Under most Earth-based circumstances, I would call ``medical healer'' redundant, but I'm curious about here. Would this be in opposition to, say, faith healers?
Religion doesn't seem as widespread in Furrae, thus less divine healing.
Interesting interpretation there, Hennya. :P
I forget, where's Cid during all of this?
Oh! Just noticed!
``Missus Soulstealer...she dead.''
The rational part of my mind is telling me that this isn't a reference, but I find life much more enjoyable when I pretend that people are making more references to literature than I know they are.
Quote from: superluser on February 24, 2007, 02:39:12 AM
Under most Earth-based circumstances, I would call ``medical healer'' redundant, but I'm curious about here. Would this be in opposition to, say, faith healers?
I'd imagine that there would be magical healers around... if there's a difference in Furrae.
Quote from: LionHeart on February 24, 2007, 03:00:45 AMI'd imagine that there would be magical healers around... if there's a difference in Furrae.
That's the question that I was raising. Why would she need a medical healer, and not a magical one? Also, do the healers have such a distinction that they medical healers wouldn't want to learn magical healing?
I'm assuming that there's some reason for this.
Quote from: superluser on February 24, 2007, 03:06:14 AM
Quote from: LionHeart on February 24, 2007, 03:00:45 AMI'd imagine that there would be magical healers around... if there's a difference in Furrae.
That's the question that I was raising. Why would she need a medical healer, and not a magical one? Also, do the healers have such a distinction that they medical healers wouldn't want to learn magical healing?
I'm assuming that there's some reason for this.
Uggh. You are almost certainly over-analyzing that comment. "Medical" could imply that there was magic involved anyway since it's so integrated into a lot of things in their world.
Plus, "she" would not need one at all -- Abel would =P
I'm hoping that abel's missing words for those last two are something like "...ran away" and "devin is..."
The boy's been traumatized ... of course he's not speaking clearly.
Poor Abel. >>;
I assume that few people would ever want to cry out "Quick! someone get a hippie!" regardless of how accurate the term would be. considering that the option of abel rushing home to tell them that he was killed is considerable, i am led to believe that at the time magical healing is still the norm while medical healing is for special purposes such as when you want to treat a victim for shock without frying their brain so they think smurfs are crawling on your skin and you have to run and scream "GET EM OFF!" otherwise they'll implant eggs in your ear.
what we've seen of mabb and magic leads me to believe thats approximately what would happen if you ask a mage to heal someone who is delirious. other reasons could be WHO knows magic, for example if your just a regular nonmagical person and magic users can be divided neatly between insane fey and things that want to eat you.
QuoteFor the birds that cannot soar, God has provided low branches.
Someone outta slap him awake so he'd stop mumbling
Indeed. Then, he'd drop the amulet as well, and his mom would see what happened to him. Okay, not the entire thing, but that he isn't hurt and that he now has a second set of wings.
If not for his being in shock, he must be really energetic now. Lots of tasty confusion.
I'd go with medical healer vs magical healer myself as well.
Also if you are panicking cause your son lost his wings and looks like he just saw people die before his eyes you may not make 100% sense
Also a possibility a sick-ill-dizy amber is repetitively redundant.
Now that that is settled we've got bigger issues
.. a maniac is on the loose mugging people for their wings leaving them to wander home dead! :B
Methinks Hennya's just a teensy bit scatterbrained. Little bit, 's all I'm saying.
My overall impression of magic was that insofar as it's concerned, Beings just know enough to keep from being eaten by demons, manipulated by angels, having their soul stolen by cubi, blown up by crazy fae, and having who knows what happen to you because of insectis. Basically, more self defense than anything else. Healing strikes me as magic that would be tough to do, considering all the variables it deals with and what it has to do at a cellular level. Ergo, a magical healer wouldn't be all that reliable, despite the results they could get when it works.
Quote from: Kattuccino on February 24, 2007, 03:15:16 AM
Quote from: superluser on February 24, 2007, 03:06:14 AM
Quote from: LionHeart on February 24, 2007, 03:00:45 AMI'd imagine that there would be magical healers around... if there's a difference in Furrae.
That's the question that I was raising. Why would she need a medical healer, and not a magical one? Also, do the healers have such a distinction that they medical healers wouldn't want to learn magical healing?
I'm assuming that there's some reason for this.
Uggh. You are almost certainly over-analyzing that comment. "Medical" could imply that there was magic involved anyway since it's so integrated into a lot of things in their world.
Plus, "she" would not need one at all -- Abel would =P
Medical healers is mainly for Wounds and Blood loss and they can use magic.. Abel does seem not to have his wings, and he is "white" in the face....
and Maybe they have
Mental healers for psychology or shrinks...
Also we have another tidbit "Anti-wing" group?... And gang of beings killing or de-winging creatures? Oh boy, what social conflicts are there is the past?
PBH
Considering the situation, and how distraught abel's mom must be at seeing her son apparently dismembered, I don't think that she meant anything specific by calling fro a medical healer. I think it's more likely that, because she's under stress, she simply spoke the words that came to her head, no matter how correct or incorrect they may actualy have been.
