100 things


Antigonus

 

Posted

100 things your kids may never know about......


You only fail if you give up. - Dana Scully

Time Jesum Transeuntum Et Non Riverentum - Nick Cave

We're not just destroyers, at the same time we can be saviors. - Allen Walker

 

Posted

That list makes me a sad panda...



 

Posted

yea...i remember all those things and i am in my mid 30's.....


You only fail if you give up. - Dana Scully

Time Jesum Transeuntum Et Non Riverentum - Nick Cave

We're not just destroyers, at the same time we can be saviors. - Allen Walker

 

Posted

Most of those are, Who cares?
but some... some of those i think are sad...not that we have them but because of what they do.

For example, GPS + Cellphones = never being lost again... well i theory yay, but wandering around and such is relaxing for some people

or everyone having MP3 players and earphones thus no need to connect with another person's music. This really hit me one day when I was sitting, waiting for my ride and I watched something like a hundred people walk by and most had friends with them and or mp3 players and I just noticed that it seamed so sterile because they weren't talking to each other or listening to each others' music... it was like they were cut off and disinterested in the people you'd think they'd care for...

A physical paper dictionary.... sure digital is more efficient, as is a digital encyclopedia, but paper dictionary and encyclopedias allow you this wonderful thing where you can learn something new randomly where as with digital versions they never include "random" articles or words in their programming so unless you know the word or subject you aren't going to ever know about something... no link, no info. It's a lose that kinda sucks.

Digital media...it's compact and more efficient, but... and this coming from someone who can stand low quality stuff... film and such is higher quality. Our best digital media can't even touch film simply by it's natural characteristics. We now accept this lower quality product because a lot of us can't tell the difference or just don't care, but it is lower quality and we are losing out when we use it to record history and such. The information is lost forever, where as with film as our technology to have higher resolutions continues to improve we can continue to take the higher quality data from it.


 

Posted

One thing I can add in each category:

Audio-Visual Entertainment

- Uncompressed media. Except for hobbyists, their video will pixelate not blur, their audio will be tinny not skippy.


Computers and Videogaming

- Software that comes in a cardboard box with a manual and disks


The Internet

- A service called ISDN


Gadgets

- The pocket calculator


Everything Else**

- The incandescent light bulb (hopefully)



** As an aside, the "everything else" category cheats their own previous categories as well as not always even being in the spirit of the article itself, which is "some of the technology we grew up with will not be passed down the line to the next generation of geeks"; I hate it when people can't be bothered to follow their own list rules just because they run out of ideas.


[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]

In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Durakken View Post

A physical paper dictionary.... sure digital is more efficient, as is a digital encyclopedia, but paper dictionary and encyclopedias allow you this wonderful thing where you can learn something new randomly where as with digital versions they never include "random" articles or words in their programming so unless you know the word or subject you aren't going to ever know about something... no link, no info. It's a lose that kinda sucks.


Michael Crichton commented on this very thing quite some time ago. He called the internet an evolutionary dead end for mankind. Since there is so much knowledge available on demand, there is less and less actual new information being discovered in essence. It kind of makes sense if you consider how much is discovered by accident while looking for something else entirely.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antigonus View Post
Michael Crichton commented on this very thing quite some time ago. He called the internet an evolutionary dead end for mankind. Since there is so much knowledge available on demand, there is less and less actual new information being discovered in essence. It kind of makes sense if you consider how much is discovered by accident while looking for something else entirely.
What's interesting is that before the internet became big, people were talking about the fact that based on the accelerating rate of scientific publication, the vast majority of "knowledge" being discovered was actually known increasingly by absolutely no one except its discoverers, since it was quickly becoming impossible for even people who specialize in very narrow fields to keep up with it all. So in effect, individual people were discovering new knowledge but the sum total of knowledge that mankind as a whole actually knew collectively was essentially reaching a bottleneck.


[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]

In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie Man View Post
Everything old is new again...



I guess the author never heard of 'the cloud.' Same thing. Smaller and wirelessly.


And what's with no Hersheys wrapped in foil? I just had one tonight.
what was meant was that Hersheys wrappers were all foil not just the one side and the other side a papery thing....


You only fail if you give up. - Dana Scully

Time Jesum Transeuntum Et Non Riverentum - Nick Cave

We're not just destroyers, at the same time we can be saviors. - Allen Walker

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antigonus View Post
Michael Crichton commented on this very thing quite some time ago. He called the internet an evolutionary dead end for mankind. Since there is so much knowledge available on demand, there is less and less actual new information being discovered in essence. It kind of makes sense if you consider how much is discovered by accident while looking for something else entirely.
incidental knowledge is extremely important is what makes a genius a genius. (genius not in the IQ sense but generally recognized as someone who has novel insight just incredibly good at something). Discoveries and such come from combining ideas that have never been combined before by a person that can verbalize or implement the implications of those ideas coming together. Without the ability to incidentally discover new things there's a smaller chance of that happening, especially in more and more specialized fields...

This is why entertainment is important... Which crushes plato's argument that the arts have no merit in society... it's because the good artist has a basic knowledge in a number of things and can throw ideas together and play with them in the realm of the mind thus giving insight to the people who work in other fields. Without the arts I don't think we'd be as far as we are now technologically.

One might say that War and Art are the two great motivators of advancement and a civilized world shouldn't do one of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
What's interesting is that before the internet became big, people were talking about the fact that based on the accelerating rate of scientific publication, the vast majority of "knowledge" being discovered was actually known increasingly by absolutely no one except its discoverers, since it was quickly becoming impossible for even people who specialize in very narrow fields to keep up with it all. So in effect, individual people were discovering new knowledge but the sum total of knowledge that mankind as a whole actually knew collectively was essentially reaching a bottleneck.
I think we still have that problem, not cuz access or what not but because people are not being educated in how to read things, think about things, and in general not be gullible fools. People complain all he time that science says today apples are bad for you tomorrow they'll say they are good. Why listen when it's always changing and wrong day to day? I find that people don't read/listen, can't understand basic things, and don't even know how to look for proper information and how to distinguish good info from bad, and what makes it worse is that we now have our search software reinforcing our bad ideas. It's understandable... We want certain info and we don't want to search through all what we consider "the garbage" so search takes into account our past searches and where we're from and any info it can figure out from us and uses that to come up with results that we want to see rather than a more accurate view on things.