[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Politikal Korrektness rears its appearance-challenged head
> > >Low tech is more durable, more survivable, more portable, cheaper to
> > >produce and
> > >easier to replace,
> > Welcome Luddite brother. But the above is untrue. You can stamp out a CD
> > for a buck or less. Publishing on the web is as cheap as it gets. Maybe
> > newsprint is as cheap as a CD, but not as durable.
> But it is elitist. Still today only 50% of people in the world have
> access to the telephone.
I think that you're right. As a matter of fact, if I remember correctly, a
similar percentage of people in the world are illiterate, so *books* are
elitist and we shouldn't use them either. And the same is probably true of
indoor toilets, so we should all squat over holes in the ground. Least common
denominator in all things, right on! Let's all run around naked and live in
> I prefer the low tech because it has more potential for
> more people,
Yes, putting out pots to catch rain water is much better than using solar
distillation technology, and carrying messages to remote villages by camel is
far preferable to forcing them to travel in those cramped little wires. And
dying of diptheria or smallpox is much better than exposing yourself to
*vaccines*! None of that high-tech stuff for me! No, sirree! None of them
printing presses, and *certainly* no photopolymer plates! Those things could
cause CANCER for God's sake!
> apart from all the hazards connected to the workers in the
> computer industry.
I'd respond to that, but I can't seem to coordinate the extra fingers I've
grown as a result of exposure to CRTs over the past fifteen years. And stop
stepping on my tentacles!
> I'm also worried about what virtual reality is doing
> to reality.
Which is...? I don't know about your reality -- which seems like it must be a
pretty peculiar one -- but mine hasn't been affected much... aside from the
flying monkeys that keep buzzing my keyboard. Get away from there, you!