|
Architecture and Design - Building design/construction and related topics.
|
|
|
|
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by Warm Worm on September 17, 2008, 4:37 pm
Kris Krieger wrote:
show/hide quoted text
>
>> Kris Krieger wrote:
>>>>> george conklin wrote:
>>>>>> )
>>>>>>> At any rate, with regard to "fresh", (storage-ripened, GM,
>>>>>>> irradiated, etc.) veggies all year round, some are beginning to
>>>>>>> talk about _how_ they get them from wherever out of season; as well
>>>>>>> as about growing locally... Perhaps commerce ships will use sails
>>>>>>> again. (kind of like Amish technology)
>>>>>> It was technology, not "modern" medicine, which brought down the
>>>>>> death
>>>>>> rates from their historic highs, the demographic transition. Moving
>>>>>> food long distances was a good bit of the drop. Local? That
>>>>>> equates with famine.
>>>>> I'm all for "technology", given the wise application of it, and I see
>>>>> a lot of questionable applications.
>>>>> I'm also cautious about the context in which we view death-rates,
>>>>> such as, for some examples, over scales of time (in their
>>>>> postponement or inevitability); in historical records;
>>>>> quality-of-life; or the inherent effects of population-expansion on,
>>>>> say, the ecosystem. If I'm "not living", I might as well be dead.
>>>>> Plumbing as a "technology", for another example, only goes so far if
>>>>> it ends up as raw, untreated sewage in our oceans. Likewise with
>>>>> mass-production plastic manufacturing in reference to the floating
>>>>> plastic garbage dump in the middle of the Pacific.
>>>>> The concern with using technology to treat problems brought about by
>>>>> technology also comes to mind.
>>>>> It's not so much technology, as the capacity to think wisely and
>>>>> desire to live truly happily.
>>>> Clean water was one of the real benefits of industrialization.
>>>> Factories needed lots of water, and water works were needed. So, yes,
>>>> plumbing was part of the solution.
>>> Er, water delivery over distances, and the advantages of washing, were
>>> figured out by the Romans, Arabs, and Chinese long before the
>>> industrial revolution.
>>>> Sorry you don't think so. And
>>>> transporting food long distances was essential too. Bad diets = early
>>>> death.
>>> Hot house vegetables can be grown locally, as opposed to importing hot-
>>> house vegetables from far away. For example, the local (Houston area)
>>> grocery sells some types of hot-house tomatoes from Canada. THere's
>>> something weird about that.
>>> Also, fruits, etc., which have to be picked green because they'd
>>> otherwise rot on theri way from Chile or oher distant areas have been
>>> shown to be lower in nutrients than ripe gruit and vegetables. So
>>> sorry, but there are advantages to "going local".
>> Good points in support.
>
> Here is an anecdote.
>
> When I lived in Vancouver, BC, I noticed that the beef all strted to taste
> "off" - I cut waaaay back on it because I felt like I was eating spoiled or
> partially-spoiled meat, that is how nasty the stuff started tasting.
> Turned out that the good Canadian beef was being exported, and teh local
> stores were getting in Brazilian beef, becaust it was "more profitable".
> Nobody ever asked whetehr we might want to at least have teh *opportunity*
> to pay mroe for better beef - they just up and switched the supply. I
> wonder whether rising fuel prices nixed that...
More stuff to incense. >:\
|
|
Posted by Amy Blankenship on September 6, 2008, 8:13 pm
On Sep 6, 9:37 am, "Amy Blankenship"
show/hide quoted text
> >> I'm really curious, Jack. Why are you so terrified that people might be
> >> able to live in an environment where they could drive less?
> > I am not terrified, its just a far less desirable life pushed by people
> > with the Technology Laggard mental condition. I have a lot of experience
> > with people that are mentally screwed up with this condition in multiple
> > technology areas.
> How is it less desirable to want to spend less of your time and money
> driving from store to store? Please explain.
For both of you, you have to realize that there are different strokes
for different folks. You can't impose your views or priorities on
other and there is no, single right answer. The best you can do is
make alternatives economically feasible.
-------------------------
Also note that Jack couldn't answer why it is more desirable to waste time
and money.
|
|
Posted by Warm Worm on September 13, 2008, 4:59 pm
Amy Blankenship wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> On Sep 6, 9:37 am, "Amy Blankenship"
>>>> I'm really curious, Jack. Why are you so terrified that people might be
>>>> able to live in an environment where they could drive less?
