Technology: on balance is it good or bad

[Veritas Aequitas]

First off, some definitions only for the purpose of discussion on this thread;

Technology—broadly defined as anything created after the Industrial Revolution.
On balance—overall or on the whole; all things considered.
Good—anything that has a beneficial effect on humans.
Bad—anything that has a deleterious effect on humans.
No replies concerning these definitions will be appreciated. They are broad enough to facilitate a discussion on technology per se.

Discussion:

The promise of technology was that it would improve the lives of humans by making life easier. Has this come to be? Consider the last time you dealt with an automated telephone answering system as compared to speaking with a real person. Consider a situation when your GPS has frustrated you. Consider a time when you called a helpline for technical support only to be given instructions that you can’t understand. Consider modern rockets and bombs. Consider the unhealthy pollution caused by fossil fuel driven vehicles. In view of the many unintended consequences of technology, can you honestly think that, on balance, technology has been good for human beings?

The current fruition of technology has improved the human condition in a number of ways. Advances have been made in the development and production of new medicines. Advances in all forms of transportation have made the world smaller. Likewise, communication has made the world a more interconnected space. AI, while it may be considered a double edged sword, has crept into areas of human life such that it is becoming ubiquitous. Technology has increased agricultural production tremendously. Can you really say that technology, on the whole, has been a detriment to humans?

What is your position as to whether technology has been an overall positive or a negative for human beings?

So far, the trend of technology advances since the IR is net-positive to humanity.

Without technological advances since IR, humans could have been extinct by pandemics from the expeditious evolving viruses and bacteria.

At present, with technology, humans are now aware [have knowledge] of the potential extinction of the human species from a rogue meteor that could exterminate humanity like what happened to the dinosaurs.
With advancing technology, there is hope humanity could divert any 'malignant' meteor from its path heading toward Earth.

With the positive trend of technology advances, humanity are now more knowledgeable of other threats to humanity on a global scale that could exterminate the human species; it is also from such advances that there is hope for humanity to deal with such threats.

The positive trend of technology advance toward the future must be complemented with high average moral competences within humanity.
Again it is the continuing trend of technological advances that will enable humanity to expedite the moral progress of individuals.

[Age]

I think technology is fantastic (positive).

So, to 'this one' at least, pollution, and thus what kills and destroys, IS fantastic (positive).
If fact, what can be CLEARLY SEEN here is that 'you' seem to be TOTALLY DISHEARTENED by the Fact that I, sometimes, SHOW WHERE, WHEN, and WHY, EXACTLY, 'your' VIEWS ARE FALSE, Wrong, Inaccurate, Incorrect, DISTORTED, or TWISTED. For example, like when I SHOWED just how Truly ABSURD and RIDICULOUS 'your' VIEW IS about how 'you' think that the 'technology', which is KILLING 'you', human beings, and other animals, as well as the ONLY planet and home that 'you' have, is FANTASTIC (positive).

Hey, Age…do you ever catch a bus, plane, automobile, motorbike, pogo-stick?

WHO CARES?

The ANSWER to 'that QUESTION', OBVIOUSLY, has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER AT ALL TO DO WITH THE 'comments and remarks' that 'you' MADE here, and which I SHOWED the ABSURDITY OF.

Does your method of communicating your worthless drivel to us on the forum entirely run on solar\wind energy? (woops, that’s technology too you idiot)

'you' appear to be MISSING 'the point' here, ONCE AGAIN, "attofishpi".

'The POINT' being, 'you' SAID and CLAIMED that 'technology', which, OBVIOUSLY, INCLUDED 'pollution', was FANTASTIC (positive).

I AM JUST POINTING OUT HOW and WHY 'this VIEW' IS RIDICULOUS, and IS even PART OF the reason WHY 'you', human beings, in the days when this is being written, ARE living IN 'the MESS' that 'you' OBVIOUSLY ALL ARE.

When the Sun goes down do you light a candlestick?
Do you not fart methane? Is that why you are so full of gas?
Do you not eat food brought to shops in trucks?

The ANSWER to ALL of 'these QUESTIONS' have ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING on the ACTUAL STUPIDITY and RIDICULOUS of 'you' CLAIMING that 'the POLLUTION' that 'you', human beings, ARE CREATING, which 'you' OBVIOUSLY do NOT NEED TO, IS FANTASTIC (POSITIVE).

To me, pollution IS NOT FANTASTIC, and NOT POSITIVE, AT ALL.

Hey, dictate to us mere ‘human beings’ how much better you are in NOT polluting planet Earth.

'you' have absolutely NO IDEA, NOR CLUE, as to what 'I' DO and AM ACTUALLY DOING HERE"attofishpi".

