From: Stephen Talbott
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: 01/03/01 20:08
Subject: NetFuture #118
NETFUTURE
Technology and Human Responsibility
=======================================================================
==
Issue #118 A Publication of The Nature Institute March 1,
2001
=======================================================================
==
Editor: Stephen L. Talbott ([log in to unmask])
On the Web: http://www.netfuture.org/
You may redistribute this newsletter for noncommercial purposes.
NetFuture is a reader-supported publication.
CONTENTS:
---------
Editor's Note
Lowell Monke's New Book
On Activism and an Open Mind
Water, Energy, and Global Warming (Michael D'Aleo and Stephen Edelglass)
Have we selected our primary villain too soon?
Tech Knowledge Revue (Langdon Winner)
Introducing the Automatic Professor Machine
DEPARTMENTS
Correspondence
Ravel at Camphill (David Plank)
Don't Mistake Power for God (Dale Lehman)
Animal Cruelty Is Related to Violence among Humans (David Miller)
Sources for Alternative Meats (Phil Walsh)
Announcements and Resources
Two Technology-criticism Web Sites
About this newsletter
=======================================================================
==
EDITOR'S NOTE
Lowell Monke's New Book
-----------------------
A book by NetFuture's occasional columnist, Lowell Monke, has just been
published by the State University of New York Press. Co-authored with
R.W. Burniske, a researcher in the Computer Writing and Research
Laboratory at the University of Texas, the book is called *Breaking Down
the Digital Walls: Learning to Teach in a Post-Modem World*. It
includes,
along with much other good stuff, Lowell's wonderful essay, "The Web and
the Plow", first published in NF #19. Both authors were, during the
writing of this book, deeply engaged in teaching computer technology to
high school students, and the book reflects some deep thinking about
their
experiences.
Go to www.sunypress.edu/breaking.html for sample chapters and ordering
information. I hope to publish an excerpt from the book in a later
issue.
On Activism and an Open Mind
----------------------------
When we channel our environmental concerns into activism, we always
place
our understanding at risk. We need the movements and causes, of course,
but it requires special vigilance to prevent our activist commitments
from
clouding our vision. Anyone who has once taken a public stand knows
that
openness to fresh insights conflicting with this stand demands a certain
selflessness. Egotism has doubtless sabotaged the growth potential of
many a promising movement.
Yet an inflexible reading of the facts is particularly ironic when it
comes to the environment, because if ecology has taught us anything at
all, it's that there is *always* something else to consider, always
additional complicating factors.
I present the feature article in this issue with considerable
trepidation,
since it may tread heavily on the sensitivities of any who take global
warming as a matter of simple fact related to unambiguous causes. The
authors, Michael D'Aleo and Stephen Edelglass, were moved to look at the
larger picture, and this led them to acknowledge the legitimate doubts
about the role of carbon dioxide. It also led them to surprising
questions about the most "innocent" of atmospheric emissions, water
vapor
-- and particularly the high-temperature vapor produced by combustion.
If
they are justified in their concerns, then such technologies of the
future
as hydrogen fuel cells (whose only emission is water) may not be quite
the
perfect answers we have imagined.
D'Aleo and Edelglass, recognizing the seriousness of the unsettled
questions framing the current debate, remain noncommittal about the role
of carbon dioxide and the fact of warming itself, as a *global*
phenomenon. But they certainly agree that our willingness to alter
atmospheric composition on a wholesale level is a willingness to play
Russian roulette with ecological balances we have scarcely begun to
understand.
What prompted their inquiry in the first place was D'Aleo's reflection
upon the early advertisement of the automobile as the solution to a
major
pollution problem of the last century -- namely, the mountains of horse
manure accumulating in rapidly growing cities. The automobile's own
contribution to pollution didn't figure in the calculations of the time.
What, D'Aleo wondered, are we leaving out of our calculations today when
we quickly embrace `benign' alternatives to fossil fuels and other
carbon
dioxide sources?
