>The question isn't so much technology for the moment, but what kind
>of developmental path to follow. I suspect that lots of advocates of
>appropriate technology would like to keep the technological level
>fairly static, and social structures oriented around the very local -
>and those in t
Davies, Daniel wrote:
>No fair. The EF Schumacher crowd are pretty non-judgemental on this sort of
>issue. "Appropriate technology" basically just means "technology that can
>be maintained and repaired without requiring an already existing industrial
>society"; those wind-up radios certainly co
L PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:28685] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Drudgery
Michael Perelman wrote:
>The Wall Street Journal article does not say that the grinder represented
>particularly modern technology; nor was it a commercial product. I think
>most people would regarded as an example of appro
>I agree, but then who judges accountants like Andersens? Other accountants?
>Does any profession ever pass adverse verdict on the leading lights of that
>profession?
>
Qui custodiet ipsos custodes? (Juvenal, Satires, if I recall). An old
question. I haven't got an easy answer. We have this di
>
>
>**Completely off the subject. Your answer to my question on legal briefs
>did not quite give the information I was looking for. Let me put it this
>way. Imagine I'm about to go to trial in a civil suit with a lot of money
>at stake. Taking your 15 hours a day for three weeks straight figu
At 01:29 PM 07/27/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Heavens, we don't want to quote the actual article, since it includes the
>observations of the women in question, rather than technological
>pessimists sitting in California. Of course, this may all just be
>capitalist propaganda - Thurow failed to call
I don't find the term appropriate technology patronizing. Shiva was
pretty accurate in what she said about the Green Revolution. Like the
Monsanto Roundup-ready genetically modified seeds, it was intended to use
more industrially produced fertilizers and pesticides. The grinder was
appropriate
Michael Perelman wrote:
>The Wall Street Journal article does not say that the grinder represented
>particularly modern technology; nor was it a commercial product. I think
>most people would regarded as an example of appropriate technology.
Don't you find something a touch patronizing about th
Justin Schwartz wrote:
>In my typical, class-blinkered, petty bourgeois manner, I am a real
>fan of expertise. Democracy has its place, but not in micro-managing
>the use of real expertise by real experts. There are skills that
>require long study and constant application to master, and where
The Wall Street Journal article does not say that the grinder represented
particularly modern technology; nor was it a commercial product. I think
most people would regarded as an example of appropriate technology.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 9
At 06:53 PM 07/26/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>This part is simply absurd! It's the software engineers, not Bill Gates
>et al who keep Microsoft undemocratic?
Well, I couldn't quite follow the argument's in Ian's post. When stuff gets
too abstract, I have problems. However, "writing unmaintainable c
Justin Schwartz wrote:
>
> Why would be a such a great idea to have the demos tell college
> professors how to run their shop? In most of this country, that would
> result in the shut-down of biological departments, except for ag depts,
> the conversion of most philosophy depts into bastion
Michael Perelman wrote:
>You are absolutely correct Joanna. I only posted this to say that
>technology CAN improve things. And then, this was in the WSJ. Closer
>inspection might prove otherwise.
>
>On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 03:34:50PM -0700, joanna bujes wrote:
>> At 03:21 PM 07/26/2002 -0700,
Justin mentions that an ill-informed public might interfere with a
rational university program. He is correct.
One of the difficulty of substantial reforms is that their success often
depends on a host of other reforms -- in this case, a reformed educational
system, media
Yesterday, NPR h
In a message dated 7/27/02 6:07:31 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>How about nuclear engineers? Hospital surgeons and administrators? College
>professors? You think any
>of those groups currently want democratization of their expertise and
>accountability if it means a
Justin Schwartz wrote:
> In my typical, class-blinkered, petty bourgeois manner, I am a real fan
of
> expertise. Democracy has its place, but not in micro-managing the use of
> real expertise by real experts. There are skills that require long study
and
> constant application to master, and where
Justin Schwartz wrote:
>
> Why would be a such a great idea to have the demos tell college
> professors how to run their shop? In most of this country, that would
> result in the shut-down of biological departments, except for ag depts,
> the conversion of most philosophy depts into bastions of co
>
>How about nuclear engineers? Hospital surgeons and administrators? College
>professors? You think any
>of those groups currently want democratization of their expertise and
>accountability if it means a
>diminution of the scale and scope of their power? Just how much difference
>would ther
Ian Murray wrote:
>
> --
> Actually Feenberg, coming from a Marxian-Marcusian-Heideggerian standpoint pays a
>lot of attention
> to May 68 as well as address property relations. But you'd have to actually read his
>books to see
> that.
>
I intended my comment to apply only to the specific s
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 5:53 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:28636] Re: Re: Re: Re: Drudgery
In a message dated 7/26/02 5:03:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ian Murray wrote:
>
>
> The
In a message dated 7/26/02 5:03:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ian Murray wrote:
>
>
> The strongest objections to democratizing technology come from experts who fear the loss of their
> hardwon freedom from lay interference.
This part is simply absurd! It's the softwar
- Original Message -
From: "Carrol Cox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 4:53 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:28630] Re: Re: Re: Drudgery
>
>
> Ian Murray wrote:
> >
> >
> > The strongest objections to democrat
Ian Murray wrote:
>
>
> The strongest objections to democratizing technology come from experts who fear the
>loss of their
> hardwon freedom from lay interference.
This part is simply absurd! It's the software engineers, not Bill Gates
et al who keep Microsoft undemocratic?
It is worth rema
>>The Wall Street Journal today had a front page story about women
>>in Mali, whose use of mechanized grinding machines has given them
>>time to improve their lives and become literate.
>
>What's the point of this? Did the cotton gin enable slaves to improve
>their lives and become literate?
>Th
You are absolutely correct Joanna. I only posted this to say that
technology CAN improve things. And then, this was in the WSJ. Closer
inspection might prove otherwise.
On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 03:34:50PM -0700, joanna bujes wrote:
> At 03:21 PM 07/26/2002 -0700, you wrote:
> >The Wall Street J
At 06:52 PM 07/26/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>As I read Michael's post, the point was that Mali women's use of
>mechanized grinding machines has given them time to improve their lives
>and become literate. No attempt to draw more general conclusions about
>the social consequences of machinery, or
- Original Message -
From: "joanna bujes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> At 03:21 PM 07/26/2002 -0700, you wrote:
> >The Wall Street Journal today had a front page story about women
> >in Mali, whose use of mechanized grinding machines has given them
> >time to improve their lives and become lit
>OK. Labor saving devices save time and labor. This time and labor can be
>invested in other (possibly worthwhile) projects. I'm on my fifth day of
>not smoking and I'm irritable and I wanted to find out why Michael was
>telling me that the world is round.
Oh...Well, I can't help you on that
28 matches
Mail list logo