..and while you are at it, since clearly you see technology as a NEGATIVE for human beings,

ONCE AGAIN, here what can be CLEARLY SEEN is that 'this one' did NOT hear and did NOT even SEE what I SAID and WROTE, PREVIOUSLY.

LOOK "attofishpi" I have NEVER even 'thought', 'suggested', SAID, NOR even WRITTEN that I see 'technology' as a NEGATIVE for human beings. So, for 'you' to think, ASSUME, or BELIEVE I DO, literally, SHOWS and REVEALS just how Truly DEAF, BLIND, and STUPID 'you' REALLY ARE being here.

AGAIN, 'confirmation bias' IS CLEARLY VISIBLE here. AND, what ELSE that can be CLEARLY SEEN here IS 'this one's' 'either/or' VERY STRONG PERSPECTIVE of 'things'.

All I ESSENTIAL DID was just POINT OUT that 'this one' CLAIMS that 'pollution' IS FANTASTIC (POSITIVE), and what 'this', supposedly, MEANS, to 'this one' anyway, is that 'I, somehow supposedly, SEE 'technology' as being a NEGATIVE.

The ABSURDITY AMONG and IN 'these adult human beings', BACK THEN, sometimes seems NEVER ENDING and/or UNLIMITED.

tell us why technological developments in capturing Solar\wind\tidal\geothermal energy IS a NEGATIVE for the environment of planet fucking Earth.

'What', EXACTLY, MADE 'you' think or PRESUME that 'I' SEE 'technology' as a NEGATIVE, to even BEGIN WITH?

[attofishpi]

So, to 'this one' at least, pollution, and thus what kills and destroys, IS fantastic (positive).
If fact, what can be CLEARLY SEEN here is that 'you' seem to be TOTALLY DISHEARTENED by the Fact that I, sometimes, SHOW WHERE, WHEN, and WHY, EXACTLY, 'your' VIEWS ARE FALSE, Wrong, Inaccurate, Incorrect, DISTORTED, or TWISTED. For example, like when I SHOWED just how Truly ABSURD and RIDICULOUS 'your' VIEW IS about how 'you' think that the 'technology', which is KILLING 'you', human beings, and other animals, as well as the ONLY planet and home that 'you' have, is FANTASTIC (positive).

Hey, Age…do you ever catch a bus, plane, automobile, motorbike, pogo-stick?

WHO CARES?

The ANSWER to 'that QUESTION', OBVIOUSLY, has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER AT ALL TO DO WITH THE 'comments and remarks' that 'you' MADE here, and which I SHOWED the ABSURDITY OF.

Does your method of communicating your worthless drivel to us on the forum entirely run on solar\wind energy? (woops, that’s technology too you idiot)

'you' appear to be MISSING 'the point' here, ONCE AGAIN, "attofishpi".

'The POINT' being, 'you' SAID and CLAIMED that 'technology', which, OBVIOUSLY, INCLUDED 'pollution', was FANTASTIC (positive).

I AM JUST POINTING OUT HOW and WHY 'this VIEW' IS RIDICULOUS, and IS even PART OF the reason WHY 'you', human beings, in the days when this is being written, ARE living IN 'the MESS' that 'you' OBVIOUSLY ALL ARE.

When the Sun goes down do you light a candlestick?
Do you not fart methane? Is that why you are so full of gas?
Do you not eat food brought to shops in trucks?

The ANSWER to ALL of 'these QUESTIONS' have ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING on the ACTUAL STUPIDITY and RIDICULOUS of 'you' CLAIMING that 'the POLLUTION' that 'you', human beings, ARE CREATING, which 'you' OBVIOUSLY do NOT NEED TO, IS FANTASTIC (POSITIVE).

To me, pollution IS NOT FANTASTIC, and NOT POSITIVE, AT ALL.

Hey, dictate to us mere ‘human beings’ how much better you are in NOT polluting planet Earth.

'you' have absolutely NO IDEA, NOR CLUE, as to what 'I' DO and AM ACTUALLY DOING HERE"attofishpi".

..and while you are at it, since clearly you see technology as a NEGATIVE for human beings,

ONCE AGAIN, here what can be CLEARLY SEEN is that 'this one' did NOT hear and did NOT even SEE what I SAID and WROTE, PREVIOUSLY.

LOOK "attofishpi" I have NEVER even 'thought', 'suggested', SAID, NOR even WRITTEN that I see 'technology' as a NEGATIVE for human beings. So, for 'you' to think, ASSUME, or BELIEVE I DO, literally, SHOWS and REVEALS just how Truly DEAF, BLIND, and STUPID 'you' REALLY ARE being here.