Sadly and unexpectedly, Stephen Edelglass died in November, 2000, after
this paper was drafted. He and D'Aleo had been instrumental in forming
SENSRI, a small, sister organization of The Nature Institute (publisher
of
NetFuture). Like the Institute, SENSRI is devoted to looking at
problems
contextually.
I sincerely hope their paper will be received in the spirit it deserves:
not as merely "for" or "against" any one of the hardened battle
positions
of the day, but rather as part of an unceasing movement toward a more
encompassing understanding.
SLT
=======================================================================
==
WATER, ENERGY, AND GLOBAL WARMING
Michael D'Aleo and Stephen Edelglass
The following is an abridgment, paraphrase, and summary of a larger
paper
(with explicit calculations and references) expected to be available by
March 8 at www.natureinstitute.org/.
Author Michael D'Aleo ([log in to unmask]), who is trained both as
engineer and educator, has spent a number of years working in industry,
receiving several patents along the way. His main interest has been to
solve technical problems artistically, based on processes found in the
natural world. He currently teaches physical science and mathematics at
the Spring Hill Waldorf School in Saratoga Springs, New York. He co-
authored the recent book, *Sensible Physics Teaching*, with Stephen
Edelglass.
Dr. Edelglass was for many years on the faculty of the Cooper Union for
the Advancement of Science and Art in New York City. He then taught
high
school mathematics and physics at the Green Meadow Waldorf School in
Spring Valley, New York, until his death last year. In addition to
*Sensible Physics Teaching*, he co-authored *The Marriage of Sense and
Thought: Imaginative Participation in Science*.
* * * * * * * * *
WATER, ENERGY, AND GLOBAL WARMING
We suspect that the public's affinity for well-defined (and preferably
villainous!) causes throws light on the current debates about global
climate change. The fixation upon a single atmospheric constituent --
carbon dioxide, which has the advantage of now being widely viewed as a
dangerous pollutant -- may have encouraged us to ignore elements of the
larger picture. Our intention here is to fill out another part of that
picture in a way that may prove startling: it appears that perfectly
"harmless" water vapor and the actual quantity of energy produced with
it
may be at least as much the villains as carbon dioxide.
Some Questions
--------------
Given the rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and given
the
insulating properties of this gas, it is natural to wonder whether we
are
looking at the cause of global warming. But has there actually been
warming over the past century, and if so, how much?
The problem underlying the current debate is that there are two
conflicting sets of data. Ground-based thermometer readings from land-
based weather stations indicate a temperature rise of about 0.6 degrees
C
since record-keeping began in the nineteenth century. Most of this
increase occurs in the second half of the twentieth century, with the
greater part, 0.2 to 0.3 degrees, coming after 1975. While these
figures
may seem small, they are potentially significant for climate change.
A second set of measurements, available only since 1980, derives from
satellites and balloons that scan the temperature of the lower
atmosphere
across the *entire* surface of the planet. These measurements show an
increase ranging from under 0.1 degree C to essentially zero. So while
the first method indicates a rather substantial change, the second
suggests a fairly modest change. Much of the wrangling focuses on which
set of data is correct.
The picture becomes more interesting when a comparison is made between
urban and rural ground-based weather stations. Urban stations show a
significantly greater temperature increase. In fact, many rural
stations
show no change at all. This has led scientists to speculate about the
existence of a so-called "heat island effect", which might affect our
global temperature measurements. In the late 1990s, NASA completed a
study of this effect in Atlanta, Georgia. The study showed temperatures
inside Atlanta up to 8 degrees F higher than the surrounding
countryside.
The suggested explanation is that man-made materials such as concrete
and
asphalt store more of the sun's heat energy than forests do. A number
of
studies also found significant temperature differences between downtown
business districts and downtown treed parks. The treed parks were up to
7
degrees F cooler than adjacent business areas.
