WebRoot | Imageless | Home | Journal | Longball | Wiki | Contact
A page for art, creativity, and robotics.

WebRoot
Imageless
Homepage
Journal
Longball
Wiki
Wedding

Contact
Valid XHTML 1.0!
Recent Posts
"Strategy Chess" game idea

New Bike

Humble

Christmas

Midnight

Creating Posterity

October Snow

Imageless Update

Education

Fall


Archives September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009
August 2009
September 2009
October 2009
November 2009
December 2009
January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
Current Posts

Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]


Twitter Subscribe via Email RSS feed
Enter your e-mail
if you'd like to be
notified as new
posts are added:

Blogger


Monday, January 26, 2009

The "New" Rights


Humanity is driven by the selfishness of few and the collaboration of many. Certainly everybody should know George Bernard Shaw's famous quotation, "All progress depends on the unreasonable man. The reasonable man adapts himself to the world. The unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself." For anything besides this to be the case, the comforts that are coveted by the selfish would be easily accessible by the lesser collaborators, for it's the nature of the reasonable man (or woman) to share. However, it's reasonable for the larger class of collaborators to be contented with their inequitably small piece of the pie as long as they have earned enough to meet their minimal requirements of comfort (food, shelter, leisure, etc).

However, there's a breaking point when the progress made by unreasonable men (and women) is so great that reasonable men are no longer needed to sustain it. This is, in fact, the goal of economy. Vis-a-vis: To make scarcity scarce. To live in a world where anybody can get whatever they'd want provided it doesn't sacrifice somebody else's natural rights (which are defined every once in a while by various organizations in order to assure the collaborator a minimum level of security that they can expect from the selfish). And while it might be a little confusing to consider, it's very easy to replace the collaborators (who require a percentage of the resources that need sharing) with machines (which only need to be manufactured once and maintained periodically). Suffice it to say, the collaborators end up going down the shit creek without a paddle.

But certainly that isn't going to happen because the collaborators are reasonable men and they REQUIRE reasonable outcomes. Also, the simple solution to the social contract between the reasonable and unreasonable man is packaged right there in the preceding paragraph: make Amendments to the natural rights of man. And this is the call for those Amendments... certainly in an age of telecommunications, space exploration, industrialization, and global warming there can be compromises struck between the selfish and the collaborators to balance the grand social order.

So before we go any further, I'd put it out there that everybody has a natural right to food and shelter in the modern world. Nobody should end up like this. Does anybody else have thoughts? Leave a comment.


Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Quote the New President


This just in:

The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our gross domestic product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart -- not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.
                                                -- Barack Obama, 01/20/09

If you're not contributing towards national prosperity, you're contributing towards the recession (like I said in my post a couple weeks ago).

So go forth and contribute towards prosperity! And if you don't know how to contribute, ask somebody to give you an opportunity. Because there will always be new opportunities... it's just a matter of gathering the resources necessary to execute on them.


Friday, January 16, 2009

Charity


Coral convinced me to do a bike ride with him and Ravi for charity (Basking Ridge, NJ - June 6, 2009). The benefactor is diabetes and our team is called Riding for a Reason. Personally, I think the whole thing is hogwash. I think the idea behind "helping" the sick by walking, running, or biking "for their cause" is just clever marketing. Plus, I'm not really interested in being required to "raise" money to cure people when the drug (or treatment methodology) that gets developed is going to end up being sold for Billions of dollars of profit for the drug company who gets it first. Charity drive? More like Venture Capital for drug companies. Having said all that, I want to ask you to please, please step up big time and donate $5 to the American Diabetes Association on my behalf.

In other news, during the holiday season I helped pool together money to buy toys and games for hospitals that take care of children who have chronic diseases and major trauma. This is charity that I believe in called Child's Play and the Christmas 2008 drive is summarized here. My contributions were made together with Jen, Ida, Matt, and Shu-Yee. Here's what we'd gotten:

  • Scooby-Doo's Original Mysteries
    DVD; $9.99
  • Coby Electronics TF-DVD7107 7-Inch Portable DVD Player
    Electronics; $79.47
  • Thomas & Friends: Thomas and the Toy Workshop (Full)
    Thomas the Tank Engine; DVD; $6.99
  • Surf's Up (Full Screen Special Edition)
    DVD; $14.99
  • Dora The Explorer - Undercover Dora
    DVD; $13.49
  • Madden NFL 09
    Video Game; $29.99
  • Mario Kart DS
    Video Game; $34.99
  • Philips PM3S 3-Device Big Button Universal Remote Control
    Electronics; $8.99
Good times. :)


Sunday, January 11, 2009

Creed & Contributing


Part I: Creed

I framed a photograph of this passage in the past week:

place where one can still be an
unworried and unregimented individual
and sit on a log and get his sanity back
and wear any old clothes

--Lover's Leap Trail
Custer State Park, SD

I may be slightly misquoting the passage because I'm not looking at it this exact moment, but that's the gist of it. And it you ever get the good fortune of seeing the sign, the real sights are only about 10 meters more of a climb up the rocks on your right. Mucho pretty. It'll make the sorts of things that most people marvel at seem shrug-worthy.


Part II: Contributing

I helped a friend of Jen's move into a new apartment yesterday. She moved into the Park Lane Seaport buildings near the New England convention center in Boston (you know, the swatch of land that opened up when the city buried its biggest road). During the afternoon Jen and I built a number of furniture units for her. It was reminiscent of when I threw my own "putting together Ikea furniture" party, except without the beer. It was very much a "Pay It Forward" type event and I felt good afterward.

And in the vein of contribution, I'd like to pose a question: How much good does your primary occupation do for the world? Does the product of you work create shelter, comfort, or a feeling of safety? Does it entertain? Does your hard work help to feed, cloth, or nurture people or animals in the world? Consider the inputs (resources needed plus the blood/sweat/tears extended in order to acquire them) and the outputs (what your occupation physically produces). If you decide that the value of what you produce is less than the value of the resources plus the amount you've been pay for your work, then congrats - you're contributing to the national recession!

Don't be afraid if you categorize yourself in this boat, you're in good company (though to be fair, both the men linked here have basically stepped down from their official duties in the last year allowing for their productivity to drop off big time). My theory is that an overwhelming percentage of middle and upper class individuals get the classification of "contributors" while lower class individuals are less likely to get pegged into this undesirable category.