AGAIN, 'confirmation bias' IS CLEARLY VISIBLE here. AND, what ELSE that can be CLEARLY SEEN here IS 'this one's' 'either/or' VERY STRONG PERSPECTIVE of 'things'.

All I ESSENTIAL DID was just POINT OUT that 'this one' CLAIMS that 'pollution' IS FANTASTIC (POSITIVE), and what 'this', supposedly, MEANS, to 'this one' anyway, is that 'I, somehow supposedly, SEE 'technology' as being a NEGATIVE.

The ABSURDITY AMONG and IN 'these adult human beings', BACK THEN, sometimes seems NEVER ENDING and/or UNLIMITED.

tell us why technological developments in capturing Solar\wind\tidal\geothermal energy IS a NEGATIVE for the environment of planet fucking Earth.

'What', EXACTLY, MADE 'you' think or PRESUME that 'I' SEE 'technology' as a NEGATIVE, to even BEGIN WITH?

Age, see that RED bit up there I highlighted? That is you erroneously asserting that I stated that POLLUTION is fantastic!!

YOU jumped to the conclusion that because I stated TECHNOLOGY IS FANTASTIC that then translates as I think POLLUTION IS FANTASTIC!! FFS!!

DO YOU COMPREHEND THAT YOU MISINTERPRET (almost) EVERY FUCKING THING THAT PEOPLE POST??

[Age]

First off, some definitions only for the purpose of discussion on this thread;

Technology—broadly defined as anything created after the Industrial Revolution.
On balance—overall or on the whole; all things considered.
Good—anything that has a beneficial effect on humans.
Bad—anything that has a deleterious effect on humans.
No replies concerning these definitions will be appreciated. They are broad enough to facilitate a discussion on technology per se.

Discussion:

The promise of technology was that it would improve the lives of humans by making life easier. Has this come to be? Consider the last time you dealt with an automated telephone answering system as compared to speaking with a real person. Consider a situation when your GPS has frustrated you. Consider a time when you called a helpline for technical support only to be given instructions that you can’t understand. Consider modern rockets and bombs. Consider the unhealthy pollution caused by fossil fuel driven vehicles. In view of the many unintended consequences of technology, can you honestly think that, on balance, technology has been good for human beings?

The current fruition of technology has improved the human condition in a number of ways. Advances have been made in the development and production of new medicines. Advances in all forms of transportation have made the world smaller. Likewise, communication has made the world a more interconnected space. AI, while it may be considered a double edged sword, has crept into areas of human life such that it is becoming ubiquitous. Technology has increased agricultural production tremendously. Can you really say that technology, on the whole, has been a detriment to humans?

What is your position as to whether technology has been an overall positive or a negative for human beings?

So far, the trend of technology advances since the IR is net-positive to humanity.

I would suggest that PROOF exists, which PROVES, or SHOWS, that so-called 'humanity' was MORE so-called 'positive' than 'it' IS 'now', in the days when this is being written. That is; IF ANY one CARED to DELVE INTO and DISCUSS 'things' FURTHER here.

Without technological advances since IR, humans could have been extinct by pandemics from the expeditious evolving viruses and bacteria.

The ONLY 'thing' so-called 'expeditious' evolving 'thing' CAUSING or LEADING TOWARDS 'extinction' IS 'you', adult human being/s.

The BIGGEST 'pest', (virus or bacteria), and DANGER on planet earth are 'you', adult human beings, "yourselves".

At present, with technology, humans are now aware [have knowledge] of the potential extinction of the human species from a rogue meteor that could exterminate humanity like what happened to the dinosaurs.
With advancing technology, there is hope humanity could divert the meteor from its path heading toward Earth.

BUT KILL, and WIPE, "themselves", OUT through HATRED, CONFUSION, GREED, POLLUTION, and/or CONFLICT, INSTEAD.

With the positive trend of technology advances, humanity are now more knowledgeable of other threats to humanity on a global scale that could exterminate the human species; it is also from such advances that there is hope for humanity to deal with such threats.

BUT adult human beings CAN BE and ARE, in the days when this is being written BLIND, DEAF, and UNAWARE of the ACTUAL CAUSE, which IS LEADING UP TO the ACTUAL EXTERMINATION of the human, and other, species.

The positive trend of technology advance toward the future must be complemented with high average moral competences within humanity.

YET, in the days when this is being written, there is NOT a 'one of you' who IS ABLE TO LIST, What IS, morally, Right and/or Wrong, in Life?'

AND, the Truly AMAZING, and UPSETTING, 'thing' TO OBSERVE and WATCH here IS 'you', adult human beings, DISPUTING, DISAGREEING, FIGHTING, AND even KILLING "each other", OVER 'What IS ACTUALLY, morally, Right IN Life'.

