The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
>On 29/10/2024 22:22, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2024-10-29, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The cornucopians think there will always be a technological fix. Someday
>>> they will reach into the hat to pull out the next rabbit and find out
>>> there ain't no more rabbits.
>>
>> "Cornucopians" - love it. That's a keeper.
>>
>It's a well known term for a clearly defined set of people who - lacking
>any STEM knowledge themselves - confidently predict that technology will
>save them, resources will never run out and the only limit is human
>imagination.
>
>They are similar to the Greens in their adherence to faith based
>arguments based on no facts whatsoever.
>
>They tend to be American, because the USA is probably the richest nation

The "D" cornucopian troll appears to be an unhappy swede.

On 30/10/2024 14:15, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> On 29/10/2024 22:22, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-29, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The cornucopians think there will always be a technological fix. Someday
>>>> they will reach into the hat to pull out the next rabbit and find out
>>>> there ain't no more rabbits.
>>>
>>> "Cornucopians" - love it. That's a keeper.
>>>
>> It's a well known term for a clearly defined set of people who - lacking
>> any STEM knowledge themselves - confidently predict that technology will
>> save them, resources will never run out and the only limit is human
>> imagination.
>>
>> They are similar to the Greens in their adherence to faith based
>> arguments based on no facts whatsoever.
>>
>> They tend to be American, because the USA is probably the richest nation
>
> The "D" cornucopian troll appears to be an unhappy swede.
>
Really?

Sweden is going more right wing these days - nuclear power, fuck the
muslims, and so on.

--
“It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
who pay no price for being wrong.”

Thomas Sowell

In article <loctfjF6l90U3@mid.individual.net>,
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>I can never remember if high time preference or low time preference is the
>one that thinks '$100 today is better than a tomorrow that may never come'
>but it does seem to be the dominant philosophy.

That's high time preference. From
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167739X21004982:

"Someone with a high time preference is highly focused on their well-being
in the present and the immediate future (a 'today person'), whereas
someone with a low time preference places more emphasis on their well-being
in the more distant future (a 'tomorrow person')."

--
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

On 30/10/2024 15:23, Scott Alfter wrote:
> In article <loctfjF6l90U3@mid.individual.net>,
> rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>> I can never remember if high time preference or low time preference is the
>> one that thinks '$100 today is better than a tomorrow that may never come'
>> but it does seem to be the dominant philosophy.
>
> That's high time preference. From
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167739X21004982:
>
> "Someone with a high time preference is highly focused on their well-being
> in the present and the immediate future (a 'today person'), whereas
> someone with a low time preference places more emphasis on their well-being
> in the more distant future (a 'tomorrow person')."
>
Time span of discretion...from the 1960s

--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 30/10/2024 09:59, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 30 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 21:43:13 +0100, D wrote:
>>>
>>>> Many centuries left. We'll mine the ocean floors, we'll reach for the
>>>> stars (or at least asteroids). Eventually we'll expand beyond the earth.
>>>> The people predicting crashes and famines have been wrong every time,
>>>> except for when alternatives to capitalism has been tried. Then there
>>>> have been real famines.
>>>
>>> I worked summers for the NYS Dept. of Education and the basement corridors
>>> were filled with pallets of newspapers. (and 5 gallon buckets of water,
>>> reusable as toilets after the Ruskies attacked) I don't know if they were
>>> waiting to be microfilmed or stacked and forgotten.
>>>
>>> I mostly read the funnies and old ads but I found a trove of 1929
>>> editions. "The fundamentals are sound!" as they took the express route
>>> down from the 30th floor.
>>>
>>> I love a good science fiction yarn but I realize the space travel genre is
>>> mostly fiction. The dystopian worlds run by AI probably aren't.
>>
>> Well, it is future, so by design fuzzy around the edges. But looking at the
>> history of the planet, and the fact that despite being capable of
>> destroying our planet several times over, we've managed not to do so (with
>> all the crazy people in power) gives me enormous hope. Yes, I'm an
>> optimist!
>
> Oh we wont destroy the planet. Just our own civilization
> Read Joseph Tainter.

Doubtful. It will change form and shape. We might have a recession or two,
but it will hardly be the end of civilization.