Another interesting phenomenon is the suspected link between forest
fires
and global warming. These fires may play a significant role in
contributing to global temperature changes. At least one study suggests
that up to 40% of the global greenhouse gas emissions may result from
combustion due to forest fires that occur around the world. The report
notes that forest destruction further reduces plant absorption of carbon
dioxide.
The link between global temperature increases and increased levels of
carbon dioxide is actually quite complex and not without its share of
uncertainty. By analyzing gas bubbles trapped in ice core samples, one
group of scientists found that the levels of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere, previously thought to be constant, actually varied
significantly during the last 11,000 years prior to the industrial age.
They also found that, during some earlier periods, the temperature
increased *before* the carbon dioxide levels began to rise, sometimes
with
as much as a 400-to-1000-year lag. While this does not imply there is
no
link between global temperature and carbon dioxide levels, it does
suggest
that other mechanisms may help determine global temperature variation
over
time.
Finally and perhaps most puzzling: scientists have noted that while
many
weather stations worldwide have been reporting increases in average
temperature, there also appears to be a worldwide decrease in global
rates
of evaporation. This was unexpected, since warm air can receive more
moisture than cool air and thus, warmer air favors evaporation.
Has some mechanism put more water into the atmosphere, thereby reducing
the global rates of evaporation?
Water Cycles and Their Alteration
---------------------------------
Water is essential for life. There are cycles of water transformation
from the individual organism all the way up to the scale of the entire
earth. As always, a certain balance must be achieved to prevent what
supports life from becoming destructive. The farmer hopes for a balance
of rain and sun for a good crop. Too little rain and the crop withers;
too much brings decay and rot.
Water also plays a significant role in the earth's thermal balance. The
specific heat of water (the amount of heat required to raise the
temperature of one gram of water by one degree centigrade) is higher
than
for almost any other material. Likewise for the amount of energy
released
when water vapor condenses to the liquid state, although this effect is
even more energy-intensive. The adage, "A watched pot never boils" pays
tribute to water's massive ability to absorb heat. Nearly everyone has
experienced the moderating effect of the ocean and large lakes on the
climate of nearby cities. These masses of water are slow to warm in hot
weather, and slow to cool in cold weather.
When a fossil fuel is burned, it produces not only carbon dioxide, but
also water vapor (steam), in relatively equal amounts. A given unit of
octane (the main component in gasoline), when completely combusted, then
exhausted at 150 degrees C, and then cooled to an ambient temperature of
30 degrees, releases directly into the atmosphere *ten times* as much
thermal energy from the water as from the carbon dioxide. In addition,
the insulating effect of water vapor and carbon dioxide are essentially
identical, so that water vapor adds substantially to any greenhouse
effect
in those areas where combustion is occurring.
Cities and industrial areas, of course, are primary sources of water
vapor
production via combustion. But they also channel water into the
atmosphere by other means. Cities present vast evaporative surfaces
preventing the return of water to underground aquifers. (The
evaporation
of water from hot asphalt after a summer rainstorm is particularly
noticeable.) Water from city surfaces is channeled into storm sewers,
where it is finally put into a holding pond or river, from which further
evaporation occurs. Additionally, ground water tables are falling in
many
cities.
But if water tables are falling, where has the water gone? You might
assume that levels have risen in surface bodies of water, but this has
not
been observed. Apparently the water has gone into the atmosphere.
Cities are not the only sites of large-scale, human-caused water vapor
emission. Deforestation by burning releases tremendous amounts of water
into the atmosphere: the tree itself is 50% water; combustion of the
remaining 50% (carbohydrates and cellulose) produces more water; and
destruction of the forest canopy exposes the moist forest soil to
evaporation by sun and wind. Given present rates of deforestation, the
potential for regional climate modification is considerable, quite apart
from the production of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.
Deforestation releases more water vapor than carbon dioxide.