What IS Truly ABSURD here IS 'you', adult human beings, even INVENT and CREATE 'weapons' of ABSOLUTE UNTOLD MASS DESTRUCTION, all UNDER the PRETENSE OF 'protecting yourselves'. 'you' ARE SO BLIND and STUPID here most of 'you' STILL can NOT SEE that the ONLY 'thing' 'you' ARE, so-called and LAUGHABLY, 'TRYING TO' 'protect' "yourselves" FROM, ARE 'yourselves".

The ONLY REAL 'danger' to 'you', human beings, in the days when this is being written, ARE 'you', adult human beings. BUT most of 'you', adults, could NOT SEE 'this OBVIOUS Fact'.

Again it is the continuing trend of technological advances that will enable humanity to expedite the moral progress of individuals.

The moving BACK TO living IN, and BY, 'What IS, morally, Right, in Life', will NEVER come FROM 'technology'. ALL 'moral progress' COMES FROM WITH-IN, and NOT FROM what IS OUT. Living BY 'What IS, morally, Right, in Life', AGAIN, and ONCE MORE, NEXT TIME, COMES/CAME FROM, and WITH, a conscious KNOWING 'this time'.

[Age]

Hey, Age…do you ever catch a bus, plane, automobile, motorbike, pogo-stick?

WHO CARES?

The ANSWER to 'that QUESTION', OBVIOUSLY, has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER AT ALL TO DO WITH THE 'comments and remarks' that 'you' MADE here, and which I SHOWED the ABSURDITY OF.

Does your method of communicating your worthless drivel to us on the forum entirely run on solar\wind energy? (woops, that’s technology too you idiot)

'you' appear to be MISSING 'the point' here, ONCE AGAIN, "attofishpi".

'The POINT' being, 'you' SAID and CLAIMED that 'technology', which, OBVIOUSLY, INCLUDED 'pollution', was FANTASTIC (positive).

I AM JUST POINTING OUT HOW and WHY 'this VIEW' IS RIDICULOUS, and IS even PART OF the reason WHY 'you', human beings, in the days when this is being written, ARE living IN 'the MESS' that 'you' OBVIOUSLY ALL ARE.

When the Sun goes down do you light a candlestick?
Do you not fart methane? Is that why you are so full of gas?
Do you not eat food brought to shops in trucks?

The ANSWER to ALL of 'these QUESTIONS' have ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING on the ACTUAL STUPIDITY and RIDICULOUS of 'you' CLAIMING that 'the POLLUTION' that 'you', human beings, ARE CREATING, which 'you' OBVIOUSLY do NOT NEED TO, IS FANTASTIC (POSITIVE).

To me, pollution IS NOT FANTASTIC, and NOT POSITIVE, AT ALL.

Hey, dictate to us mere ‘human beings’ how much better you are in NOT polluting planet Earth.

'you' have absolutely NO IDEA, NOR CLUE, as to what 'I' DO and AM ACTUALLY DOING HERE"attofishpi".

..and while you are at it, since clearly you see technology as a NEGATIVE for human beings,

ONCE AGAIN, here what can be CLEARLY SEEN is that 'this one' did NOT hear and did NOT even SEE what I SAID and WROTE, PREVIOUSLY.

LOOK "attofishpi" I have NEVER even 'thought', 'suggested', SAID, NOR even WRITTEN that I see 'technology' as a NEGATIVE for human beings. So, for 'you' to think, ASSUME, or BELIEVE I DO, literally, SHOWS and REVEALS just how Truly DEAF, BLIND, and STUPID 'you' REALLY ARE being here.

AGAIN, 'confirmation bias' IS CLEARLY VISIBLE here. AND, what ELSE that can be CLEARLY SEEN here IS 'this one's' 'either/or' VERY STRONG PERSPECTIVE of 'things'.

All I ESSENTIAL DID was just POINT OUT that 'this one' CLAIMS that 'pollution' IS FANTASTIC (POSITIVE), and what 'this', supposedly, MEANS, to 'this one' anyway, is that 'I, somehow supposedly, SEE 'technology' as being a NEGATIVE.

The ABSURDITY AMONG and IN 'these adult human beings', BACK THEN, sometimes seems NEVER ENDING and/or UNLIMITED.

tell us why technological developments in capturing Solar\wind\tidal\geothermal energy IS a NEGATIVE for the environment of planet fucking Earth.

'What', EXACTLY, MADE 'you' think or PRESUME that 'I' SEE 'technology' as a NEGATIVE, to even BEGIN WITH?

Age, see that RED bit up there I highlighted?

YES.

That is you erroneously asserting that I stated that POLLUTION is fantastic!!

