a reason to limit technology. It is incredibly destructive,
(high technology being the most destructive of all) and we are trashing
the planetary ecosystem that sustains us. This is common sense, not
"dogmatism".
No, its stupidity..,

I apologize for calling you "stupid" in my other post here. You are
not stupid, you are ignorant (as well as rude). You probably have
a college degree, 16 years of formal education, and you know nothing
about technology. (This says as much about the educational system
as it does you.)



The sahara, for instance, was created by overgrazing of low tech goats,
and the chopping down of trees with primitive axes for very low tech
construction and firewood.

And if this had been accomplished with a medium level of technology,
circa 1950, the technologies used for the agriculture and
silviculture involved would have done not only that damage, but
all of the damage creating and sustaining those industries required.
Mines and factories and coking mills and rolling mills and foundries
and smelters and oil wells and refineries (just for starters). To make
and fuel caterpillars and road graders and skidders and tankers and
chain saws and radios and logging trucks and docks and warehouses and roads
and power plants and, and, and....

Make it a high-tech operation, with computers and robotics at
every level, and you have added the destructiveness of yet another
layer of industry. One that is very, very destructive, because it
requires so many resources and production steps. That's what
high-technology means: Complex.

<snippety>

Bombadil

.

Loading