On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 08:56:58PM +0530, Deepa Mohan wrote: > I don't agree with this, either. For most of us, electricity is a must for
Why do you imply nomadic=low tech? Self-erecting camps are the opposite of that. > communication...and very, very few of us can do without it on a permanent > basis. How would you have a nomadic existence with dependence on it? An all-terrain vehicle, a self-erecting solar canopy, solid-state air conditioning and water still, LEO sat constellation uplink. > I don't know about this, Giancarlo.....We have never had such a large > population of human beings ever...and perhaps this IS the best strategy for > human survival...the pattern always seems to have been for humans to > aggregate in large numbers...compared to the population then, the ancient Location is less important with a good enough telepresence. (Somebody fetch me a good enough telepresence). > cities were large groups of people. So why do you feel that it's sad, > dangerous, and stupid? Surely, a human being feels more secure and less > threatened by external dangers in larger groups. The problem is missing sustainability, though some infrastructure scales better in a high-density setting. It still means jack if food production and energy harvesting infrastructure blankets the city umlands. -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
