Forum Replies Created
-
ZN,
Thanks. I already knew I could just copy and paste and that would work somewhat. Was hoping, however, to use code to shrink it down to fit the space given, and maintain the (original) height/width ratio.
On my own site, I can do that — because I’m, well, god there. In the universal settings, and in individual posts. It’s difficult being a mere mortal sometimes.
;>)
PA,
I’m looking forward to it. I think it hits HBO in October.
Here’s another one about the future, robots, genetic manipulation and such. Very good film.
And, why aren’t apes evolving into humans?
Pretty good article for lay persons (like me!!):
Dear Science: Why aren’t apes evolving into humans?
Dear Science: Why are there no hominins left on Earth? If evolution is ongoing and species are always changing and adapting, shouldn’t we see new human-like species evolving from apes, even if the old ones died out?
Here’s what science has to say:We hate to be the ones to break it to you, but you are an ape.
So were the Neanderthals, the Hobbits, Lucy the Australopithecus, the Taung child and Peking man. And while we’re at it, so are orangutans, gorillas, bonobos and chimpanzees. All of us evolved from a common ancestor that lived about 14 million years ago, and together we make up the taxonomic family Hominidae. Also known as hominids. Also known as great apes.
Interesting.
Some more of my (annoying) book snobbery: I worked in book stores at various times in my younger adulthood (into the 1990s), and in one store was given pretty much total control over a section I called the Avant Garde. They did that because they recognized my brilliance in matters literary.
;>)
I got really territorial about it. Didn’t necessarily stick with the usual time frame for that designation, though, putting books in there by authors from a fairly broad range of chronological time (and place), including Garcia Marquez. If co-workers tried to help out and put Garcia Marquez under M, I’d move it to G, cuz, well, technically, Spanish authors with those two surnames (paternal and maternal) are alphabetized by the paternal surname.
Stuffy, yeah. I know. But I think it’s right to go by the culture in question, as much as possible. Though, I make mistakes sometimes with other cultures, like Chinese or Japanese names, which typically should go surname and then personal name, with these often being reversed.
Long story short: Wonder if they should have named the spider, Kankuamo García Márquezi.
If we timed out everyone who crossed the line, I would have to time myself out sometimes, which I think would be a physics paradox.
;>)
I think you could sell the rights for that to JJ Abrams. It could be, like, well, a sequel of sorts to, “Fringe” and “Lost,” about how a bulletin board moderator destroyed the space-time continuum by banning himself, and how the rest of us had to devote our lives to hunting down the moderator, finally discovering him on this island in the middle of Boston. And, it’s only real during dream-time, and when you wake up from the dream, you’re back in fantasy land, and you watch Vinatieri kick that winning field goal, which we all really know never happened.
I hear ya, WV, about his being alone.
I’ve been there, done that, too.
Just saying, I don’t like being called a liar. And I think it’s important to say so. Prior to that, I was trying to go the ignore route. It didn’t work so well.
And, ZN,
I understand what you’re saying as well, and will adhere to board policies. I also would understand if you thought my comments were over the line — Maginot or otherwise — and deserved a board time out. I wouldn’t argue against that, and it’s perhaps even “deserved,” given their content.
You guys decide, and I’ll abide. Btw, whatever happened to the poster with “the Dude” as his avatar?
C-M-C and use value: C for commodity. M for money. C for commodity. Use value meaning a product with a specific use, not dependent upon its ability to be bought or sold or resold.
M-C-M and exchange value: M for money. C for commodity. M for money. And exchange value. Commodities under capitalism are produced primarily for their exchange value, not their use value.
The capitalist purchases labor power, as a commodity, in order to produce commodities for money the capitalist appropriates. He or she takes what workers make for him or herself. Basically, theft. Workers have no control over the fruits of their own labor under capitalism. It’s legally not theirs, from the get go, which is also unique to capitalism. Under capitalism, for the first time, actual, direct producers (workers) don’t own their own work. They did under feudalism, even though they had to give the local lord a cut of the action. They still received the vast majority of the fruits of their own labor, and their production was not, by rights, the local lord’s from the get go.
Capitalism basically gives the local lord — now the capitalist — far greater rights than he previously had. All of the work, every last bit of it, is the capitalist’s, even though very few capitalists do the actual production themselves. It’s extremely rare that they’re involved in direct production, and it’s impossible for them to ever, ever do as much as their workforce.
And, remember. A single proprietor is not a capitalist, 99% of the time. A self-employed person is not a capitalist, 99% of the time. Lone wolf hedge fund managers, yeah. They do the M-C-M thing by basically bypassing the purchase of labor power, though they take advantage, of course, of all the labor power making the financial system go. So, indirectly, they, too, purchase it. But they’re primarily capitalists because they do M for M and perpetually in the exchange value mode, and their “job” is to keep the capitalist system as is, concentrating wealth, power, privilege and access at the very top. They don’t do C-M-C and use value.
W,
One of the key things that makes capitalism unprecedented. It must Grow or Die. It must subsume previously local and independent markets, and unify them. It must keep doing this to expand its “market share,” and individual capitalists within the system must do the same. It engulfs former ways of doing things. It is the first imperialistic economic system in history, where “globalization” isn’t just a matter of seeking new trade partners in far off lands . . . but a matter of survival.
Prior to capitalism, and this includes in America, we had local, autonomous, independent “markets,” peopled by small farmers, craftspersons, artisans and the like — including the little girl selling her lemonade. None of this was “capitalism.” Capitalism changes that in several ways, but the two key ways of doing this were:
1. Changing C-M-C and use-value commerce to M-C-M and exchange-value commerce.
2. Unifying previously independent and autonomous markets, by force if necessary. And by changing the political structure. And by overwhelming them with mass production and other “competitive” advantages.
The second one is pretty self-explanatory. I’ll come back later and elaborate on the first.
Also, W,
No one would go to the gallows. They’d just have a brand new way of doing things, and they’d see the results of this new way as generating a far, far better life for everyone, except for former millionaires and billionaires. They, too, would have a very good life in the new system. They just wouldn’t be able to live like sultans any longer.
Everyone would have access to the highest quality free education, medical care, transportation, cultural venues, parks and rec and so on. The “commons” would be vast and there for everyone. The amount of innovation, artistic and intellectual endeavors would explode off the charts, because everyone would get their chance to express their fullest potential as human beings. Again, no one would be denied access due to lack of money. Money no longer woujld be the key to entrance. They would have, as a birthright, free access to all the basics.
