MESSAGE
| DATE | 2003-09-04 |
| FROM | Steve Milo
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] unInteresting article on Valenti
|
On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Joe Grastara wrote:
>
>
> --On Tuesday, September 2, 2003 9:01 PM -0400 Steve Milo
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Billy wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 07:19:31PM -0400, Steve Milo wrote:
> >> > In the 60's they laughed at the US for attempting to create what we
> >> > today call the internet.
> >>
> >> Did they? I've NEVER heard that.
> >> I think they would have recognized its strategic importance.
> >
> > Right, they recognized its strategic importance so much that they never
> > tried to implement anything like it. Do you know anyone who was
> > politically aware during that time in that country?
> >
> >> > Shit, they even lauged at the US for trying
> >> > to put men on the moon and bringing them back.
> >>
> >> Yeah, and I'm still laughing at us for that.
> >> It was a pointless, dangerous, and vastly expensive propaganda maneuver.
> >
> > Technological benefits aside, the propoganda it generated was sufficient
> > to have put this country at the forefront.
> > Much like Valenti is good at spinning propoganda about how the
> > entertainment industry will suffer due to 'unbridaled' innovation.
> >
> > China could have been a 'superpower' centuries ago but it stopped short.
> > It stopped exploring and it stopped innovating. The Great Wall is one
> > example of how it chose to isolate itself instead of explore, not that
> > their method hasnt served them.
> >
> >> The USSR started the space race with Sputnik, and followed up as the
> >> first nation to engineer a manned space flight. I'm sure they were
> >> laughing at us then, and they earned the position from which to do so.
> >
> > They lost their advantage the second they decided to not match this
> > country's technological advancements. That downward slide continued
> > throughtout the 70's into the 80's when we outspent them on weapons
> > defense. Thats right, that ugly phrase weapons defense, what Reagan
> > called 'Star Wars'.
> > The russians thought we were crazy for that one too.
> > Today russia has plenty of technology that would put American innovation
> > to shame. But its all gathering dust, worse still the
> > innnovations that cause destrution are being sold off by the scientists to
> > feed themselves.
>
>
> Russia never had an advantage. They invested in a losing system and it
> was only a matter of time. The world is a dynamic place and monolithic
> closed systems are not capable of responding quickly or accurately enough
> to change. I don't think it's so much a matter of the U.S. outspending
> Russia on the Space Race or the Arms Race as it is a matter of the U.S.
> being more able to efficiently allocate it's resources. In other words
> Russia was probably richer in resources than the U.S. but paralyzed by a
> poorly designed system.
They invested in a closed system which encouraged espionage in every sense
of the word. That is what had kept them afloat, it was a system they came
to rely on heavily because their own scientists feared true innovation.
This mentality came about just before WW2, when Stalin
killed all his generals because they were smarter than him.
When WW2 came about it took them untold loss of life to finally turn the
tide.
Stalin killed *everyone* who appeared to know more than him. That was
their policy up and down and left and right. Silence *anyone*
who is smarter than the people who have/are in power.
Eventually this paralyzed the population to the point of ineffectiveness.
At which point the 'system' came to rely heavily on the 'outside' world
for innovation and ultimately survival.
It worked for them throughout the 50's, 60's, 70's and the early 80's.
When Reagan's advisers finally said the only way to avoid an all out war
with the russians is to outspend the living shit out of them. They were
spying on the western world for *everything*. They were doing so because
they couldnt count on their own population to innovate. They had *no*
other way because they didnt have the mechanisms in place like we do known
as the Contitution of the United States of America.
Their whole system was built on containment.
When I say 'advantage' I meant that they lost the advantage in terms of
the space race. The fact that the Americans quit the race to the moon
when they had was equally effective. The russians were, at the time,
developing their own means to put men on the moon. They stopped because
we stopped. As a result, they were left with a technology that was
untested and useless. They were late to the game all because their
scientists were afraid.
> >
> > Communist russsia is a shining example when there is an illusion
> > of centralized control. Instead self interest entities control their own
> > slice of the system(hold ransom).
> > When that happens one hand doesnt know what the other hand is doing and
> > it turns into an 'everyman for himself' scenario.
> >
> > Communist russia isnt such an ancient example that there isnt a lesson to
> > be learned from its failure.
> >
> >> > But its obvious who won in the end.
> >>
> >> Did we win because we have an internet or because we put men on the moon?
> >> Think!
> >
> > Right, we are the most prosperous nation in this world.
> > The internet has given third world countries opportunites to create jobs
> > that would otherwise leave its citizens living under third world
> > standards. Further, NASA is footing most of the bill for the space
> > station or atleast was until 9/11 took its toll. Inturn paying for the
> > space scientists salaries in russia helping keep jobs and paying for
> > innovation. All of which russia gets to keep.
> > A pattern I will remind you that this country has followed in every
> > victory it gained. WW2 the US rebuilt Europe, it helped rebuild Japan,
> > now after it has won the Cold War it is helping Russia get back on its
> > feet.
> >
> >> > I was probably a little harsh on him, he does have a right to voice
> >> > his opinion on important matters. Actually I was probably completely
> >> > wrong about him.
> >>
> >> He has the right to have his ass handed to him when he says stupid
> >> things, too. Remember the Boston strangler....
> >
> > I'm not in a position to perform such a medical procedure.
> >
> >> > If he was able to make the kind of headway he has in Congress I
> >> > shouldn't have any doubt he is a very intelligent man.
> >>
> >> Yup.
> >
> > 10-4
> >
> > In short all of this illustrates how the citizens of this country have to
> > protect what was outlined to them in this countrys Constitution. The men
> > who wrote that document may not have been able to forsee the technological
> > aspects. But they very much realized the idealogical importance.
> >
> > Steve M
> >
> >> ____________________________
> >> NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
> >> Fair Use -
> >> because it's either fair use or useless....
> >> NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
> >>
> >
> > ____________________________
> > NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
> > Fair Use -
> > because it's either fair use or useless....
> > NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
>
>
>
> Joe Grastara
> Systems Administrator
> NYU School of Medicine
>
____________________________
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|
