(OT) Monte Cook's most recent rant.....

[Zappo]

Re: Re: Re: (OT) Monte Cook's most recent rant.....

Actually, it isn't bull at all, and many, many people ARE brainwashed into buying useless technology because they think it is better.

That's true. I recall reading about a motorized spinning fork to eat spaghetti. As an Italian, the simple idea of someone unable to pick up spaghetti with a fork and using a weird electrical fork to do it made me LMAO instantly. That however doesn't mean that every technology is useless, it doesn't mean that every person buys useless technology, and neither it means that those who do buy it are brainwashed. I know I would buy the technofork simply to stare at it and laugh, for example.

Now cellular phones are also one of the most useless devices we have, and yet they are everywhere, even when proven health issues have arisen regarding the waves given off (if in doubt, refer to Verizon Wireless in a case in Madrid last December where a school was moved due to its proximity to a cellular phone towere and the rate of cancer among the young students).

Wait, wait... cellphones useless? Very wrong. You can live without them, that's sure. Does that make an object useless? I don't think so. Cellphones are extremely useful in a myriad of situations. In my country, everyone with enough braincells to operate it has a cellphone. I mean that almost literally. Everyone I know save the elderly and the very poor has a cellphone. 98% or so of the land is covered (the remaining 2% is mostly uninhabited). Calling is cheap, and receiving is free. I can talk to anyone whenever I want, but if I don't want to be reached I'm still perfectly free to do so. People use it for fun, but also for work and for daily life. Do you really think it is possible to sell something useless in a given country until you've sold more of it than the country's inhabitants?

As for the health hazards, nothing has been "proved" yet. I don't care if cancer rises in one school somewhere, because it can be attributed to a variety of factors. A reasonable doubt? Yes (enough to worry and to warrant a move). Proof? No. Incidentally, as I said in my country everyone has and uses a cellphone, and it has been so for a few years now, but cancer rates haven't been influenced.

Among the poor, there is basically no dependence upon advanced technology beyond a television, radio, refrigerator, water filtering device and telephone, in some instances, also a car. And you know what? Plain as day, the poor were happy in general, they did not suffer because of their lack of access to higher technology. Sure, the place was a hotbed for other issues, both race and religious, but in general, the poor were just as happy and healthy with their lack of fancy gadgets.

All true (I've traveled in poor countries too), but that doesn't make the gadgets useless.

Useless != "can live without it"

 

[mmadsen]

Re: Re: Re: (OT) Monte Cook's most recent rant.....

Now cellular phones are also one of the most useless devices we have...

Perhaps if you have no friends and no business contacts...

 

[hellbender]

Re: Re: Re: Re: (OT) Monte Cook's most recent rant.....

Perhaps if you have no friends and no business contacts...

I use something called email. Hard to send business proposals with pictures over a cellular telephone. Cheaper than calling my friends in this and various countries, and update them with pictures as well. One day email will catch on, and everyone will use it!


hellbender

 

[hellbender]

Re: Re: Re: Re: (OT) Monte Cook's most recent rant.....

[As for the health hazards, nothing has been "proved" yet. I don't care if cancer rises in one school somewhere, because it can be attributed to a variety of factors. A reasonable doubt? Yes (enough to worry and to warrant a move). Proof? No. Incidentally, as I said in my country everyone has and uses a cellphone, and it has been so for a few years now, but cancer rates haven't been influenced.All true (I've traveled in poor countries too), but that doesn't make the gadgets useless.

Useless != "can live without it" [/B]

I will give you some points on the fact that some people find electronic leashes fashionable. To me, a cellular phone is a useless gadget. If people want to get ahold of me, there is email and my handy dandy answering machine. I don't need to carry some ringing annoyance on my person to look cool or to be bothered while I am doing something.
As for cancer increase, believe what you will, but if a cellular phone company is willing to pay for the relocation of the school ( I am assuming that zoning restrictions made this easier than moving the tower) due to an increase in cancer in schoolchildren, that maybe, just maybe, there is something to it. I can't imagine how sending various waves through your head on any type of basis would be all that healthy. When cellular phones first came out, there were health concerns, but big business more than likely took care of that.


hellbender

 

[Xeriar]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: (OT) Monte Cook's most recent rant.....

I use something called email. Hard to send business proposals with pictures over a cellular telephone. Cheaper to call my friends in this and various countries, and update them with pictures as well. One day email will catch on, and everyone will use it!


hellbender

That's comparing apples and oranges - they have drastically different purposes. Try e-mailing the fire department when your house has caught fire and melted the phone line (even worse if you are right next to a switch...)

 

[hellbender]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: (OT) Monte Cook's most recent rant.....