Water Emissions and Climate Modification
----------------------------------------
If we have been releasing more water into the atmosphere, might it be
falling out of the sky somewhere? There is little evidence for
increased
precipitation on a global scale. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Association reports a small (one percent) increase in precipitation over
land in the twentieth century, while the same report notes a general
increase in cloud cover over both land and oceans in recent decades.
For
the most part, areas experiencing long wet spells seem to be
counterbalanced by other areas experiencing drought.
The fact that there seems to be little overall increase in precipitation
despite increasing human contributions of water vapor suggests that the
atmosphere's water content might be rising. However, this would not be
a
*global* effect. Water vapor, unlike carbon dioxide, does not diffuse
easily through the atmosphere and is therefore concentrated near the
earth's surface.
Further, the atmospheric water vapor content will be higher near the
sources of water vapor -- for example, near cities and areas undergoing
deforestation -- rather than being evenly dispersed in the manner of
carbon dioxide. Higher atmospheric water vapor would be expected near
cities on a continuing basis, as a result of the combustion of fossil
fuels. It would also be expected near deforested areas on a short-term
basis; once deforestation is complete, the effect would cease.
All this has definite implications for climate modification. In the
first
place, given the higher temperature of the products of combustion, the
release of energy when water vapor is condensed, and the insulating
effects of water vapor, we should expect an increase in the cities'
average yearly temperature. As we have seen, this "heat island effect"
has already been reported, although the link to water vapor and
combustion
processes has been widely missed.
All energy production ultimately manifests as thermal energy. A very
general calculation is therefore possible by taking the overall energy
produced in the U.S. in 1988 and assuming it to be evenly distributed on
a
per capita basis. In this case the energy production in a heavily
populated region such as Queens County, New York, turns out to be a
rather
astounding 43% of the total solar energy incident upon the same area.
Of course, most of this energy production releases water vapor, and our
calculation leaves aside the further, insulating and thermal properties
of
this vapor. (You'll have noticed, for example, that a cloudy night is
generally warmer than a clear night, and that a hot desert cools off
significantly at night due to a lack of water in the air and immediate
surroundings.)
A second expectation is that moisture-rich metropolitan air should
produce
rain when it moves over cooler, rural areas. This is exactly what the
NASA study of Atlanta found.
Taking the per capita U.S. consumption of fossil fuels and again
applying
it to Queens, one discovers that the water resulting from combustion
would
cover the entire 109 square miles of the county to a depth of nearly 4
inches -- this in a place where the average annual rainfall is 42.82
inches. Needless to say, not all the additional rainfall would fall
within the county, but these figures suggest the relative significance
of
the added water.
Applying the same calculations to a rural area such as Herkimer County,
New York (with a population of 65,809 on an area of 1412 square miles),
one sees only a tiny fraction of the effects seen in urban areas. For
example, human energy production turns out to equal only 0.1% of solar
input.
Reconciling the Data
--------------------
The role of water vapor and energy consumption also helps to explain
*both* sets of temperature data mentioned earlier. Even though global
levels of carbon dioxide are fairly consistent worldwide, temperature
variations are not. But these temperature variations -- including the
urban-rural disparity -- do correlate well with energy consumption and
local water vapor production.
Moreover, there appears to be a strong correlation between areas of
deforestation and temperature change, as our analysis suggests should be
the case. Temperature increases in the Amazon region and Siberia, where
significant deforestation is under way, seem to be unusually high. This
contrasts with other interior areas, such as the Midwest Plains of the
U.S., where no warming is apparent.
Finally, the decrease in measured evaporation rates now also finds
explanation. While the decrease is puzzling when taken only in
conjunction with a thesis of global warming, it makes sense once we add
human-related sources of water vapor to natural evaporation.
Furthermore,
as expected, the atmospheric water vapor content in North America (the
one
place where reliable data are available) has been increasing during the
two-decade period starting in 1973.
