h a l f b a k e r yWith moderate power, comes moderate responsibility.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
This movement would be for minimal everything -
subsistence
food,
fashion etc. pay a company to just provide you with the
minimum
and never bother you about the details.
Tiny house movement
http://thetinylife....iny-house-movement/
[JesusHChrist, Dec 18 2014]
Steve Martin's prophetic let's get small
https://www.youtube...watch?v=fyWirJjuO5I
[JesusHChrist, Dec 18 2014]
Vonnegut already did it for the chinese
http://en.wikipedia...apstick_%28novel%29
"...and the Chinese are making vast leaps forward by miniaturizing themselves and training groups of hundreds to think as one. Eventually, the miniaturization proceeds to the point that they become so small that they cause a plague among those who accidentally inhale them, ultimately destroying Western civilization beyond repair." [Toto Anders, Dec 19 2014]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
Self-bunning, and on Shabbat as well... |
|
| |
It wasn't me, there I will now self bun just to prove it. |
|
| |
Minimalist is not the same as miniature. |
|
| |
I've heard that if you don't feed people as much,
they take up less space, and if you restrict the diet
enough during developmental years, they won't
grow to be as tall either. |
|
| |
Can there be a Huge Everything Movement, so that I
can buy up and use all the space that the Tiny
Everything Movement will free up? |
|
| |
I wonder what the upper limit and lower limit is on the size things can be. If for smallness would people end up thinner and shorter living inside honeycomb stacks of extruded tubes, and if towards bigger everything people would actually turn into another uncontainable large animal in an entirely new consumptive tier above carnivore, something that devours everything in the carnal domain sensually, digestively and sexually. How the more distributed variations of people-kind react in regulation of this has probably been an ongoing theme throughout history. Obviously speculating in the other direction toward smallness one might instead speculate the honeycomb people would be mischievous and perhaps more predatory and selective rather than all consuming in their tendencies. read this text in the correct way and don't be deceived this exact idea can be drawn with crayons with all consuming with an arrow pointnig at one drawing's mouth etc. |
|
| |
There's an interesting question as to how small a
brain can be, for a given intelligence. |
|
| |
Most of the time taken to have a thought is spent in
propagating signals along axons - it's a very slow
process compared to electrical propagation in wires.
So a brain in which all the cells were smaller would,
all other things being equal, be able to think much
faster. Even if you shrunk a brain by reducing the
total number of cells, the shorter path-lengths would
partially offset the smaller number of cells. |
|
| |
If everything was smaller, say then the brain wouldn't have to produce as large a simulation of the environment, which now includes the entire globe for the everyday person to consider in making ordinary decisions. Smallness in all things would suggest micro understandings of all things, for example global conflicts would be about who said what and who touched who first, who took all the lollipops and wont take turns on the swings. Larger brains would just over-complicate simple relations, such as people devising complex outsmarting schemes, and using brain smallness as the reason for not accepting them. When in actuality they are to eliminate the small brained unnecessarily. |
|
| |
Companies will refuse to hire people not part of this
movement resulting in literal slavery. |
|
| |
//Companies will refuse to hire people not part of
this movement resulting in literal slavery.// |
|
| |
When you say "literal", do you literally mean "literal",
or are you using "literal" metaphorically? |
|
| |
I drew a picture and [voice] drew a picture and it ended in slavery that just shows whats in the imagination. |
|
| |
We may have different ideas of what slavery is [Max]... I
consider any economic condition that leaves a person
working as much as possible on as little sustenance as
possible a slave whether or not he could theoretically quit
and starve instead. The chain may be invisible but she is still
a slave. |
|
| |
Surely this idea is for people to stay the same size, but for their 'stuff' to shrink, whether in size, quantity, or complexity. If people were smaller as well as everything else then it would not make much difference practically speaking. How do you know everything is not shrinking right now? Perhaps that's what the apparent 'expansion' of the universe is? |
|
| |
Post-singularity, intelligence disappears into the multiverse
via quantum interstices. |
|
| |