That's comparing apples and oranges - they have drastically different purposes. Try e-mailing the fire department when your house has caught fire and melted the phone line (even worse if you are right next to a switch...)

I have neighbors, with phones. Really, there is no way to convince me that a cellular telephone is a necessity. Most people, I would imagine, would be more concerned with getting out of the house than hunting down a cellular phone, the act of which, is dangerous if you think about it during a fire. You get out and save your family and pets, not look for a bloody phone.

hellbender

 

[Eosin the Red]

ColH -

I'm in Cleveland. The plane that went down in Pennsylvania was in our airspace.

I suspect us folks in OKC are a little shell-shocked from the last decade. Nothing serious happened but it was UGLY. Gas did go up over $5.00 in some spots - but others were unwilling to take advantage of the panic. Potable water was sold out in several areas (or so I am told - like a good scout I have water set aside for such emergencies + unlike a scout I had to learn that lesson the hard way, once).

Disasters in general bring out the very best in some and the very worst in others.

I worked both the Murrah building and the May 3 tornado (Fire Fighter turned RN) - in both I walked away with my faith in humanity restored and destroyed. The problem isn't those who rally in bad times, it is those who use it to take what they feel is theirs by right. It is people who are given extra-ordaniary powers but are unable to exercise them judiciously. It is people who, given no rational re-course to an event, choose to shut off their brains completely. Confusion and panic in a disaster are generally increased by turf wars between FBI, Police, Fire, EMS, FEMA, local elected officials and state elected officials.
I am glad that Cleveland has a calm head, but I do not assume that our experiece here in OK was unique. Then again maybe we are just more sensitive?

If this sounds negative - it is not. I have been amazed at folks who plunge headlong into danger, asking that they only be allowed to help.

It is a bonifide miracale that we are able to leverage so much skilled manpower in such a short notice, all focused on one task but it could be so much better.

 

[Eosin the Red]

I have neighbors, with phones. Really, there is no way to convince me that a cellular telephone is a necessity. Most people, I would imagine, would be more concerned with getting out of the house than hunting down a cellular phone, the act of which, is dangerous if you think about it during a fire. You get out and save your family and pets, not look for a bloody phone.

Amen, brother!

Don't need no chains here. Besides, cell phones as a rule do not work in disasters, a fire maybe, but nothing that involves 100+ people.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I am glad that Cleveland has a calm head, but I do not assume that our experiece here in OK was unique. Then again maybe we are just more sensitive?

Maybe what happened where you're at wasn't unique, but it didn't seem to be commonplace. Besides a general shock, things seemed pretty sedate everywhere I was able to check; I have friends and family spread out around the country. The general feeling I got from everyone was that although they knew the attack was horrendous, it also wasn't something likely to be widespread. So, in that respect, that's why there was calm. The main emotion was seething anger, with a desire for retribution and a general sense of anguish.

It could be that OK is still feeling the effects of what McVeigh did, which would, of course, place that area in a position rather different from the rest of the country.

 

[Zappo]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: (OT) Monte Cook's most recent rant.....

I will give you some points on the fact that some people find electronic leashes fashionable. To me, a cellular phone is a useless gadget. If people want to get ahold of me, there is email and my handy dandy answering machine. I don't need to carry some ringing annoyance on my person to look cool or to be bothered while I am doing something.

"Fashionable"? "Look cool"? I thought we were talking about usefulness. Besides, now that everyone has it, a cellphone isn't even a status symbol any more.

As for cancer increase, believe what you will, but if a cellular phone company is willing to pay for the relocation of the school ( I am assuming that zoning restrictions made this eaier than moving the tower) due to an increase in cancer in schoolchildren, that maybe, just maybe, there is something to it.

I agree 100%. Maybe there is something. Maybe not. Certainly a company has an interest in pulling such a stunt, for public relations if nothing else, and if a real, scientific proof comes out that radio waves actually cause cancer, they will be able to come out on the top. That's still no proof, though.

I can't imagine how sending various waves through your head on any type of basis would be all that healthy. When cellular phones first came out, there were health concerns, but big business more than likely took care of that.

Sound waves pass through your head constantly. They aren't any less "natural" than radio waves. In the first years when a new technology comes out, there are always health concerns. Microwave ovens, cellphones, whatever. The more useful the technology, the more health concerns. Some people just don't get that technology can actually make their lives better without taking away something.

I have neighbors, with phones. Really, there is no way to convince me that a cellular telephone is a necessity.

I don't want to convince you that it's a necessity. I want to convince you that between being a necessity and being useless there's a lot of room, where cellphones fit nicely.

Oh, and also that between "I have proof that radio waves are harmless" and "I have proof that radio waves are harmful" there's a lot of room too.