On the view presented here, one would expect to see *some* correlation
between carbon dioxide levels and temperature change, since both water
vapor and carbon dioxide are major products of combustion. But water
vapor's dominant role fits better with the overall pattern of global
data,
helping to resolve the contentious debate between those who see global
warming and those who don't. Local and regional warming *are*
occurring,
even if the global picture shows no clear warming trend.
One additional note: the role of increased cloudiness and its albedo
(reflective) effect is not discussed here, and requires further study.
We Are Environmental Causes
---------------------------
In sum, atmospheric warming -- the warming for which we currently have
the
clearest evidence -- is a local and regional phenomenon more than a
global
one, and it appears to be due more to human-caused energy production and
water emissions than to carbon dioxide emissions.
This is not to take a position for or against global warming as such.
Nor
is it to downplay the potentially grave significance of *any*
large-scale
alteration of the natural environment. Nor again is it to dismiss the
global significance of local and regional warming. When a NASA study of
the metropolitan Atlanta area finds that the rainfall in rural areas
southeast of the city was the result of Atlanta's "heat-island" effect,
we
can no longer deny mankind's effect on the greater environment. The
possibilities of even larger regional effects continue to be studied by
various researchers.
Even if the globally averaged temperature fluctuations reflect improper
measurements or natural periodic variations, it seems impossible to
attribute local and possibly regional temperature fluctuations to
anything
other than man-made influences. We have yet to see a report that denies
the existence of the "heat-island" effect. There is also sufficient
evidence to suggest that the atmospheric levels of water vapor are
rising
and may be responsible for local and regional changes in temperature and
in weather patterns.
If there is a moral to the story, it is that prolonged scientific debate
and confusion can sometimes result from a failure to step back and look
at
all aspects of a problem. And a second moral is that out-of-context
technological fixes aimed at a single aspect of a complex whole may
prove
destructive. Much of the research on alternative fuels today is
premised
on the belief that water vapor is a benign emission. But if we have
learned anything over the past decade, it is that a life-giving element
can become destructive if it is removed from a balanced context. The
faith being placed in hydrogen and fuel cell technologies (which emit
nothing but water) may need more thorough study.
The only solutions that will truly decrease the destabilization of the
environment are those that work in conjunction with the entire natural
process found in any given ecosystem. A greater study and understanding
of the complex interactions found within natural ecosystems may indeed
yield important details in this regard and point to real solutions to
these problems.
* * * * * * * * *
If you are interested in the details of this paper, it can be found
(after
March 8) at www.natureinstitute.org.
=======================================================================
==
INTRODUCING THE AUTOMATIC PROFESSOR MACHINE
Langdon Winner ([log in to unmask])
TECH KNOWLEDGE
REVUE
3.1 March 1,
2001
Readers of NetFuture my be interested to learn that there's now a
streaming video version of my "Introducing the Automatic Professor
Machine" satire available on my web page:
http://www.rpi.edu/~winner/apm1.html
The skit begins at the yearly meeting of the American Association for
the
Advancement of Education where I am about to give the keynote address.
Soon I step aside, introducing my alter ego, Mr. L.C. Winner, dynamic
global entrepreneur and C.E.O. of the exciting new start-up, Educational
Smart Hardware Alma Mater, Inc. From there L.C. rolls out his vision of
the "forces driving education today" and his sales pitch for the APM and
other innovative products from EDU-SHAM.
The 20-minute video is best seen if you have a fast ethernet or cable
connection. Please note that the skit is in two parts that load
automatically (of course), but with a brief break between parts one and
two. Also, I regret that the present production still lacks the sound
track for applause and crowd noise, although L.C. obviously hears them.
In the as yet unfinished final version, these sound effects will be
included along with "credits" at the conclusion and a musical theme,
"March of the Distant Educators".
The video is a shorter version of a lecture I've given at conferences
and
universities during the past couple of years. It offers my response to
the premises and pretensions of initiatives in digital, online education
that we hear so much about these days. The origin of the piece was a
straightforward lecture on globalism and education I first gave at the
School of Education, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, in the middle
1990s. After doing the same talk a few more times I decided to present
the ideas in a different way, taking the language of globalism, distance
education, computers in the classroom, and the like and pushing it over
the top. The results now stream away for your edification and enjoyment
on my web page.