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' have COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISSED 'things' here, "attofishpi".

BASED UPON the ACTUAL opening post, AND 'your response' to 'it' I think you WILL FIND that 'I' AM NOT 'erroneously asserting' ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing' here.

YOU jumped to the conclusion that because I stated TECHNOLOGY IS FANTASTIC that then translates as I think POLLUTION IS FANTASTIC!! FFS!!

OF COURSE what 'you' SAID and WROTE translates to 'THIS'.

Did 'you' NOT READ the opening post here?

DO YOU COMPREHEND THAT YOU MISINTERPRET (almost) EVERY FUCKING THING THAT PEOPLE POST??

Do 'you' UNDERSTAND, and COMPREHEND, that A LOT of what I SAY and WRITE here gets MISUNDERSTOOD, MISINTERPRETED, and/or JUST MISSED BY 'you', posters, here?

Now, if 'you' would like to DELVE INTO and DISCUSS HOW and WHY 'you' MISSED what was ACTUALLY SAID and WRITTEN in the opening post, then PLEASE let me KNOW. Or, if 'you' STILL WANT TO BELIEVE that 'it' IS 'me' who HAS BEEN MISINTERPRETING, ERRONEOUSLY ASSERTING 'things' here, and/or that 'you' have NOT MISSED ANY 'thing' in the opening post, then, ALSO, PLEASE let me KNOW 'this', AS WELL.

I WILL THEN SHOW and REVEAL what HAS Truly HAPPENED and OCCURRED here.

[FlashDangerpants]

Technology—broadly defined as anything created after the Industrial Revolution.

I don't really know when the Industrial Revolution ended, so it's unclear which tech happened after it. Is the oldest tech in question the motor car, the fax machine, penicillin, heavier than air flight, those old IBM things with the holes punched in them...?

I don’t know which of these inventions came first. Why is this important to you?

I have been inspired by my interractions with the trajedy of logik to really make sure all terms are defined with great precision. So this "technology" that is broadly defined as tech that comes after the industrial revolution... I don't know what it is because I don't know when the industrial revolution ended. The question is imponderably vague unless you can tell us that much at least.

Or are you saying tech since the start of the IR? That would be madness though, because then you are comparing modern life to the times when everyone died of syphilis excelt those lucky enough to succumb to typohoid in childhood.

[commonsense]

I don't really know when the Industrial Revolution ended, so it's unclear which tech happened after it. Is the oldest tech in question the motor car, the fax machine, penicillin, heavier than air flight, those old IBM things with the holes punched in them...?

I don’t know which of these inventions came first. Why is this important to you?

I have been inspired by my interractions with the trajedy of logik to really make sure all terms are defined with great precision. So this "technology" that is broadly defined as tech that comes after the industrial revolution... I don't know what it is because I don't know when the industrial revolution ended. The question is imponderably vague unless you can tell us that much at least.

Or are you saying tech since the start of the IR? That would be madness though, because then you are comparing modern life to the times when everyone died of syphilis excelt those lucky enough to succumb to typohoid in childhood.

Industrial Revolution: 1760 - 1840.

Broad definitions play against restrictions of thought.

[FlashDangerpants]

I don’t know which of these inventions came first. Why is this important to you?

I have been inspired by my interractions with the trajedy of logik to really make sure all terms are defined with great precision. So this "technology" that is broadly defined as tech that comes after the industrial revolution... I don't know what it is because I don't know when the industrial revolution ended. The question is imponderably vague unless you can tell us that much at least.

Or are you saying tech since the start of the IR? That would be madness though, because then you are comparing modern life to the times when everyone died of syphilis excelt those lucky enough to succumb to typohoid in childhood.

Industrial Revolution: 1760 - 1840.

Broad definitions play against restrictions of thought.

That's quite a range. In 1760 Jethro Tull's seed drill that could plant three or four rows of turnips at once was cutting edge tech...

It made thousands of farm hands redundant overnight and forced them to live in filthy overvcrowded cities, where their life expectancy increased, literacy boomed, and their children were less likely to die in infancy.

By 1840, the cutting edge of tech was probably the transatlantic steamer SS Great Western


so are we worrying about whether everything since the first paddle steamers was a bad idea, or everything since horse drawn ploughs?

[commonsense]

I have been inspired by my interractions with the trajedy of logik to really make sure all terms are defined with great precision. So this "technology" that is broadly defined as tech that comes after the industrial revolution... I don't know what it is because I don't know when the industrial revolution ended. The question is imponderably vague unless you can tell us that much at least.

Or are you saying tech since the start of the IR? That would be madness though, because then you are comparing modern life to the times when everyone died of syphilis excelt those lucky enough to succumb to typohoid in childhood.