> He lays it all oy very plainly. A society finds a better way to exploit
> nature. It grows, and extends, as it does so it needs rules and regulations
> laws taxes and competent bureaucrats. Then its resource base starts to get
> strained, and it needs even more complexity and bureaucracy to keep it going.
> Eventually the quality of people needed to keep it going also runs out.
> And it collapses into autonomous fragments.

What I think will happen in the near term is that socialism will
temporarily destroy a lot of value in the world, in line with what Joseph
says. This is proven, and a fact, and should not surprise anyone.

But as we've done in the past, we learn the lessons, start again. End of
civilization? Hardly. A bump in the road, definitely.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 30/10/2024 11:44, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 30 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 29/10/2024 22:22, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-29, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The cornucopians think there will always be a technological fix. Someday
>>>>> they will reach into the hat to pull out the next rabbit and find out
>>>>> there ain't no more rabbits.
>>>>
>>>> "Cornucopians" - love it.  That's a keeper.
>>>>
>>> It's a well known term for a clearly defined set of people who - lacking
>>> any STEM knowledge themselves - confidently predict that technology will
>>> save them, resources will never run out and the only limit is human
>>> imagination.
>>>
>>> They are similar to the Greens in their adherence to faith based arguments
>>> based on no facts whatsoever.
>>>
>>> They tend to be American, because the USA is probably the richest nation
>>> in terms of natural resources per capita.  And because it has no history
>>> at all, is inclined to disbelieve its lessons
>>>
>>> Here in Europe we have lived through many a resource limited collapse.
>>
>> Yet here we are, having it better than we ever had historically.
>>
> No. Frankly we are not.
> Life in the 1960s was a lot more fun.

For some, but if you look at the statistics, not for the majority of the
planet, as I said above.

>> On the other hand, the eternal negative can take refuge in the fact that
>> the universe will die the heat death, so from that point of view, why
>> bother with anything at all? ;)
>>
>
> Indeed. Because its fun basically,
>
> Enjoy surfing that entropy wave., It wont last forever

That's a truism if we look at billions of years, but hardly interesting at
all from the point of view of humanity.

I'll enjoy a bright and prosperous future, and the great thing is, that
people who think all will come tumbling down, are free to terminate the
their lives and their miserable experiences earlier if they so wish. Since
very few do it, I can only deduce by their actions, that at some level,
they do think it is more worthwhile living, so some form of positivity
does indeed exist deep down. ;)

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> On 29/10/2024 22:22, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-29, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The cornucopians think there will always be a technological fix. Someday
>>>> they will reach into the hat to pull out the next rabbit and find out
>>>> there ain't no more rabbits.
>>>
>>> "Cornucopians" - love it. That's a keeper.
>>>
>> It's a well known term for a clearly defined set of people who - lacking
>> any STEM knowledge themselves - confidently predict that technology will
>> save them, resources will never run out and the only limit is human
>> imagination.
>>
>> They are similar to the Greens in their adherence to faith based
>> arguments based on no facts whatsoever.
>>
>> They tend to be American, because the USA is probably the richest nation
>
> The "D" cornucopian troll appears to be an unhappy swede.

And Scott an unhappy socialist homo?

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 30/10/2024 14:15, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>> On 29/10/2024 22:22, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-29, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The cornucopians think there will always be a technological fix. Someday
>>>>> they will reach into the hat to pull out the next rabbit and find out
>>>>> there ain't no more rabbits.
>>>>
>>>> "Cornucopians" - love it. That's a keeper.
>>>>
>>> It's a well known term for a clearly defined set of people who - lacking
>>> any STEM knowledge themselves - confidently predict that technology will
>>> save them, resources will never run out and the only limit is human
>>> imagination.
>>>
>>> They are similar to the Greens in their adherence to faith based
>>> arguments based on no facts whatsoever.
>>>
>>> They tend to be American, because the USA is probably the richest nation
>>
>> The "D" cornucopian troll appears to be an unhappy swede.
>>
> Really?
>
> Sweden is going more right wing these days - nuclear power, fuck the muslims,
> and so on.

On the surface this is true, but underneath, sweden is destroyed.
Socialism is deeply engrained, so don't be fooled by any cosmetics you
might read in the newspapers.

