Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. finally, Wendell Berry's standards for technological innovation--truly as relevant now as they were in 1987 #othernetworks

finally, Wendell Berry's standards for technological innovation--truly as relevant now as they were in 1987 #othernetworks

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
othernetworks
75 Indlæg 50 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • msbellows@c.imM msbellows@c.im

    @ZenHeathen @loriemerson You absolutely should. Here are a couple starting points:

    Why I Will Not Buy a Computer (essay): berry-computer.pdf https://classes.matthewjbrown.net/teaching-files/philtech/berry-computer.pdf

    The Blue Robe (poem): https://www.writersalmanac.org/index.html%3Fp=6383.html

    unchartedworlds@scicomm.xyzU This user is from outside of this forum
    unchartedworlds@scicomm.xyzU This user is from outside of this forum
    unchartedworlds@scicomm.xyz
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #63

    @msbellows

    Thanks for the links!

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • iron_bug@friendica.ironbug.orgI iron_bug@friendica.ironbug.org
      @loriemerson I disagree only with °cheaper° clause. because if something is better and higher in tehnology, it just cannot be cheaper. and cheaper are usually poor quality things or things made by slaves that are underpaid.
      but I would add a clause of longevity: a new instrument should run and work fine longer than previous one.
      lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.brL This user is from outside of this forum
      lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.brL This user is from outside of this forum
      lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #64
      remember moore's law? it had us all used to expecting cheaper tech as time went by, or far more powerful tech costing the same. that's the expectation encoded there, I believe.

      CC: @loriemerson@post.lurk.org
      iron_bug@friendica.ironbug.orgI 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.brL lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
        remember moore's law? it had us all used to expecting cheaper tech as time went by, or far more powerful tech costing the same. that's the expectation encoded there, I believe.

        CC: @loriemerson@post.lurk.org
        iron_bug@friendica.ironbug.orgI This user is from outside of this forum
        iron_bug@friendica.ironbug.orgI This user is from outside of this forum
        iron_bug@friendica.ironbug.org
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #65
        @loriemerson @lxo it is not actual for many years already. the era of possible cheap development based on existing technologies is over and further envolvement takes serious scientific research and engineering efforts and investments.
        that's why we don't see any improvements in hardware the past decades. they just faced the limits that are not passable with already exising solutions.
        lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.brL 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • wesdym@mastodon.socialW wesdym@mastodon.social

          @redoak It doesn't occur to you that the post directly conflicts with its own content, and the comment you responded to explains how. You just don't like it.

          "This sucks" is not an argument or proposal. It's what little kids say about anything they don't like, because we excuse them from adult responsibilies such as accounting for themselves.

          If you're not a little kid, you should understand why "I don't like thing" does not flatter you.

          redoak@social.coopR This user is from outside of this forum
          redoak@social.coopR This user is from outside of this forum
          redoak@social.coop
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #66

          @wesdym wow, this one sucks too

          wesdym@mastodon.socialW 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • redoak@social.coopR redoak@social.coop

            @wesdym wow, this one sucks too

            wesdym@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
            wesdym@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
            wesdym@mastodon.social
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #67

            @redoak Grow up.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • iron_bug@friendica.ironbug.orgI iron_bug@friendica.ironbug.org
              @loriemerson @lxo it is not actual for many years already. the era of possible cheap development based on existing technologies is over and further envolvement takes serious scientific research and engineering efforts and investments.
              that's why we don't see any improvements in hardware the past decades. they just faced the limits that are not passable with already exising solutions.
              lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.brL This user is from outside of this forum
              lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.brL This user is from outside of this forum
              lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #68
              that may be true, but realize you're arguing with something written in 1987, and what you dispute doesn't relate with what's written there. it's not about how expensive it is to develop and evolve something, but how tech tends to become cheaper over time, as new tech displaces old one

              CC: @iron_bug@friendica.ironbug.org @loriemerson@post.lurk.org
              loriemerson@post.lurk.orgL 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.brL lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
                that may be true, but realize you're arguing with something written in 1987, and what you dispute doesn't relate with what's written there. it's not about how expensive it is to develop and evolve something, but how tech tends to become cheaper over time, as new tech displaces old one

                CC: @iron_bug@friendica.ironbug.org @loriemerson@post.lurk.org
                loriemerson@post.lurk.orgL This user is from outside of this forum
                loriemerson@post.lurk.orgL This user is from outside of this forum
                loriemerson@post.lurk.org
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #69

                @lxo it is strange - it is as if people don't know how to read any more...just to spell out the obvious (for myself), reading is so much more than contending with literal content that can be picked apart and argued with

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • loriemerson@post.lurk.orgL loriemerson@post.lurk.org

                  finally, Wendell Berry's standards for technological innovation--truly as relevant now as they were in 1987 #othernetworks

                  kib@shotjr.netK This user is from outside of this forum
                  kib@shotjr.netK This user is from outside of this forum
                  kib@shotjr.net
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #70

                  @loriemerson My problem with this is the entire rest of the piece which I wrote an angsty essay about in a class as a teen

                  Computers at the time largely COULD be repaired with simple tools and the parts, at least as easily as a refrigerator or microwave, which he thinks are fine. An absolute rando can't fix a refrigerator without some specific knowledge either.

