nutranurse
Unlikeliest of Slash Fics
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2009
- Messages
- 2,077
Well that was not as bad as I thought it would be. Missed a 14 point question on what dark matter is. :~I I hate memorization.
While We Wait: Boredom Strikes Back
- Thread starter Thlayli
- Start date
- Status
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
Holy cow. O.o What level astronomy course is this?
Symphony D.
Deity
It's not uncommon to see in 200-level gen-ed science.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
nutranurse, do you play Battle for Wesnoth?
nutranurse
Unlikeliest of Slash Fics
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2009
- Messages
- 2,077
Occasionally, lj. Mostly when procrastinating 
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
Really? I never took an astronomy course that was higher than 100-level. That's interesting, given that dark matter is largely theoretical.
nutranurse
Unlikeliest of Slash Fics
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2009
- Messages
- 2,077
It's a 100-level. My college is just has stupid high expectations about sciences.
SKILORD
Insurgent
I mean, it's theoretical, but it's also the main way that we explain crazy huge inconsistencies in the mass and energy of the universe. So it wouldn't make a lot of sense to ignore the vast majority of matter just because we can't properly qualify it.
Link to video.
Link to video.
Symphony D.
Deity
Pretty much. If you want to talk about the big bang, the inflationary period, size of the observable universe, red shift the fate of the universe, etc, there's pretty much no way of avoiding discussing dark matter and dark energy, and it's always possible to look around a room and watch looks of confusion creep across the faces of non-science majors when they come up.
I think my break will be slightly less than two weeks.
nutranurse
Unlikeliest of Slash Fics
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2009
- Messages
- 2,077
NO SLEEP EVER. I'm writing the next 5 papers without blinking due to the stash of monster that I have.
SKILORD
Insurgent
So, I know that the post-apocalyptic euphoria has died down, but has anyone seen the The Open Sourced Ecology?
I find their premise interesting, but I am extremely doubtful of their strategy. I mean, the idea of systematically breaking down civilization into 50 specific tools that construct the physical trappings is cool, and I understand the utility of it as a mental process, but what is the practical application?
Say they do build a handful of prototypes with the various advantages of modern civilization, what good does it do you in any sort of doomsday scenario to know how one would construct a tractor with materials purchased from supply stores that no longer exist? How much mining are you really prepared to do by yourself? Let alone smelting and forging.
And past that, the real application here, to my mind, is the third world. I mean, if these 50 tools are really so transformative then why isn't this being marketed as a cure for global poverty? What good would it do today, in the sort of situations it presupposes for the future, and if the addition of a few more tractors or 3D Printers would fail to remedy the situation in, say, Darfur, then what good does it really do us?
And maybe you would argue that there isn't anything explicitly doomsday-hoard-gold-bullion-in-your-bunker paranoid about this open sourced civilization thing, but then, what is the purpose? To build the material trappings of a second civilization here, in America today? The truth is that there is no practical utility to me owning a tractor, or a well drill, today. You can't say that this movement is anti-materialistic either, it is fundamentally materialistic. It assumes that modern civilization is the product of 50 literal material tools.
And I don't mean to discredit their ideas or their prototypes here when I say this about them. Like I said, I find the thought intriguing and I think that if it were more broadly evaluated it could be a great tool against poverty, but as it exists I find the whole thing somewhat strange and confusing.
I find their premise interesting, but I am extremely doubtful of their strategy. I mean, the idea of systematically breaking down civilization into 50 specific tools that construct the physical trappings is cool, and I understand the utility of it as a mental process, but what is the practical application?
Say they do build a handful of prototypes with the various advantages of modern civilization, what good does it do you in any sort of doomsday scenario to know how one would construct a tractor with materials purchased from supply stores that no longer exist? How much mining are you really prepared to do by yourself? Let alone smelting and forging.
And past that, the real application here, to my mind, is the third world. I mean, if these 50 tools are really so transformative then why isn't this being marketed as a cure for global poverty? What good would it do today, in the sort of situations it presupposes for the future, and if the addition of a few more tractors or 3D Printers would fail to remedy the situation in, say, Darfur, then what good does it really do us?
And maybe you would argue that there isn't anything explicitly doomsday-hoard-gold-bullion-in-your-bunker paranoid about this open sourced civilization thing, but then, what is the purpose? To build the material trappings of a second civilization here, in America today? The truth is that there is no practical utility to me owning a tractor, or a well drill, today. You can't say that this movement is anti-materialistic either, it is fundamentally materialistic. It assumes that modern civilization is the product of 50 literal material tools.
