"Thomas Lunde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just recently, I was reading
>a posting about all the early computer tapes, discs, hard drives, etc that
>we are losing for two reasons, one the storage devices are deteriotating and
>two we are losing the disk drives, operating systems, formats, in wh
--
>From: "Brad McCormick, Ed.D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Steve Kurtz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I think we need also to add the enormous entropy of the
> obsolescence of knowledge. This is sometimes stated
> more "positively" as a shortening "half-life" of
> knowledge, so that by the time
Steve and Tom,
I think you are both missing the point. This (FW) is all
fantasy. What kind of world would you imagine for
the future of human endeavor (work) and
1. How is it built from the past?
2. How does it play out in the present?
3. What kind of world do you imagine it would be in the
Chris, that's not cynicism, that's business. One of the
reasons they can downsize so easily is because of the
excess they hire. All of these exercises with numbers,
hours, and work weeks are just more of the same. The
size of the company separates you so much from those
who truly control the t
Brad McCormick wrote:
> I worked on a big educational website (just a
> lot of HTML an Javascript -- pretty "simple"
> stuff, as computer programming goes!), where,
> every time Netscape came out with a new
> "maintenance release" of their web browser, it
> was time for me to find out how it would
Steve,
You were wondering why no one had replied to your earlier criticism of Jim
Stanford's op-ed piece. So I replied. My point is simply that you have taken
a light-weight rhetorical piece to task over some heavy-duty substantive
issues and have ignored the fact that we are daily inundated fro
Tom Walker wrote:
> Context, Steve, context.
> Your response to Jim Stanford's piece seemed to
> miss the point that poor-bashing and welfare-bashing have been mainstays of
> the self-styled individualist, "free market" line since time immemorial.
Maybe that's the opinion of some about the acti
Steve Kurtz wrote:
>Are there no reactions to my post about the Workfare for Capital piece?
>Perhaps all listmembers grasped its ideological hyperbole immediately!
Context, Steve, context. Your response to Jim Stanford's piece seemed to
miss the point that poor-bashing and welfare-bashing have b
Thomas once again has given us his insightful, sobering commentary on a
unidimensional, rather ephemeral perception of the human predicament. It
is not realistic to continue discussing the future of work without
including the future of the caloric input required for brain activity -
a requirement
Title: Re: Charles Leadbetter
PS: I assumed on first reading that Ian had written this lengthy post, it
was only after I had read it again and written my comments that I realized
it was written by Charles Leadbetter, so rather than spend the time
re-writng, please accept my apoligies Ian and
The NS Essay - Towards the knowledge society
Markets are too cruel, communities too stifling, third ways too much of a
fudge. Charles Leadbeater offers a fourth and better way
I will start with myself. I do not work for a company or a
university. I am neither a business consultant nor a civil
11 matches
Mail list logo
