Ableton Forum

krulecello wrote:
Care to answer this one without ignoring physical reality / facts, how is it that 7 billion people (or 10 billion for that matter) are going to be able to have their own car and live the same energy intensive lifestyles that we do in wealthy nations without destroying the planet?

well, I've already gone over my views on this at great length, but you obviously didn't bother to read any of it because it challenges your existing views and you started posting stupid pictures instead so I kind of can't be arsed now really.

Forge. wrote:

krulecello wrote:
Care to answer this one without ignoring physical reality / facts, how is it that 7 billion people (or 10 billion for that matter) are going to be able to have their own car and live the same energy intensive lifestyles that we do in wealthy nations without destroying the planet?

well, I've already gone over my views on this at great length, but you obviously didn't bother to read any of it because it challenges your existing views and you started posting stupid pictures instead so I kind of can't be arsed now really.

Quoted because this 'reaction' is important for future reference.

krulecello wrote:[
How about admitting the role you play?

again, I never didn't admit that. In fact I told you many times throughout the course of this thread that I think you are doing good and that you're right that cars are damaging etc etc

What I took great exception to was your assertion that government is irrelevant and that there's no point coming up with less damaging cars because we need to get rid of them altogether. You are taking this personal responsibility idea to the opposite extreme and not acknowleging the bit where we live in a society that needs to work on this together and legislate and act together so that WHEN all those millions of people DON'T give up their cars the cars they drive are at least far less damaging.

Do you think the carbon tax would have happened without public pressure and more people voting green? Kevin Rudd said first time around in 2007 that climate change was one of the big topics people talked about. Is it the total answer? no. Is it a start? yes.

For the last time, I'm not telling you to not do what you're doing, or to not encourage other people to do the same, quite the opposite, I'm just saying that saying government is irrelevant or that there's no point building clean cars is actually bordering on dangerously negligent.

krulecello wrote:[
Childish stupid pictures?

the action of posting them because you can't think of anything better to say

krulecello wrote:

Forge. wrote:

krulecello wrote:
Care to answer this one without ignoring physical reality / facts, how is it that 7 billion people (or 10 billion for that matter) are going to be able to have their own car and live the same energy intensive lifestyles that we do in wealthy nations without destroying the planet?

well, I've already gone over my views on this at great length, but you obviously didn't bother to read any of it because it challenges your existing views and you started posting stupid pictures instead so I kind of can't be arsed now really.

Quoted because this 'reaction' is important for future reference.

fair point, I guess it's time I stopped replying to you then?

Forge. wrote:

krulecello wrote:[
How about admitting the role you play?

again, I never didn't admit that. In fact I told you many times throughout the course of this thread that I think you are doing good and that you're right that cars are damaging etc etc

What I took great exception to was your assertion that government is irrelevant and that there's no point coming up with less damaging cars because we need to get rid of them altogether. You are taking this personal responsibility idea to the opposite extreme and not acknowleging the bit where we live in a society that needs to work on this together and legislate and act together so that WHEN all those millions of people DON'T give up their cars the cars they drive are at least far less damaging.

Do you think the carbon tax would have happened without public pressure and more people voting green? Kevin Rudd said first time around in 2007 that climate change was one of the big topics people talked about. Is it the total answer? no. Is it a start? yes.

For the last time, I'm not telling you to not do what you're doing, or to not encourage other people to do the same, quite the opposite, I'm just saying that saying government is irrelevant or that there's no point building clean cars is actually bordering on dangerously negligent.

lol.... "I never didn't admit that" and then a whole lot of pointing the finger at government.

This is a good time to take a break.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKYyX3B0aXY

shadx312 wrote:This is a good time to take a break.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKYyX3B0aXY

Thanks for the offer shadx. Unfortunately my internet is too slow at this time of day to watch youtube so I'll have to respectfully decline. (It's why I can never be 9V, amongst other reasons. )

shadx312 wrote:

I just don't see how it's even vaguely fair to think it's right to deny people only just getting their chance at the lifestyle we've had for a long time because we've fucked things up for everyone.

I disagree. That seems backwards to me, actually. How I read it is
"Hey there, 3rd world person in poverty. Go ahead and poison yourself and the world around you because it was fun. We've already been there and have changed for the better but dive on in, you missed a lot."
I'm willing to bet a lot of 3rd world poverty people won't care about living that kind of life. Word gets around quickly, they don't have to see what kind of damage we've been doing to ourselves with their own eyes.

