San Francisco, 1:23 AM
Wed Dec 16
25 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz |
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders |
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner |
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis |
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan |
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier |
Ed Grabianowski |
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan |
Lauren Davis |
Chris Hsiang |
Lynn Peril |
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins |
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox |
Interns:
Tim Barribeau |
Julia Carusillo |
Alex Eichler |
Cyriaque Lamar |
Caitlin Petrakovitz |
Mary Ratliff |
Josh Snyder |
Hahah, man, did you ever read about those crazy Frenchmen that owned the only automobile in France, and used it to rob banks and escape the police? Where was that, hang on, wait...
Edited by braak: You are, as usual, completely correct. at 12/10/09 10:15 AM
braak: You are, as usual, completely correct. was starred
braak: You are, as usual, completely correct. was unstarred
All technology can be used for nefarious purposes, but that shouldn't limit our technological progress. What it should do, however, is put the onus on us as a society to discourage such uses and, ideally, make it so there is no place for crime.
@TemporalSword: what does that even mean, really? crime being a subjectively defined category of acts what would it mean to 'make it so there is no place for crime.' all we need do is change our definintion of crime and there wouldn't be any.
no, crime is defined as such because no other mechanism but the threat of direct punishment exists to balance the reward for an activity. there can be no such thing as a society that both defines crime and has no place for it, it is a contradiction in terms.
@tetracycloide: I would argue that a strong majority of crime is based on need; you rob because you're poor and need the money, or you steal because you need something but can't afford it. In a proto-typical "future utopia", everyone gets what they need and I think the crime rate drops substantially. Yes, of course there will always be some crime, based on jealousy and power, etc.
My point is, while the utopia is an ideal and not a practical reality, it should be something we continually strive for as a society. Teach our kids not to hate based on race or religion, not to take what isn't theirs, and to respect others. This will try to address the other reasons for crime.
If we can overcome man's inherent self-centered nature and provide for everyone (as best we can), then I think crime, however you define it, will no longer be the problem it is today, and we can worry less about thieves using planes (or the next technological breakthrough) for evil purposes.
@TemporalSword: ahh, but if no one needs anything why would stealing still be a crime? why would anyone need to own anything if everything you could ever need is readily available?
@tetracycloide: I always felt like this was why talking about future Star Trek world as being Communist wasn't really accurate. They've got limitless property access--whatever this future society is using to measure status against each other (this is assuming that's an instinct that won't go away), it's not going to be private property.
The Federation isn't a Communist society, it's a society that just doesn't give a crap about having things.
@TemporalSword: True, some crime arises from need. More or maybe even most arise from want but NOT need.
My friend is a public defender and many of his cases are hard pressed to even explain why they did what they did. The ones with solid reasons usually - and I mean a two thirds majority usually - steal to buy drugs. Drugs are a want and NOT a need. They even admit that they'd rather not use drugs in the first place.
Then there is the third category of crime - emotion. Jealousy, hate, rage.
I am willing to bet my remote microwave cardiac detonation device (a steal at $599.99) that those who steal from pure need (food, shelter) are in the extreme minority. Say 20%.
@Vexxarr: Well, I think most addicts would disagree on whether they think its want or need, but certainly, the drug trade as a major source of crime would be a third source that I hadn't considered.
@TemporalSword: Admittedly want and need blur in this area but speaking strictly from a Brian's - a public defender's - perspective, they know it's not a need.
@Vexxarr: want and need are the same thing. from an individual's perspective they may be different but as far as everyone else is concerned all things most people think of as 'needs' are really all born out of a want to survive.
@tetracycloide: I'm not sure that your point isn't at least partially self-contradictory.
The use of the term 'want' as in "want to survive" is vague and somewhat innacurate. While an arbitrary standard, the will to survive (neither want nor need but impulse) is typically accepted as a moral imperative.
In this context, a need is something literally life sustaining as you say and a want is is something associated with comfort. While austere, this definition does draw a stark contrast between wants and needs.
Now to the individual in question, the distinction between wants and needs can become confused by drugs, emotions and physical duress. And i will concede that when extreme physical discomfort - cold, pain, fear comes into play there is room for debate.
@Vexxarr: again, i think want and need only contrast from an individual's perspective. from any other perspective, another individual's or the a group's for example, there is no 'need' for them to survive. survival is a comfort, there's no contrast between the two.
@tetracycloide: I have to disagree. This line of reasoning seems semantical.
In your context, there is no 'need' for the universe exist. All I was saying is that given that virtually all philosophical frameworks define survival as a moral imperative. From that assumption, there are drives impulses that arise directly from the survival instinct - food, shelter, water - and those that arise from a desire for comfort - wealth, possessions, delicacies.
There is an obvious empirical contrast: deprive any individual of their wants and they may be unhappy. Deprive any individual of their 'needs' as defined above and they die. You can argue that there is no 'need' for anyone to survive. That is not the issue. The issue is whether for humans on earth if there is a difference between want and need. There clearly is.
Just recently I was in Los Alamos and went to the Bradbury Science Museum (named after a Los Alamos Lab director). It was great fun, full of science, technology, and history displays. But it does have an element of the "Hey, Kids, nuclear weapons are fun!" kind of thing. Of course, that totally works for me, but may not be everyone's cup of tea.