But yes, in the short term, there have been a few mm shift towards the
right, and that's better than nothing I guess.

Fortunately the world is a big place, so there's plenty of white and low
tax areas to move to! =)

On 30/10/2024 17:33, D wrote:
>
And it collapses into autonomous fragments.
>
> What I think will happen in the near term is that socialism will
> temporarily destroy a lot of value in the world, in line with what
> Joseph says. This is proven, and a fact, and should not surprise anyone.
>
> But as we've done in the past, we learn the lessons, start again. End of
> civilization? Hardly. A bump in the road, definitely.

Well end of THIS civilisation, then.
Tainter didn't say that all civilisations end simultaneously.

We will descend into near barbarism under Islam, or the chinese will
wander in.

--
Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the
gospel of envy.

Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 30/10/2024 17:33, D wrote:
>>
> And it collapses into autonomous fragments.
>>
>> What I think will happen in the near term is that socialism will
>> temporarily destroy a lot of value in the world, in line with what Joseph
>> says. This is proven, and a fact, and should not surprise anyone.
>>
>> But as we've done in the past, we learn the lessons, start again. End of
>> civilization? Hardly. A bump in the road, definitely.
>
> Well end of THIS civilisation, then.
> Tainter didn't say that all civilisations end simultaneously.
>
> We will descend into near barbarism under Islam, or the chinese will wander
> in.

I agree to disagree. Hopefully we will never know the answer in case he
is right, and hopefully we will, if I am! =)

On 2024-10-30, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 22:22:00 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2024-10-29, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The cornucopians think there will always be a technological fix.
>>> Someday they will reach into the hat to pull out the next rabbit and
>>> find out there ain't no more rabbits.
>>
>> "Cornucopians" - love it. That's a keeper.
>>
>> As I once heard on a program on the topic, "Science can't make the sun
>> shine brighter or the rivers run faster."
>
> The term has been around for a long time.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornucopianism
>
> Henry George had some interesting ideas but he went off the rails on that
> one.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon%E2%80%93Ehrlich_wager
>
> Simon won for that specific decade and was wise to take a pass on the
> second one proposed.

It looks as if there was a lot of careful cherry-picking involved.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey

On 2024-10-30, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 22:22:00 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> As I once heard on a program on the topic, "Science can't make the sun
>> shine brighter or the rivers run faster."
>
> Think of artificial night-time lighting running off stored solar power
> gathered in the day-time: it does better than making the sun shine
> brighter, doesn’t it? It makes it shine when it wouldn’t shine at all.
>
> Further: When you dam up a river, the outflow runs faster.

The point of the article wasn't the peak output, but that we can't
increase total insolation, or the total volume of water flowing in
the river - both of which are needed by a policy of unlimited growth.

> Moral: beware of folksy, misleading epithets from the anti-scientists.

Moral 2: beware of misinterpretations.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 08:37:50 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Guns don't create any wealth. At best they could simply limit survival
> to people with guns who ate all the rest

The ones with food >> the ones with guns.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 20:48:51 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> The point of the article wasn't the peak output, but that we can't
> increase total insolation, or the total volume of water flowing in the
> river - both of which are needed by a policy of unlimited growth.

So we look for alternative energy sources, and alternative sources of
fresh water. Like the fact that rivers do not retain all the fresh water
that falls from the sky. And that we can build our own water-freshening
systems.

So my moral still stands: beware of folksy, misleading epithets from the
anti-scientists. Or maybe not anti-science as such, just science-ignorant.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 08:35:52 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> They tend to be American, because the USA is probably the richest nation
> in terms of natural resources per capita. And because it has no history
> at all, is inclined to disbelieve its lessons

Given the rise of the anti-science movement within the USA, somehow I
don’t think this is true any more. When you are not anchored in history
(which the Americas have in plenty, but which their Anglo inhabitants, in
particular, choose to ignore), you can easily flip either way.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 18:33:03 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> We will descend into near barbarism under Islam ...

Just a note that Islam played its part in propagating the culture of
learning inherited from the ancient Greeks, back when the Christians’ idea
of “learning” was making elaborately-illuminated copies of their holy
books.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 18:33:25 +0100, D wrote:

> But as we've done in the past, we learn the lessons, start again. End of
> civilization? Hardly. A bump in the road, definitely.