My point is really that we have no moral right to preach to anyone in China or India about how they treat the environment. And actually, I know it was probably tl;dr but the whole point I was trying to make is that ideally it would be good for us in the west to keep the pressure up so that as more and more people join the club the technology is cleaner right from the start. i.e. - a cheap tesla/clean alternative car for mass market to India or China rather than just more of the same petrol cars. The more things like this are encouraged in the west now, the more the price will come down when they are mass produced ... etc...

I'm not talking about encouraging people to abuse the planet, it's about damage control.

but the cat is out of the bag

lots of cats have been out of many bags in the past, it doesn't mean we have to keep them alive.

The only actual option is a course correction that includes everyone.

How do you know that's the only actual option? Everyone is not realistic anyway. Some will not care to play, fuck em. You either do your part or you don't. If you don't, someone may save you but don't be surprised to be an example of shame.

well, aside from the cat analogy, again the point was about people in the developing world wanting their piece of the pie, and at the moment the pie is made from oil. Rather than saying they can't have any pie it might be better to make a pie out of hydrogen fuel cells or something else clean.

The entire world economy depends on oil and fossil fuels. Are we ready for the kind of crash that would happen if we abandon that overnight? If we're worried about the people in the 3rd world living off rubbish tips, we'd start seeing that kind of thing in front of us.

... It always seems like the biggest thing that stops people from doing something they aren't used to is the preconception that they have to change their lifestyle or it will take a lot of work, like old people with computers.
They don't bother trying to remember how to email because they're always thinking, "this contraption is too complicated, I'll never learn it." It's a self-defeating mentality.

This has been exactly my point all along. If anyone who drives a car is selfish, greedy, pig headed, wilfully ignorant, and a victim or whatever else the insult du jour happens to be then large numbers of people will just switch off completely.

So much power is currently so heavily concentrated in the hands of a small few who not only don't care about any of this, but often actually sabotage it.

All the more reason to be self-reliant and DIY. ..

I know, but I think the importance of pushing back and getting the governments and corporations to act better is getting overshadowed by all this. The absolute biggest task we have is changing them. It's actually THE most important bit and it's also the hardest, so it's also the 'old people with computers' scenario on steroids — because it feels too difficult to get them to change everyone just says "government sucks" and gives up. In fact next to this challenge giving up a car is easy. It has nothign to do with "blame" or not taking responsibilty - in fact if anything it is a much bigger responsibility because it's much, much harder.

Anyway, too bad she went all 9V on us. Started out so nice, too, then this.

Forge. wrote:
I know, but I think the importance of pushing back and getting the governments and corporations to act better is getting overshadowed by all this. The absolute biggest task we have is changing them. It's actually THE most important bit and it's also the hardest, so it's also the 'old people with computers' scenario on steroids — because it feels too difficult to get them to change everyone just says "government sucks" and gives up. In fact next to this challenge giving up a car is easy. It has nothign to do with "blame" or not taking responsibilty - in fact if anything it is a much bigger responsibility because it's much, much harder.

"In fact next to this challenge giving up a car is easy". You're giving up your car??

krulecello wrote:

Forge. wrote:

krulecello wrote:[
How about admitting the role you play?

again, I never didn't admit that. In fact I told you many times throughout the course of this thread that I think you are doing good and that you're right that cars are damaging etc etc

What I took great exception to was your assertion that government is irrelevant and that there's no point coming up with less damaging cars because we need to get rid of them altogether. You are taking this personal responsibility idea to the opposite extreme and not acknowleging the bit where we live in a society that needs to work on this together and legislate and act together so that WHEN all those millions of people DON'T give up their cars the cars they drive are at least far less damaging.

Do you think the carbon tax would have happened without public pressure and more people voting green? Kevin Rudd said first time around in 2007 that climate change was one of the big topics people talked about. Is it the total answer? no. Is it a start? yes.

For the last time, I'm not telling you to not do what you're doing, or to not encourage other people to do the same, quite the opposite, I'm just saying that saying government is irrelevant or that there's no point building clean cars is actually bordering on dangerously negligent.

lol.... "I never didn't admit that" and then a whole lot of pointing the finger at government.

see this right here is your problem. You are confusing the monumental task (that a lot of people work very hard on i.e. GetUp etc...) of trying to get the government to take action with "finger pointing".