I know I've misspoken plenty of stuff while under stress.
Princess Bride, one of the Classics of Western Nerd Movies.
If it helps any, people say "medical healer" in real life too. As opposed to stuff like psychic healers.
Brain... shut... down... Can't... form... coherent... sentences...
(I'm feeling the sudden urge to make a reference to "Mr. Monk and the Earthquake" here...)
Anyway, yes, Princess Bride for the romantic nerd win.
As.... you... wish....
Quote from: Supercheese on February 24, 2007, 01:17:50 PM
As.... you... wish....
Not exactly a princess bride moment...although Hennya
is getting married ;)
Hennya's not quite getting the message, is she? ???
And, for some reason, i have "Tommy Can You Hear Me," Stuck in my head. :boogie
But, still, there must be some time when abel will start speaking comprehensibly......albeit after he throws up....
Quote from: The LizardKing on February 24, 2007, 01:38:07 PM
Quote from: Supercheese on February 24, 2007, 01:17:50 PM
As.... you... wish....
And, for some reason, i have "Tommy Can You Hear Me," Stuck in my head. :boogie
Now I do too. I hate you. :<
"We're not gonna take it... We're not gonna take it..."
I'm gonna hop aboard the bandwagon and say "poor Abel", 'cos the guy looks so absolutely exhausted and traumatized D: Things are only gonna get worse from here for him when he drops the medallion, but it's probably going to be nothing compared to watching two people brutally die before your eyes and nearly being killed yourself for him.
I have to say that May looks great in the final panel, and it did manage to get a snicker out of me. Hennya, you silly, silly Mythos, you.
~Keaton the Black Jackal
but the question on my mind is if Abel somehow downloaded Devin's memories, Even if Abel didn't die he may have experienced it through devin I mean.
Quote from: Supercheese on February 24, 2007, 01:17:50 PM
As.... you... wish....
Eat... some... fish...
Seriously, though, Abel looks pretty shell-shocked, and it doesn't look like his mother and Hennya are helping.
Nice avatar, Shego.
Yeah. Hennya's just trying to make make sense of what Abel is nattering on about, but she's not the sharpest tool in the shed, now, is she? :-)
Quote from: Azraelle on February 24, 2007, 04:33:14 AM
The boy's been traumatized ... of course he's not speaking clearly.
I guess we both agree that he's too shook up to speak clearly...and the two ladies are not helping much.
Hehe. I like Hennya more now. I just like that response and that face.
you know I had a bad thought
What if Hennya's future husband is Selev's brother. He shows up while they are trying to calm Abel down. Comming here because he knows Hennya is there. He's shocked to see Abel, Hennya is suprised to see him, Abel wouldn't recognise him but in the confusion Glory catches up to him and wounds him. Hennya steps in angery to defend him only to be struck down by Glory. May screams in terror and Glory in a blind fury attacks her too. In a last ditch effort Anhora mortaly wounds Glory befre dieing from his own injuries. And hours later Abel is found by Cid sobbing.
Quote from: llearch N'Djamena on February 24, 2007, 05:55:39 PM
Quote from: they're on February 24, 2007, 05:48:23 PM
you know I had a bad thought
*starts hula-ing*
AH that is a little too much covenant or something... My take is that Cid maybe have trouble getting home, because of these anti-wing groups or the counter-creature groups, like Kria's team.
PBH
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on February 24, 2007, 03:14:48 PM
Nice avatar, Shego.
Yeah. Hennya's just trying to make make sense of what Abel is nattering on about, but she's not the sharpest tool in the shed, now, is she? :-)
Thanks! And, yeah, I agree with that. Who knows what conclusions Abel's incoherent statements could lead her to...
Quote from: thegayhare on February 24, 2007, 05:48:23 PM
you know I had a bad thought
What if Hennya's future husband is Selev's brother. He shows up while they are trying to calm Abel down. Comming here because he knows Hennya is there. He's shocked to see Abel, Hennya is suprised to see him, Abel wouldn't recognise him but in the confusion Glory catches up to him and wounds him. Hennya steps in angery to defend him only to be struck down by Glory. May screams in terror and Glory in a blind fury attacks her too. In a last ditch effort Anhora mortaly wounds Glory befre dieing from his own injuries. And hours later Abel is found by Cid sobbing.
My fellow in plot! Let us join together, and use our mischievous, marvelous and machiavellian minds to master this motley and mind-numbingly disorganized forum! Let us break their manacles of mindlessness, and manage to manipulate and maneuver them into moving the comic, and most of all, miss Mab, in this manner!
Dangit! I know I've heard that rant line before about the land war and a sicilian...... but I can't place it. Ack!
Can anyone else? THis is threatening to drive me mad :mwaha
Eh, it's more fun being mad anyway.
Quote from: Grenn on February 24, 2007, 10:09:47 PM
Dangit! I know I've heard that rant line before about the land war and a sicilian...... but I can't place it. Ack!