Industrial Revolution: 1760 - 1840.

Broad definitions play against restrictions of thought.

That's quite a range. In 1760 Jethro Tull's seed drill that could plant three or four rows of turnips at once was cutting edge tech...

It made thousands of farm hands redundant overnight and forced them to live in filthy overvcrowded cities, where their life expectancy increased, literacy boomed, and their children were less likely to die in infancy.

By 1840, the cutting edge of tech was probably the transatlantic steamer SS Great Western


so are we worrying about whether everything since the first paddle steamers was a bad idea, or everything since horse drawn ploughs?

So now you can reveal whether you think technology is, on balance, a good thing or not, yes?

[FlashDangerpants]

So now you can reveal whether you think technology is, on balance, a good thing or not, yes?

I think it's great. Imagine having to wait for a pigeon to swim the Atlantic like they did in ye olden tymes so that you can find out the latest news of Peter Kropotkin's philosophical investigations. With the interwibbliweb I get to know what amazing thing Kropotkin is thinking about in real time. As It Happens!

Was life before that even really living?

[attofishpi]

WHO CARES?

The ANSWER to 'that QUESTION', OBVIOUSLY, has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER AT ALL TO DO WITH THE 'comments and remarks' that 'you' MADE here, and which I SHOWED the ABSURDITY OF.


'you' appear to be MISSING 'the point' here, ONCE AGAIN, "attofishpi".

'The POINT' being, 'you' SAID and CLAIMED that 'technology', which, OBVIOUSLY, INCLUDED 'pollution', was FANTASTIC (positive).

I AM JUST POINTING OUT HOW and WHY 'this VIEW' IS RIDICULOUS, and IS even PART OF the reason WHY 'you', human beings, in the days when this is being written, ARE living IN 'the MESS' that 'you' OBVIOUSLY ALL ARE.



The ANSWER to ALL of 'these QUESTIONS' have ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING on the ACTUAL STUPIDITY and RIDICULOUS of 'you' CLAIMING that 'the POLLUTION' that 'you', human beings, ARE CREATING, which 'you' OBVIOUSLY do NOT NEED TO, IS FANTASTIC (POSITIVE).

To me, pollution IS NOT FANTASTIC, and NOT POSITIVE, AT ALL.


'you' have absolutely NO IDEA, NOR CLUE, as to what 'I' DO and AM ACTUALLY DOING HERE"attofishpi".


ONCE AGAIN, here what can be CLEARLY SEEN is that 'this one' did NOT hear and did NOT even SEE what I SAID and WROTE, PREVIOUSLY.

LOOK "attofishpi" I have NEVER even 'thought', 'suggested', SAID, NOR even WRITTEN that I see 'technology' as a NEGATIVE for human beings. So, for 'you' to think, ASSUME, or BELIEVE I DO, literally, SHOWS and REVEALS just how Truly DEAF, BLIND, and STUPID 'you' REALLY ARE being here.

AGAIN, 'confirmation bias' IS CLEARLY VISIBLE here. AND, what ELSE that can be CLEARLY SEEN here IS 'this one's' 'either/or' VERY STRONG PERSPECTIVE of 'things'.

All I ESSENTIAL DID was just POINT OUT that 'this one' CLAIMS that 'pollution' IS FANTASTIC (POSITIVE), and what 'this', supposedly, MEANS, to 'this one' anyway, is that 'I, somehow supposedly, SEE 'technology' as being a NEGATIVE.

The ABSURDITY AMONG and IN 'these adult human beings', BACK THEN, sometimes seems NEVER ENDING and/or UNLIMITED.


'What', EXACTLY, MADE 'you' think or PRESUME that 'I' SEE 'technology' as a NEGATIVE, to even BEGIN WITH?

Age, see that RED bit up there I highlighted?

YES.

That is you erroneously asserting that I stated that POLLUTION is fantastic!!

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' have COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISSED 'things' here, "attofishpi".

BASED UPON the ACTUAL opening post, AND 'your response' to 'it' I think you WILL FIND that 'I' AM NOT 'erroneously asserting' ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing' here.

YOU jumped to the conclusion that because I stated TECHNOLOGY IS FANTASTIC that then translates as I think POLLUTION IS FANTASTIC!! FFS!!

OF COURSE what 'you' SAID and WROTE translates to 'THIS'.

Did 'you' NOT READ the opening post here?

DO YOU COMPREHEND THAT YOU MISINTERPRET (almost) EVERY FUCKING THING THAT PEOPLE POST??

Do 'you' UNDERSTAND, and COMPREHEND, that A LOT of what I SAY and WRITE here gets MISUNDERSTOOD, MISINTERPRETED, and/or JUST MISSED BY 'you', posters, here?