When I offer the longer, 40-minute version of this shtick, there are two
common responses. Some people insist on telling L.C. Winner (who
remains
at the podium during the question and answer period) that while they
appreciate the humor, they themselves have had excellent luck using
digital hardware and software in their online schools, colleges and
universities. L.C. responds enthusiastically, telling the teachers and
administrators that he celebrates their successes; together they can
work
toward the eventual goal -- "eliminating the inflexible ballast that has
come to be known as `education' during the past two centuries!"
Inevitably, there are people in the audience who inform L.C. that his
business plan is already out of date, superceded by aggressive
corporations and hucksters in the software, communications, university,
and info-ed business worlds who are wiring the world of distance
learning
in ways far more extensive, lucrative and effective than the ham-fisted
schemes he's proposing. L.C. admits that there's stiff competition out
there, but that EDU-SHAM still has a few tricks up its sleeve. Among
these are developments that will eliminate the "two remaining
bottlenecks"
that stand in the way of achieving total penetration of education by
global, digital technology. Alas, legal issues of "intellectual
property,
copyrights, and patents" prevent L.C. from saying exactly what the
bottlenecks are or how they will be removed.
I hope to polish the Automatic Professor Machine video soon, making it
available on VHS tape and CD-ROM, perhaps by late spring. Now that I've
gotten used to this medium, I'll move on to do a series of "techno-
satires" that raise issues about technology and human responsibility in
a
variety of contexts. Your comments on the APM streaming video and its
approach are most welcome.
* * * * * * * * *
Tech Knowledge Revue is produced at the Chatham Center for Advanced
Study,
339 Bashford Road, North Chatham, NY 12132. Langdon Winner can be
reached
at: [log in to unmask] and at his Web page: http://www.rpi.edu/~winner .
Copyright Langdon Winner 2001. Distributed as part of NetFuture:
http://www.netfuture.org/. You may redistribute this article for
noncommercial purposes, with this notice attached.
=======================================================================
==
CORRESPONDENCE
Ravel at Camphill
-----------------
Response to: "On Forgetting to Wear Boots" (NF-117)
From: David Plank <[log in to unmask]>
Steve,
Thanks so much for your article on Camphill at Copake. I hope to retire
someday to live in such a community. I'll never forget an evening there
when Richard Goode played Ravel in a way that enlivened the music and
the
audience like I've never experienced anywhere else ... in space or time.
Regards,
David
Don't Mistake Power for God
---------------------------
Response to: "Response to Goldhaber and Wishard" (NF-117)
From: Dale Lehman <[log in to unmask]>
The more Kevin Kelly explains himself, the more I become bothered. He
claims that his point is that we should acknowledge our "godhood" and
not
deny it -- and that wise use of our power is a daunting and frightening
task. I agree with the latter part of the statement but I am deeply
disturbed by the acknowledgment of our "godhood." Why elevate power
(and
potential reckless power) to the status of "godhood?" I think the
characterization reveals a fundamental way of looking at human existence
that differs from my own. Yes we have power. Yes we can now influence
evolution and life on this planet to extents never possible before. Yes
we should not deny this fact but recognize it and learn how to act under
such circumstances.
But power should not be mistaken for god. I have no particular
religious
convictions, but I think it is unfortunate that the societal value that
Kevin's statement reflects is that power is good and power makes some
people more worthy than others. Isn't that part of the problem?