>>> I am not terrified, its just a far less desirable life pushed by people
>>> with the Technology Laggard mental condition. I have a lot of experience
>>> with people that are mentally screwed up with this condition in multiple
>>> technology areas.
>> How is it less desirable to want to spend less of your time and money
>> driving from store to store? Please explain.
>
> For both of you, you have to realize that there are different strokes
> for different folks. You can't impose your views or priorities on
> other and there is no, single right answer. The best you can do is
> make alternatives economically feasible.
> -------------------------
> Also note that Jack couldn't answer why it is more desirable to waste time
> and money.
What? So it's not my newsgroup server? ;)
|
|
Posted by Kris Krieger on September 7, 2008, 3:49 pm
1ba11a644dd1@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com:
[snip]
show/hide quoted text
>
> Driving. I'm okay with it. I can think, listen to books, and talk on
> the phone. It's not bid deal. But it's given me the ability to live
> in a small down in the middle of nowhere. I can work out of my house,
> have time for the kids, etc. From my perspective, I think both of you
> are whooped. But again, maybe I'm not the most mainstream guy,
> either.
The point was not about any/all driving, the point was about driving short
distances (that are nevertheless too long to walk esp., as I had very
specifically noted, in very hot, humid weather, or in bitterly cold
weather) to go from one cluster of small shops, to another, and questioning
whether it is efficient, and whetehrit's desireable to build more of them,
especially when that sort of stop-and-go short-distance driving is known to
both stress a car's engine, and make gas mileage plummet.
(BTW, both of whom.....?)
show/hide quoted text
>
> So Amy likes walkable communities. Good for her. Jack recognized
> that most people don't give a d**n about planning -- they just want to
> live their lives, work their jobs, eat their TV dinners, and watch
> American Idol. Good for Jack and good for them.
>
> People will make their decisions based on their likes, dislikes, and
> economics. So the more option we have available, the better.
> Everyone is out making good choices, from their own perspective.
>
That is where reliance upon the gov.t to "fix things" is extremely naive,
because gov.t only changes when people demand that it change, pressure it
to do so.
OTOH, it's conversely extremely cynical to say that people simply do not
give a damn. Maybe I've just know weird people, but most of the people
I've known, and lived near, *do* give a damn - they just have no idea what
they *can* do, and they also have limited time (due to working and family
and so on) to devote to doing it. Hell, *I* don't know exactly what I, as
one person, can do. So folks end up frustrated, concentrate on work,
family, and friends, and just cope as best they can with situations they
don't like but feel they can't change. And yes, unscrupulous politicians
and business people *do* take advantage of that, and therefore can get away
with claiming that poorly-working situations are "efficient", when in
reality, they aren't, but people find ways to cope with the situations.
What appears to be "apathy" can all too often be frustration that "you
can't fight city hall", and what appears to be "efficiency" is all too
often just the fact that people can adapt to cope with all sorts of
situations.
|
|
Posted by Kris Krieger on September 6, 2008, 3:24 pm
show/hide quoted text
>
>> I'm really curious, Jack. Why are you so terrified that people might
>> be able to live in an environment where they could drive less?
>
> I am not terrified, its just a far less desirable life pushed by people
> with the Technology Laggard mental condition. I have a lot of
> experience with people that are mentally screwed up with this condition
> in multiple technology areas.
>
> They all act the same way. They lie a lot and have great difficulty
> dealing with reality. They are not fun and I prefer to avoid these
> troubled people. All that can be done is to correct them in the futile
> hope that they can ever become rational in normal society.
>
>
Hmmm. I like all sorts of tech - tech improves medical diagnosis and
treatment, improves quality of live, keeps my house insulated and cooler,
powers my 4GB of RAM, allows me to ahve a nearly-zero-maintenence pool, and
so on.
But I loathe driving, and esp. loathe driving through strip malls trying to
find some store (esp. when I can get the same thing online, or when the local
stores don't even carry the item I want).
I also prefer a parking garage with areas of trees preserved (esp. when I can
walk in shade from the parking, to the store/mall) (which means a lot durint
hte SUmmer in the Houston area and other Southern cities/towns), to acres of
hot parking lots where you have to make long hikes from the car over a baking
black desoalte stretch of tar.