Now, if 'you' would like to DELVE INTO and DISCUSS HOW and WHY 'you' MISSED what was ACTUALLY SAID and WRITTEN in the opening post, then PLEASE let me KNOW. Or, if 'you' STILL WANT TO BELIEVE that 'it' IS 'me' who HAS BEEN MISINTERPRETING, ERRONEOUSLY ASSERTING 'things' here, and/or that 'you' have NOT MISSED ANY 'thing' in the opening post, then, ALSO, PLEASE let me KNOW 'this', AS WELL.

I WILL THEN SHOW and REVEAL what HAS Truly HAPPENED and OCCURRED here.

Philosophical enquiry can be a form of trolling for some people. I agree that Age is the only obvious troll on this forum currently, often bombarding threads and posters with mountains of nonsense claims and questions gushing forth as some sort of fantasy know-it-all glory for himself based on the delusions he seems mired in. It's surprising that he has not been banned from this forum, like any other excessive troll/spammer.

Yes, it's one thing to have basically a non-moderated forum, free speech and all, but Age is beyond the pale.

...

I have to draw your attention to this guy "Age" Rick, I mean just look at the above nonsense from him, and it's everyday he posts copious amounts of this rubbish.

[Age]

Age, see that RED bit up there I highlighted?

YES.

That is you erroneously asserting that I stated that POLLUTION is fantastic!!

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' have COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISSED 'things' here, "attofishpi".

BASED UPON the ACTUAL opening post, AND 'your response' to 'it' I think you WILL FIND that 'I' AM NOT 'erroneously asserting' ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing' here.

YOU jumped to the conclusion that because I stated TECHNOLOGY IS FANTASTIC that then translates as I think POLLUTION IS FANTASTIC!! FFS!!

OF COURSE what 'you' SAID and WROTE translates to 'THIS'.

Did 'you' NOT READ the opening post here?

DO YOU COMPREHEND THAT YOU MISINTERPRET (almost) EVERY FUCKING THING THAT PEOPLE POST??

Do 'you' UNDERSTAND, and COMPREHEND, that A LOT of what I SAY and WRITE here gets MISUNDERSTOOD, MISINTERPRETED, and/or JUST MISSED BY 'you', posters, here?

Now, if 'you' would like to DELVE INTO and DISCUSS HOW and WHY 'you' MISSED what was ACTUALLY SAID and WRITTEN in the opening post, then PLEASE let me KNOW. Or, if 'you' STILL WANT TO BELIEVE that 'it' IS 'me' who HAS BEEN MISINTERPRETING, ERRONEOUSLY ASSERTING 'things' here, and/or that 'you' have NOT MISSED ANY 'thing' in the opening post, then, ALSO, PLEASE let me KNOW 'this', AS WELL.

I WILL THEN SHOW and REVEAL what HAS Truly HAPPENED and OCCURRED here.

Philosophical enquiry can be a form of trolling for some people. I agree that Age is the only obvious troll on this forum currently, often bombarding threads and posters with mountains of nonsense claims and questions gushing forth as some sort of fantasy know-it-all glory for himself based on the delusions he seems mired in. It's surprising that he has not been banned from this forum, like any other excessive troll/spammer.

Yes, it's one thing to have basically a non-moderated forum, free speech and all, but Age is beyond the pale.

The ACTUAL 'things' that 'you', "attofishpi", "lacewing", and "others" here do NOT, REALLY, like ABOUT what I SAY and WRITE here is the Fact that I POINT OUT and SHOW 'your' Inaccuracies, and INVALID and/or UNSOUND arguing, and WHEN I QUESTION and CHALLENGE 'you' OVER 'your CLAIMS'.

...

I have to draw your attention to this guy "Age" Rick, I mean just look at the above nonsense from him, and it's everyday he posts copious amounts of this rubbish.

There is ABSOLUTELY NO so-called NONSENSE ABOVE, and the Fact that 'you' can NOT STIPULATE ABSOLUTELY ANY just SHOWS and PROVES that there IS NONE.

Also, I CAN and WILL, ABSOLUTELY, back up and support ABSOLUTELY EVERY 'thing' that I have SAID and WRITTEN here. That is; IF ABSOLUTELY ANY one of 'you' here HAS the COURAGE and ABILITY TO CHALLENGE 'me' here.

Furthermore, I AGREE JUST LOOK AT the above FROM 'me'.

