Re: House questions in a new political order
Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2020 2:54 pm
At least we can agree the burbs are the worst!
---an online community leveraging 14 years of experience in resilient post-consumerist praxis
https://forum.earlyretirementextreme.com/
https://forum.earlyretirementextreme.com/viewtopic.php?t=11583
i'll drink to that!
requoting/reanswering from a different angle, because this thing about “informal interactions” and “college dorms” has stayed in the back of my head for days, bouncing around.CS wrote: ↑Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:57 pmYes.
Ditto for the social one. I've just been reading along on that one. There is something to be said for walking out the door and knowing there is someone close by for informal interactions. With the exception of college dorms, our society is not set up for that. (I should probably put this comment there but I'm a lazy person today.)
that sort of hothouse environment is great for pursuing projects and generating ideas through formal and informal collaboration. and it’s always sad when they end.Amos and I had our most productive year in 1971–72, which we spent in Eugene, Oregon. We were the guests of the Oregon Research Institute, which housed several future stars of all the fields in which we worked—judgment, decision making, and intuitive prediction. Our main host was Paul Slovic, who had been Amos’s classmate at Ann Arbor and remained a lifelong friend. Paul was on his way to becoming the leading psychologist among scholars of risk, a position he has held for decades, collecting many honors along the way. Paul and his wife, Roz, introduced us to life in Eugene, and soon we were doing what people in Eugene do—jogging, barbecuing, and taking children to basketball games. We also worked very hard, running dozens of experiments and writing our articles on judgment heuristics. At night I wrote Attention and Effort. It was a busy year.
kahneman, d. (2011) thinking, fast and slow. farrar, strauss, giroux
(not sure how to cite kindle page numbers in apa style, but this is the opening of chapter 12)
when i or friends have been to artist residencies it’s usually for a fixed term set in advance. you apply with your cv/portfolio to carry out a project, plus other forms of participation/collaboration are required (with students/faculty/community/other residents/etc), and then you make a public presentation at the end—that’s the only lecture, or the discussion/presentation of other people’s projects as well. then they swiftly kick you out to make room for the next batch of elected.
There's some interesting illustrations in that link. Although 2070 is beyond my horizon, if I consider my future geographic range an ellipse, the foci are well placed for the next 50 years. Where I'm at now is not so good. Wish I could claim some sort of agency in that, but the choices were instinctual and the overlay on this set of future predictions lucky.jacob wrote: ↑Fri Sep 18, 2020 9:13 amUS climate change maps for 2070 and moderate--high emissions scenarios which are still the most realistic outcome.
https://projects.propublica.org/climate-migration/
In that map, the northeast gets more unsuitable (the green areas in the first few maps of the US) in high emissions scenarios (ME, VT, etc). I'm surprised since they are pretty close to the ocean and further north. Anyone know the TL; DR for why that happens?jacob wrote: ↑Fri Sep 18, 2020 9:13 amUS climate change maps for 2070 and moderate--high emissions scenarios which are still the most realistic outcome.
https://projects.propublica.org/climate-migration/
Only if you use an unusual definition of the word near.Alphaville wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:56 pmi’m saying aus/nz are near a very big fish that is hungry for resources. and in a dystopian world... there is nowhere to go.
with a hypothetical american collapse in the pacific (hawaii bases no longer in play) china is still closer to new zealand than any other major powers, and i'm looking at the south china sea as china's sphere of influence, where there's a clear island hopscotch into australasia.