And I don't mean to discredit their ideas or their prototypes here when I say this about them. Like I said, I find the thought intriguing and I think that if it were more broadly evaluated it could be a great tool against poverty, but as it exists I find the whole thing somewhat strange and confusing.
I looked over it briefly and will check over it more lately, but the goal of demystifying technology and simplifying some definition of modern civilization down to the simplest set of machines that could support said civilization seems like a positive one.
SKILORD
Insurgent
I understand, I don't have any problem with the stated goals. I'm just wondering about the practical application of that, how useful is that knowledge, really? On a day to day basis? Are the ideas being applied in a useful way?
And, more importantly, doesn't that highlight the importance of the application over the tool?
Say you have opportunity to build a tractor, for instance, and you get it done, drill constructed and well dug, all the basic stuff you get from the kit. Do you know how to farm on an industrial scale? Even past the technical details of unrelated but required schools of thought, something like farming is going to be variable dependent on geographic location, so not only do you need to know "how to farm" you need to know "how to farm in British Columbia" or "how to farm in North Carolina" which are obviously going to have totally different qualities and requirements. Do you know where the best soil is? Do you have the means to secure access to that soil? How good is your irrigation? Where is your water source? How do you secure your perimeter from intruders?
So, in my mind, the problems that this sort of thing is trying to confront aren't materialistic in nature, they are social and political. I get how spreading information is always good, but like all of these tools, isn't how the thing is used more important than their individual abstract capacity for good? And is this information being deployed well, or does it place some crazy amount of faith into the idea of the fundamental capacity for good that knowledge has as an end in itself and that these tools likewise are good in and of themselves.
And, more importantly, doesn't that highlight the importance of the application over the tool?
Say you have opportunity to build a tractor, for instance, and you get it done, drill constructed and well dug, all the basic stuff you get from the kit. Do you know how to farm on an industrial scale? Even past the technical details of unrelated but required schools of thought, something like farming is going to be variable dependent on geographic location, so not only do you need to know "how to farm" you need to know "how to farm in British Columbia" or "how to farm in North Carolina" which are obviously going to have totally different qualities and requirements. Do you know where the best soil is? Do you have the means to secure access to that soil? How good is your irrigation? Where is your water source? How do you secure your perimeter from intruders?
So, in my mind, the problems that this sort of thing is trying to confront aren't materialistic in nature, they are social and political. I get how spreading information is always good, but like all of these tools, isn't how the thing is used more important than their individual abstract capacity for good? And is this information being deployed well, or does it place some crazy amount of faith into the idea of the fundamental capacity for good that knowledge has as an end in itself and that these tools likewise are good in and of themselves.
It seems that the whole thing's approaching the 'survival kit' from a physical perspective- naturally you need to have knowledge of how to apply the tools as well. I don't think it's trying to directly address anything social or political, beyond simply making technology more accessible, which is both a social and a material problem.
Change of subject, I'm thinking of devoting a bit of time to starting a story in Civ5 Stories and Let's Plays subforum- I never really dedicated myself to playing a full game of Civ5, and who knows, it might draw a few people into our forum. 
SKILORD
Insurgent
I played like 3 games recently, I got a lot of the old Stories and Tales instincts when I was playing the first but it was a humiliating loss (I kept blaming the game for putting me in Siberia ("people get banished here"), but the truth is that if I had just gone and conquered the Mongols instead of letting them wage a stupid endless but intermittent war on my impenetrable southern border, or if I had stuck to fewer cities, I would have had the focus to get a victory condition).
Good luck with it, not that I don't believe it can't be done, but I don't have the heart to write a story about a Civ 5 game.
Good luck with it, not that I don't believe it can't be done, but I don't have the heart to write a story about a Civ 5 game.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
I haven't tried Civ5 yet. What's it like? I expected it to be much more war-centric than Civ4 and less simulating (Although god is Civ4 little of a simulator) but more streamlined and generally better in most aspects.
nutranurse
Unlikeliest of Slash Fics
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2009
- Messages
- 2,077
It's kind of lacking. I do not quite know how to describe it, but it's lost the "one more turn" feel that civ4 had. There just is not much to do in the game anymore other than win/lose through min/maxing.
- Status
Similar threads