1. "attofishpi" has OBVIOUSLY NOT, FULLY, READ and COMPREHENDED the opening post, BECAUSE if 'it' DID, then 'it' would CLEARLY SEE that 'pollution' IS INCLUDED IN, WITH, and AS 'technology', and that it WAS "attofishpi" who WANTS TO CONTINUE TO CLAIM that 'technology' IS FANTASTIC, and even POSITIVE.

2. "attofishpi", OBVIOUSLY, NEVER SOUGHT TO CLARIFY 'things', but RATHER just PREFERRED to STAY STUCK in 'its' OWN BELIEFS here. Which, as I have CONTINUALLY POINTED OUT and STIPULATED, It IS BELIEFS that STOP and PREVENT people FROM LEARNING, SEEING, and UNDERSTANDING what the ACTUAL Truth of 'things' REALLY IS. As AGAIN SHOWN and PROVED True above, here.

3. IF ONLY "attofishpi" had NOT been SO QUICK TO JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS here, then "attofishpi" would NOT have ENDED UP SO COMPLETELY IN THE Wrong here, ONCE AGAIN. I SUGGEST READING the opening post AGAIN "attofishpi".

4. Some might be now suggesting that it SHOULD be 'those' who do NOT ACTUALLY 'philosophize' here, like "attofishpi" is NOT here, which would be BEST REMOVED FROM 'this forum'.

[Age]

I don't really know when the Industrial Revolution ended, so it's unclear which tech happened after it. Is the oldest tech in question the motor car, the fax machine, penicillin, heavier than air flight, those old IBM things with the holes punched in them...?

I don’t know which of these inventions came first. Why is this important to you?

I have been inspired by my interractions with the trajedy of logik to really make sure all terms are defined with great precision. So this "technology" that is broadly defined as tech that comes after the industrial revolution...

BUT 'technology', as defined here, in the opening post, is NOT broadly defined as 'tech', that comes after the industrial revolution AT ALL.

ACTUALLY 'technology', as defined here, in the opening post, IS broadly defined as 'anything' created after the Industrial Revolution.

Which, for people like "attofishpi", OBVIOUSLY, INCLUDES 'things' like POLLUTION.

Sometimes 'these people', BACK THEN, could REALLY DO WITH SOME MORE READING LESSONS.

I don't know what it is because I don't know when the industrial revolution ended. The question is imponderably vague unless you can tell us that much at least.

See here is A VERY, VERY GOOD POINT.

Or are you saying tech since the start of the IR? That would be madness though, because then you are comparing modern life to the times when everyone died of syphilis excelt those lucky enough to succumb to typohoid in childhood.

SAYING 'modern life' is ALSO SAID WITHOUT A BEGINNING NOR AN ENDING ALSO, "flashdangerpants".

JUST LIKE WHEN 'the Industrial Revolution' words WERE SAID, WITHOUT A BEGINNING NOR AN ENDING.

[Age]

I don’t know which of these inventions came first. Why is this important to you?

I have been inspired by my interractions with the trajedy of logik to really make sure all terms are defined with great precision. So this "technology" that is broadly defined as tech that comes after the industrial revolution... I don't know what it is because I don't know when the industrial revolution ended. The question is imponderably vague unless you can tell us that much at least.

Or are you saying tech since the start of the IR? That would be madness though, because then you are comparing modern life to the times when everyone died of syphilis excelt those lucky enough to succumb to typohoid in childhood.

Industrial Revolution: 1760 - 1840.

SEE HOW QUICKLY 'issues' can be RESOLVED, WHEN 'they' ARISE?

Broad definitions play against restrictions of thought.

[Age]

I have been inspired by my interractions with the trajedy of logik to really make sure all terms are defined with great precision. So this "technology" that is broadly defined as tech that comes after the industrial revolution... I don't know what it is because I don't know when the industrial revolution ended. The question is imponderably vague unless you can tell us that much at least.

Or are you saying tech since the start of the IR? That would be madness though, because then you are comparing modern life to the times when everyone died of syphilis excelt those lucky enough to succumb to typohoid in childhood.

Industrial Revolution: 1760 - 1840.

Broad definitions play against restrictions of thought.

That's quite a range. In 1760 Jethro Tull's seed drill that could plant three or four rows of turnips at once was cutting edge tech...

It made thousands of farm hands redundant overnight and forced them to live in filthy overvcrowded cities, where their life expectancy increased, literacy boomed, and their children were less likely to die in infancy.

By 1840, the cutting edge of tech was probably the transatlantic steamer SS Great Western


so are we worrying about whether everything since the first paddle steamers was a bad idea, or everything since horse drawn ploughs?

WHY IS ANY one 'worrying' ABOUT ANY 'thing' here?

There was JUST A QUESTION posed, in the opening post, ASKED FOR responses/answers. So, REALLY there IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL TO 'worry' ABOUT here.