The "Remember my Forgotten Man" number would work really well with the Matrix visuals... and, as far as her lapsing into pig latin (or the same lyrics 3 times in "forgotten man"), I think they were just padding the hell out of these films... 20 minutes of story stretched out to 90...
@Annalee Newitz: Oh, to be sure, these guys did a great job. That was more a dig on old trailers, which tend to linger waaaaay too long on chosen sound bites and presentational shots, then jump cut through others.
I mean, check out how long they let Ned Sparks' monologue run in the Gold Diggers trailer. That's ages in trailer-time. And during some transitions, you can see remnants of discarded clips they chose not to use.
The worst offender is the "Miracle on 34th Street" trailer. It's like a bloody short film it's so long, and still fails to explain what the hell it's about. Amazing and bewildering, all at once. I highly recommend it.
I love 'em, the old ones, but good lord do they suck.
@Anekanta - killed by a cacodemon: As noted, it's good old-fashioned Pig Latin which was inexplicably, ridiculously popular back in HPL's day, and she did indeed practice it for hours. OTOH, even at that tender age, she was of course the tremendously-talented-yet-often-underrated Ginger Rogers, and so probably nailed it perfectly on the first take...
By very definition, anything is better as a musical.
I have to admit, "The Matrix" should be up-tempo and could have used more 80's/90's R/B divas. Maybe a subtle recast with Patti LaBelle as Oracle, Deborah Cox as Trinity, that sort of thing.
The Thunderpussy remix of the CD will make a MINT on the dance circuit.
12/10/09
The Bonnot Gang
[en.wikipedia.org]
I used them in my Rethinking Irma Vep for Warren Ellis's Remake/Reimagine project.
12/10/09
12/10/09
no, crime is defined as such because no other mechanism but the threat of direct punishment exists to balance the reward for an activity. there can be no such thing as a society that both defines crime and has no place for it, it is a contradiction in terms.
12/10/09
My point is, while the utopia is an ideal and not a practical reality, it should be something we continually strive for as a society. Teach our kids not to hate based on race or religion, not to take what isn't theirs, and to respect others. This will try to address the other reasons for crime.
If we can overcome man's inherent self-centered nature and provide for everyone (as best we can), then I think crime, however you define it, will no longer be the problem it is today, and we can worry less about thieves using planes (or the next technological breakthrough) for evil purposes.
12/10/09
12/10/09
The Federation isn't a Communist society, it's a society that just doesn't give a crap about having things.
12/10/09
My friend is a public defender and many of his cases are hard pressed to even explain why they did what they did. The ones with solid reasons usually - and I mean a two thirds majority usually - steal to buy drugs. Drugs are a want and NOT a need. They even admit that they'd rather not use drugs in the first place.
Then there is the third category of crime - emotion. Jealousy, hate, rage.
I am willing to bet my remote microwave cardiac detonation device (a steal at $599.99) that those who steal from pure need (food, shelter) are in the extreme minority. Say 20%.
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
The use of the term 'want' as in "want to survive" is vague and somewhat innacurate. While an arbitrary standard, the will to survive (neither want nor need but impulse) is typically accepted as a moral imperative.
In this context, a need is something literally life sustaining as you say and a want is is something associated with comfort. While austere, this definition does draw a stark contrast between wants and needs.
Now to the individual in question, the distinction between wants and needs can become confused by drugs, emotions and physical duress. And i will concede that when extreme physical discomfort - cold, pain, fear comes into play there is room for debate.
12/11/09
12/11/09
In your context, there is no 'need' for the universe exist. All I was saying is that given that virtually all philosophical frameworks define survival as a moral imperative. From that assumption, there are drives impulses that arise directly from the survival instinct - food, shelter, water - and those that arise from a desire for comfort - wealth, possessions, delicacies.
There is an obvious empirical contrast: deprive any individual of their wants and they may be unhappy. Deprive any individual of their 'needs' as defined above and they die. You can argue that there is no 'need' for anyone to survive. That is not the issue. The issue is whether for humans on earth if there is a difference between want and need. There clearly is.
12/01/09
12/01/09
11/25/09
huh.
I guess the Matrix is perfect for this parody...
11/25/09
11/25/09
11/25/09
11/25/09
I mean, check out how long they let Ned Sparks' monologue run in the Gold Diggers trailer. That's ages in trailer-time. And during some transitions, you can see remnants of discarded clips they chose not to use.
The worst offender is the "Miracle on 34th Street" trailer. It's like a bloody short film it's so long, and still fails to explain what the hell it's about. Amazing and bewildering, all at once. I highly recommend it.
I love 'em, the old ones, but good lord do they suck.
11/25/09
11/25/09
11/25/09
Still no match for Busby Berkley, though.
11/25/09
11/25/09
11/25/09
11/25/09
11/25/09
11/26/09
11/25/09
I have to admit, "The Matrix" should be up-tempo and could have used more 80's/90's R/B divas. Maybe a subtle recast with Patti LaBelle as Oracle, Deborah Cox as Trinity, that sort of thing.
The Thunderpussy remix of the CD will make a MINT on the dance circuit.
11/25/09
11/26/09
#calendar
11/25/09
10/23/09