                  And I vaguely remember some comment about typing manuscripts, but he had his wife type for him. Easy to dismiss when you're not the one typing!

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • loriemerson@post.lurk.orgL loriemerson@post.lurk.org

                    finally, Wendell Berry's standards for technological innovation--truly as relevant now as they were in 1987 #othernetworks

                    studioumluft@mastodon.gamedev.placeS This user is from outside of this forum
                    studioumluft@mastodon.gamedev.placeS This user is from outside of this forum
                    studioumluft@mastodon.gamedev.place
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #71

                    @loriemerson @njamster I spotted «Why I’m not going to buy a computer» in a small bookshop in the UK in 2019 and – as a person, who is working a lot with computers – was intrigued by the title. I really wanted to know, why he didn’t want to buy one. I finished reading very quickly and it transformed the way I look at progress. Since then I am waiting for a company to advertise their computer as “The last PC you will ever buy” (because you can repair and replace things and it lasts a lifetime).

                    loriemerson@post.lurk.orgL 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • studioumluft@mastodon.gamedev.placeS studioumluft@mastodon.gamedev.place

                      @loriemerson @njamster I spotted «Why I’m not going to buy a computer» in a small bookshop in the UK in 2019 and – as a person, who is working a lot with computers – was intrigued by the title. I really wanted to know, why he didn’t want to buy one. I finished reading very quickly and it transformed the way I look at progress. Since then I am waiting for a company to advertise their computer as “The last PC you will ever buy” (because you can repair and replace things and it lasts a lifetime).

                      loriemerson@post.lurk.orgL This user is from outside of this forum
                      loriemerson@post.lurk.orgL This user is from outside of this forum
                      loriemerson@post.lurk.org
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #72

                      @studioumluft @njamster I love this idea - I would even pay a lot of money for the last PC I will ever buy!

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • aakoskin@bitwoods.duckdns.orgA aakoskin@bitwoods.duckdns.org

                        @loriemerson 10. Never post an image/screenshot if you can type the same in plain text.

                        paulditz@todon.euP This user is from outside of this forum
                        paulditz@todon.euP This user is from outside of this forum
                        paulditz@todon.eu
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #73

                        @aakoskin @loriemerson Literally has the text as alt text you absolute doofus.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • loriemerson@post.lurk.orgL loriemerson@post.lurk.org

                          @lxskllr @nickrauchen @aakoskin I am having trouble wrapping my head why the format of my post is worth anyone commenting on - the text is in the image. it's not elegant but I wanted to give a screenshot of the exact text I was reading from Harper's. surely there are more important things to discuss here, and in general, than policing precisely how people post

                          courtcan@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                          courtcan@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                          courtcan@mastodon.social
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #74

                          @loriemerson @lxskllr @nickrauchen @aakoskin For what it's worth, I think it's great that the plain text is in an image with alt-text. This allowed me to download the list directly when I realized that I wanted to keep it -- instead of having to mess with screenshotting and cropping. So thank you for sharing the image the way you did; it was helpful.
                          ☺️✌️🤘🖖

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • loriemerson@post.lurk.orgL loriemerson@post.lurk.org

                            finally, Wendell Berry's standards for technological innovation--truly as relevant now as they were in 1987 #othernetworks

                            courtcan@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                            courtcan@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                            courtcan@mastodon.social
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #75

                            @loriemerson I can't think of a single example of modern technology that functions according to Berry. Which is a damn shame.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • jwcph@helvede.netJ jwcph@helvede.net shared this topic
                              tokeriis@helvede.netT tokeriis@helvede.net shared this topic
                              suneauken@mastodon.worldS suneauken@mastodon.world shared this topic
                            Svar
                            • Svar som emne
                            Login for at svare
                            • Ældste til nyeste
                            • Nyeste til ældste
                            • Most Votes


                            • Log ind

                            • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                            • Login or register to search.
                            Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                            Graciously hosted by data.coop
                            • First post
                              Last post
                            0
                            • Hjem
                            • Seneste
                            • Etiketter
                            • Populære
                            • Verden
                            • Bruger
                            • Grupper