Dale Lehman
Animal Cruelty Is Linked to Violence among Humans
-------------------------------------------------
Response to: "How Important Is Animal Suffering?" (NF-117)
From: David Miller <[log in to unmask]>
Hi, Steve --
Phil Walsh might be interested in some research conducted and promoted
by
the Humane Society of the United States, on the connection between
cruelty
to animals and violence toward other human beings. I understand that law
enforcement personnel around the country are taking this connection
seriously. The URL for the Humane Society's "First Strike Campaign" is:
http://www.hsus.org/firststrike/index.html
To quote from their Introduction:
Over the last 25 years, many studies in psychology, sociology and
criminology have demonstrated that violent offenders frequently have
childhood and adolescent histories of serious and repeated animal
cruelty. The FBI has recognized this connection since the 1970s,
when
its analysis of the lives of serial killers suggested that most had,
as
children, killed or tortured animals.
Far more prevalent, animal cruelty is frequently an indicator in
cases
of domestic violence, child abuse, and elder abuse. In response to
recent studies indicating a strong correlation between animal abuse
and
family violence, communities across the United States are taking
animal
abuse seriously and developing innovative programs designed to
provide
early identification and intervention for violent perpetrators.
So, even if one professes that the suffering of (other!) animals is, of
itself, less important than that of humans, the connection is worth
taking
seriously.
Thanks,
David Miller
Boston, Mass.
Sources for Organic Meats
-------------------------
Response to: "How Important Is Animal Suffering?" (NF-117)
From: Phil Walsh <[log in to unmask]>
My post regarding factory farms and suffering was so poorly written that
it almost completely obscures my beliefs.
Rather than trying to salvage that post, I'd just like to note that I
whole-heartedly agree with the gist of what Lowell Monke and Douglas
Sloan
had to say about factory farms, and for anyone interested in alternative
sources of meat I offer this link to the "Iowa Family Farm Meats
Directory", a compendium of family farms that practice organic,
chemical-
free, and/or free-range animal husbandry:
http://www2.state.ia.us/agriculture/meatdirectory1.htm.
Phil Walsh
Des Moines, Iowa
=======================================================================
==
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND RESOURCES
Two Technology-criticism Web Sites
----------------------------------
NetFuture reader Hans Talmon has put together a remarkable collection of
links to a stimulating array of essays, articles, and text excerpts --
all
under the heading "Social Criticism Review" (www.socialcritic.org).
There
are numerous subheadings dealing with various aspects of technical
society
and alienation, environmental crisis, moral crisis, and the restoration
of
community. The selection of material is stunning, quickly surveyable,
and
-- unless time is an infinite resource for you -- a bit overwhelming in
its richness.
Jerry McCarthy's Luddite Reader web site (www.ludditereader.com) is less
extensive, less buttoned down, and at times a little weird. Next time
someone calls you a Luddite, check it out.
=======================================================================
==
ABOUT THIS NEWSLETTER
NetFuture is a freely distributed newsletter dealing with technology and
human responsibility. It is published by The Nature Institute, 169
Route
21C, Ghent NY 12075 (tel: 518-672-0116). Postings occur roughly every
couple of weeks. The editor is Steve Talbott, author of *The Future
Does
Not Compute: Transcending the Machines in Our Midst*.
Copyright 2001 by The Nature Institute.
You may redistribute this newsletter for noncommercial purposes. You
may
also redistribute individual articles in their entirety, provided the
NetFuture url and this paragraph are attached.
NetFuture is supported by freely given user contributions, and could not
survive without them. For details and special offers, see
http://www.netfuture.org/support.html .
Current and past issues of NetFuture are available on the Web:
http://www.netfuture.org/
To subscribe to NetFuture send the message, "subscribe netfuture
yourfirstname yourlastname", to [log in to unmask] . No
subject line is needed. To unsubscribe, send the message, "signoff
netfuture".
Send comments or material for publication to Steve Talbott
([log in to unmask]).
If you have problems subscribing or unsubscribing, send mail to:
[log in to unmask] .
************************************************************************************
Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated discussion
list made up of people who are interested in the interdisciplinary academic
study of Cyber Society in all its manifestations.To join the list please visit:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
*************************************************************************************
|
