[ExI] I love the world. =)

Wed Nov 10 02:45:21 UTC 2010

>>Could we get through a loss of the net and not loose most of the
population?  At this point "the net" and phone service is largely the
same thing, at least outside a LATA.  I think that might be possible
today, enough people remember old ways of doing things.  Ten years
from now?  20?  30?  Perhaps, but it gets harder and harder as time
goes on and dependency on the net increases.  Losing process control
computers would be really bad.  There are processes that can't be run
by hand at all, they are unstable and people are too slow.<<

An interesting discussion that I missed, likely because I am full-time work
and part-time school and don't have a lot of free time. I just moved back to
rural Nova Scotia from San Francisco and this subject has been on my mind a
lot lately. I've noticed that since I've been here ( a small isolated
community of eighty people or so, with the nearest town of any size forty
kilometers away) that lives here have changed considerably due to technology
since I was a boy. The Internet  has created broader personal networks and
people are better educated because of it. Improved medical procedures are
helping people live longer. Everyone owns more stuff and drive nicer cars
and they engage in a broader range of social, political and physical
activity than they used to. They are even more tolerant of ethnic and
cultural diversity. All of these changes in less than twenty years.

Yet, my guess is, based on my recent observations, that if they were forced
off the grid tomorrow, and had to go back to "amish-level" technology they
would survive a hell of a lot longer than most of my friends in urban areas.
Many of them still hunt and they all have guns. Some even cross-bows for
bear-hunting. They know how to get food and to keep it, even without
electricity. It is not uncommon for them to lose power in the winter months,
and they have techniques for keeping their food:  root cellars and snow
banks and packing an unpowered fridge full of ice if the juice is going to
be out for any length of time. They still preserve food (salt and pickle and
spice) and keep low-temperature vegetable bins in basements, and almost
everybody keeps some kind of garden in the warmer months. And most of all,
they know how to cooperate to get things done. They do it all the time at
local auxiliary and volunteer fire department and church meetings.

Most houses here are oil, gas, propane or pellet stove heated. But many also
have wood stoves or fireplaces for emergencies even if they don't use them.
You'd be hard-pressed to find a single household without a chopping axe.
 Since I've moved back here I've even given some thought to defense, as
scary as that sounds. The village is in a narrow valley divided by a small,
fish-abundant river, and is easily defended if you had enough people
motivated to do it (likely why this spot was chosen as a settlement in the
late 1700's to begin with, not a peaceful time in my neck of the woods.) All
in all, the chances of  keeping a thriving community here in the event of
something so disastrous as described above would be fairly good, at least
for awhile.

But there is one interesting aside. Coyotes are a huge problem. They grow
sleeker and braver and more numerous with each passing year, glutted on
domestic cats and injured deer and human garbage carelessly stored. So
people might find that predation was once again an issue, especially with
small children, if there were no passing cars and ambient machine noise to
keep them away during the day. And of course, access to medication and
infection and disease would also be a problem, though my parents still teach
their grandchildren remedies for some of the minor common ailments that many
of us now run to the doctor for.

One more thing. In my black fantasy, when the big one hits, I'm gonna grab a
gun and head to the little library village-centre and defend the books. The
world's first armed librarian.

Darren

On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 5:00 AM,  Charlie Stross
> <charlie.stross at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 8 Nov 2010, at 00:20, Mike Dougherty <msd001 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> 3) we will continue to advance according to our own programming.
> >> Mostly that frightened monkey programming that kept us from being
> >> eaten by primordial predators will make us just as likely to hit the
> >> computronium monsters with a proverbial rock or (as recently
> >> discussed) a burning branch.  Once the threat becomes possible, expect
> >> to see right next to the firehose something like "in case of hard
> >> takeoff, break glass to employ EMP."  In a not-quite-worst-case
> >> scenario we are forced to Nuke the Internet and revert back to
> >> Amish-level technologies.  Not a pretty situation, but humanity would
> >> adapt.
> >
> > Humanity *in the abstract* might adapt; but if we have to go there, you
> and I, personally, are probably going to die. Even today, all our supply
> chains have adapted to just-in-time production and shipping, relying on
> networked communications to ensure that stuff gets where it's needed; we
> can't revert to doing things the old way -- the equipment has long since
> been scrapped -- and we'd rapidly starve. Your average big box supermarket
> only holds about 24-48 hours worth of provisions, and their logistics
> infrastructure is highly tuned for efficiency. Now add in gas stations,
> railroad signalling, electricity grid control ... If we have to Nuke The Net
> Or Die, it'll mean the difference between a 100% die-back and a 90%
> die-back.
>
> I understand that just losing GPS will make hash of the banking
> industry (timestamps).
>
> > Meanwhile, the Mormons, with their requirement to keep a year of canned
> goods in the cellar, will be laughing. (Well, praying.)
>
> I thought you are out of date on this since our Mormon neighbors got
> rid of their year of food back in the late 80s.  But it seems like
> this is still part of Mormon culture, though it may be followed by a
> minority of them.
>
> Could we get through a loss of the net and not loose most of the
> population?  At this point "the net" and phone service is largely the
> same thing, at least outside a LATA.  I think that might be possible
> today, enough people remember old ways of doing things.  Ten years
> from now?  20?  30?  Perhaps, but it gets harder and harder as time
> goes on and dependency on the net increases.  Losing process control
> computers would be really bad.  There are processes that can't be run
> by hand at all, they are unstable and people are too slow.
>
> I wonder if there was any consideration for the possible consequences
> before this started?
>
> Keith
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>

-- 
"I don't regret the kingdoms. What sense in borders and nations and
patriotism? But I miss the kings."

-*Harold and Maude*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20101109/666490ca/attachment.html>