So how do you suggest we get all the massive industries to change to clean energy sources?

Forge. wrote:

krulecello wrote:
lol.... "I never didn't admit that" and then a whole lot of pointing the finger at government.

see this right here is your problem. You are confusing the monumental task (that a lot of people work very hard on i.e. GetUp etc...) of trying to get the government to take action with "finger pointing".

So how do you suggest we get all the massive industries to change to clean energy sources?

I'm not confused Forge, I'm waiting for you to be honest.

Thanks for being patient with some of my responses, Forge. I know you wouldn't want the impoverished ti have a chance to "have fun pallootin'!" for example, so it's good to get further explanations form those.

So, we're in no position anyway to tell what other countries should do with the environment, seeing as how we can't take care of our own, amongst the other pile of excuses...

I'm not sure how realistic this one aspect would be, but I'd love to see boycotting be a powerful force to change corporations. I remember seeing charts people would post on facebook months ago ridiculing boycotting a companies product because if you go up the chain you'd have to end up giving up a whole bunch of other products, and I thought that was a lazy argument, because it's only one particular brand and most likely there is at least one other brand making the same kind of product by another company that might not be as bad. Obviously there are some things where we have no choice but to have to give a corp some money for their service ie Comcast monopoly but still.

I'd like to think if people stopped buying goods and services from the worst of corps vs an alternative with better reputation those bad boys would have to consider actually doing something good in favor to win some loyalty.

The other thing is, I think most homes have enough space to grow a little food (and I'm just talking about indoors) and there's enough resources on the net to build some tech alternatives to energy efficiency like LED lighting, water heater, solar chargers for devices, etc. It may be a minuscule comparison to not driving, but it's something to get the ball rolling, and I think it would have a snowball effect (mostly in the suburbs in an neighborly ego sort of way, either out of competition or guilt)
The other thing is, as we've been seeing world protests the past couple of years we're seeing how much people want to take power back in their own hands, and it's going to have an effect here more and more, even though we should have more outrage and protesting at this point, people should be using those examples I listed above as a statement as well, and as a morale booster. I just, I would really love to see some corporations crumble simply from people not giving them any more money. That may be wishful thinking as well, but you could at least make a movie out of it...something like you see a barren Wal-Mart parking lot, and it looks like 50 year old shambles, chipped away, and you hear "you'll be back! You need me!" like that cliched abusive boyfriend, and it just crumbles into dust.

shadx312 wrote:Thanks for being patient with some of my responses, Forge. I know you wouldn't want the impoverished ti have a chance to "have fun pallootin'!" for example, so it's good to get further explanations form those.

So, we're in no position anyway to tell what other countries should do with the environment, seeing as how we can't take care of our own, amongst the other pile of excuses...

I'm not sure how realistic this one aspect would be, but I'd love to see boycotting be a powerful force to change corporations. I remember seeing charts people would post on facebook months ago ridiculing boycotting a companies product because if you go up the chain you'd have to end up giving up a whole bunch of other products, and I thought that was a lazy argument, because it's only one particular brand and most likely there is at least one other brand making the same kind of product by another company that might not be as bad. Obviously there are some things where we have no choice but to have to give a corp some money for their service ie Comcast monopoly but still.

I'd like to think if people stopped buying goods and services from the worst of corps vs an alternative with better reputation those bad boys would have to consider actually doing something good in favor to win some loyalty.

The other thing is, I think most homes have enough space to grow a little food (and I'm just talking about indoors) and there's enough resources on the net to build some tech alternatives to energy efficiency like LED lighting, water heater, solar chargers for devices, etc. It may be a minuscule comparison to not driving, but it's something to get the ball rolling, and I think it would have a snowball effect (mostly in the suburbs in an neighborly ego sort of way, either out of competition or guilt)
The other thing is, as we've been seeing world protests the past couple of years we're seeing how much people want to take power back in their own hands, and it's going to have an effect here more and more, even though we should have more outrage and protesting at this point, people should be using those examples I listed above as a statement as well, and as a morale booster. I just, I would really love to see some corporations crumble simply from people not giving them any more money. That may be wishful thinking as well, but you could at least make a movie out of it...something like you see a barren Wal-Mart parking lot, and it looks like 50 year old shambles, chipped away, and you hear "you'll be back! You need me!" like that cliched abusive boyfriend, and it just crumbles into dust.

You have a good heart Shadx.

I was made to inspire, not be realistic, anyway