I haven't read Tainter but I have visited most the the Chaco culture sites
in the US SW. Chaco Canyon is particularly impressive, in the size of the
primary site and the network of roads to the outliers. The roads are
enigmatic. There is no evidence the Ansazi used the wheel although there
are children's pull toys that show they understood the concept.

The culture is gone. The same can be said for the Mound Builders in the
eastern US. You might say civilization was alive and well in contemporary
Europe, but it was vanishing in the Americas about a millennium ago.

He was a one trick pony but Miller's 'A Canticle for Leibowitz' os the
more likely account of the future.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 21:02:08 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 18:33:03 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> We will descend into near barbarism under Islam ...
>
> Just a note that Islam played its part in propagating the culture of
> learning inherited from the ancient Greeks, back when the Christians’
> idea of “learning” was making elaborately-illuminated copies of their
> holy books.

Spengler saw the Abbasid Caliphate as the late phase of the Arabian
culture before it devolved into the Seljuk empire. Al-Andalus is long gone
to be replaced by fellaheen with suicide vasts.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 07:20:40 -0300, Shadow wrote:

> On 30 Oct 2024 00:17:17 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 20:12:24 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> Or the economic system collapses and governments simply stop paying
>>> civil servants, public sector workers and pensioners anything at all.
>>> along with people on social security.
>>
>>The retirees on SS would be a bit upset. Many of them in the US have
>>more guns than teeth.
>
> You mean they could sell their guns? Good idea, but who would
> want to buy them?
> []'s

Hold that thought.

https://wiki.lspace.org/Silver_Horde

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 12:43:03 +0100, D wrote:

> Oh but they are. Today they are called mexicans, italians, greek,
> arabians etc. and from a material and quality of life point of view,
> they've never had it better.

Tell that to a mestizo picking lettuce in central California.

On 31 Oct 2024 00:06:33 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> You might say civilization was alive and well in
> contemporary Europe, but it was vanishing in the Americas about a
> millennium ago.

Civilization originated in Mesopotamia. I have a book in my shelf on a
generalist introduction to the archaeology of the earliest civilizations,
and it has a specific set of features that a society has to have to be
classed as a “civilization”:

* Urbanization
* Division of labour
* Metalworking
* Writing

On 31 Oct 2024 00:16:44 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> Al-Andalus is long gone ...

It did last about 700 years. How long has your “empire” been in existence?

During the Islamic Golden Age, Toledo was a meeting place of cultures --
Christian, Muslim, Jewish -- and a seething ferment of ideas.

On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 01:57:05 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 31 Oct 2024 00:06:33 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> You might say civilization was alive and well in contemporary Europe,
>> but it was vanishing in the Americas about a millennium ago.
>
> Civilization originated in Mesopotamia. I have a book in my shelf on a
> generalist introduction to the archaeology of the earliest
> civilizations,
> and it has a specific set of features that a society has to have to be
> classed as a “civilization”:
>
> * Urbanization * Division of labour * Metalworking * Writing

Obviously written by an archaeologist who thought western civilization was
hot shit. Spengler puts civilization as the late stage of a culture before
its decline.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 02:00:33 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> On 10/29/24 9:24 PM, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 00:14:28 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> Microsoft released its “AI Workstation” development platform for
>>> Windows. And guess what: WSL2 is a requirement.
>>>
>>> Can you say “slippery slope” ... ?
>>
>> Supposedly you can make Docker Desktop work without WSL but I don't
>> think it's very happy.
>
> Step by step by step, M$ is encouraging standards/approaches that
> REQUIRE it's own methods/systems/software.

Actually, more and more they are requiring Linux. I wouldn’t say it’s a
conscious strategy, it’s just the path of least resistance, once you have
a powerful, functional Linux kernel present, it’s easier to rely on that
than try to reinvent the wheel in your own proprietary fashion, and
getting it wrong.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 01:55:35 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> SQL and flat-file DBs are kind of the all-gobbling monsters.
>
> But MV is still the better, saner, way to organize many kinds of
> data.

The trouble with unnormalized fields is: how do you do updates? You have
to delete all the values and insert them all again.