So that prefrence makes me a "liar" and a "technology laggard", too, I
suppose?
show/hide quoted text
=>:-p
|
Page 5 of 6 < 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Re: Design: Pedestrians, bikes, etc. | September 5, 2008, 4:29 pm |
| Re: Design: Pedestrians, bikes, etc. | September 6, 2008, 12:05 am |
| Re: Design: Pedestrians, bikes, etc. | September 6, 2008, 4:54 pm |
| Re: Design: Pedestrians, bikes, etc. | September 6, 2008, 8:03 pm |
| Re: Design: Pedestrians, bikes, etc. | September 6, 2008, 9:33 pm |
| Re: Design: Pedestrians, bikes, etc. | September 7, 2008, 3:09 pm |
| Why Buildings Design Firms FAIL to Optimize Their Design?! | March 14, 2009, 10:34 pm |
| Interior Design Service Online Expands with A La Carte Interior Design | December 18, 2008, 2:59 pm |
| how would I get a design for this? | October 29, 2007, 6:30 pm |
| Design Ideas | May 15, 2007, 2:29 am |
|
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
>> Kris Krieger wrote:
>>>>> george conklin wrote:
>>>>>> )
>>>>>>> At any rate, with regard to "fresh", (storage-ripened, GM,
>>>>>>> irradiated, etc.) veggies all year round, some are beginning to
>>>>>>> talk about _how_ they get them from wherever out of season; as well
>>>>>>> as about growing locally... Perhaps commerce ships will use sails
>>>>>>> again. (kind of like Amish technology)
>>>>>> It was technology, not "modern" medicine, which brought down the
>>>>>> death
>>>>>> rates from their historic highs, the demographic transition. Moving
>>>>>> food long distances was a good bit of the drop. Local? That
>>>>>> equates with famine.
>>>>> I'm all for "technology", given the wise application of it, and I see
>>>>> a lot of questionable applications.
>>>>> I'm also cautious about the context in which we view death-rates,
>>>>> such as, for some examples, over scales of time (in their
>>>>> postponement or inevitability); in historical records;
>>>>> quality-of-life; or the inherent effects of population-expansion on,
>>>>> say, the ecosystem. If I'm "not living", I might as well be dead.
>>>>> Plumbing as a "technology", for another example, only goes so far if
>>>>> it ends up as raw, untreated sewage in our oceans. Likewise with
>>>>> mass-production plastic manufacturing in reference to the floating
>>>>> plastic garbage dump in the middle of the Pacific.
>>>>> The concern with using technology to treat problems brought about by
>>>>> technology also comes to mind.
>>>>> It's not so much technology, as the capacity to think wisely and
>>>>> desire to live truly happily.
>>>> Clean water was one of the real benefits of industrialization.
>>>> Factories needed lots of water, and water works were needed. So, yes,
>>>> plumbing was part of the solution.
>>> Er, water delivery over distances, and the advantages of washing, were
>>> figured out by the Romans, Arabs, and Chinese long before the
>>> industrial revolution.
>>>> Sorry you don't think so. And
>>>> transporting food long distances was essential too. Bad diets = early
>>>> death.
>>> Hot house vegetables can be grown locally, as opposed to importing hot-
>>> house vegetables from far away. For example, the local (Houston area)
>>> grocery sells some types of hot-house tomatoes from Canada. THere's
>>> something weird about that.
>>> Also, fruits, etc., which have to be picked green because they'd
>>> otherwise rot on theri way from Chile or oher distant areas have been
>>> shown to be lower in nutrients than ripe gruit and vegetables. So
>>> sorry, but there are advantages to "going local".
>> Good points in support.
>
> Here is an anecdote.
>
> When I lived in Vancouver, BC, I noticed that the beef all strted to taste
> "off" - I cut waaaay back on it because I felt like I was eating spoiled or
> partially-spoiled meat, that is how nasty the stuff started tasting.
> Turned out that the good Canadian beef was being exported, and teh local
> stores were getting in Brazilian beef, becaust it was "more profitable".
> Nobody ever asked whetehr we might want to at least have teh *opportunity*
> to pay mroe for better beef - they just up and switched the supply. I
> wonder whether rising fuel prices nixed that...
More stuff to incense. >:\