Can anyone else? THis is threatening to drive me mad :mwaha
"Inconcevible... Inconcevible."
"You keep using that word... I don think it means what you think it means"
LOL
Its from princess bride
The bit about the land war in Asia is good advice.
Anyways, I've been trying to work the ``Missus Soulstealer--she dead'' bit into something, and I think I've done it:
(http://www.frontiernet.net/~superluser/soulstealershedead.jpg)
Why yes, I am easily amused, why do you ask?
Ah, Princess Bride references. Win.
Even if I'm guilty of never seeing it.
Quote from: Prof B Hunnydew on February 24, 2007, 11:00:14 AMOh boy, what social conflicts are there is the past?
I am sorry if this has been asked before.. but has it ever been said how Far in the past this story took place?
Quote from: aurawyn on February 24, 2007, 11:38:29 PMI am sorry if this has been asked before.. but has it ever been said how Far in the past this story took place?
In the DMFA world, Abel is 399. In Abel's arc, he's just over 24. I don't know if we can rule out time dilation, but assuming that we can, it's 375 years from DMFA world. As to how far off DMFA is from 2007 AD, I'd ask Amber, except that I'd like to keep most of my body parts.
Abel needs many hugs. -huggles the Abel- Hennya needs some more braining. Or at least more organized braining.
Quote from: superluser on February 24, 2007, 11:48:49 PM
Quote from: aurawyn on February 24, 2007, 11:38:29 PMI am sorry if this has been asked before.. but has it ever been said how Far in the past this story took place?
In the DMFA world, Abel is 399. In Abel's arc, he's just over 24. I don't know if we can rule out time dilation, but assuming that we can, it's 375 years from DMFA world. As to how far off DMFA is from 2007 AD, I'd ask Amber, except that I'd like to keep most of my body parts.
Not sure if there is any correlation with the DMFA world and the real world at all. It's an alternate universe. There's no need to tie it to 2007 AD or any other year. It's like Star Wars; not part of our world in any which way whatsoever. That's why it's called fantasy.
Quote from: Azraelle on February 25, 2007, 12:19:04 AMNot sure if there is any correlation with the DMFA world and the real world at all. It's an alternate universe. There's no need to tie it to 2007 AD or any other year. It's like Star Wars; not part of our world in any which way whatsoever. That's why it's called fantasy.
Well, the point is that most fantasy settings take place in feudal times, and that manorialism died out at around the time of the Renaissance, so that should make everything at least 400 years behind where we are today.
But, of course, this is fantasy, so it doesn't have anything to do with the real world.
From the way you framed your question, I wasn't sure if you were referring to Abel's arc in relation to DMFA present day or in relation to Earth's present day.
Quote from: thegayhare on February 24, 2007, 11:01:10 PM
Quote from: Grenn on February 24, 2007, 10:09:47 PM
Dangit! I know I've heard that rant line before about the land war and a sicilian...... but I can't place it. Ack!
Can anyone else? THis is threatening to drive me mad :mwaha
"Inconcevible... Inconcevible."
"You keep using that word... I don think it means what you think it means"
LOL
Its from princess bride
Of course! :ipod
Thanks!
::Pushes for DMFA Remix thread once again::
Feh, I knew it was the missingwings that got her attention.
She's too busy checking for bleeding to give him a desperately needed hug. T_T
Quote from: superluser on February 25, 2007, 12:25:44 AM
Well, the point is that most fantasy settings take place in feudal times, and that manorialism died out at around the time of the Renaissance, so that should make everything at least 400 years behind where we are today.
It's not that cut-and-dried - IIRC Amber was saying that the level of technology and culture in Furrae varies with the region. So even in the present day where they have laptops and DV cameras you'll have some backwater where the lifestyle hasn't changed since before Abel was born.
That and magic can act as a substitute for technology (making aluminium for instance)
All we know is that Being technology is relatively recent.
Quote from: Tapewolf on February 25, 2007, 06:37:12 AM
Quote from: superluser on February 25, 2007, 12:25:44 AM
Well, the point is that most fantasy settings take place in feudal times, and that manorialism died out at around the time of the Renaissance, so that should make everything at least 400 years behind where we are today.
It's not that cut-and-dried - IIRC Amber was saying that the level of technology and culture in Furrae varies with the region. So even in the present day where they have laptops and DV cameras you'll have some backwater where the lifestyle hasn't changed since before Abel was born.
That and magic can act as a substitute for technology (making aluminium for instance)
All we know is that Being technology is relatively recent.
given how furrae's development would be -radically- different from our own, differences in overall technological development would be rather immense. Really, Furrae and Earth's timescales quite possibly wouldn't match up..
However, don't forget that disasters, both natural and man-made (Wars, plagues, and so on) can be detrimental to technological progression if widespread enough, also some sort of cultural lockdown like how china went about it, after the great wall was built, china pretty much stagnated for the next few hundred years or so.
so how fast a culture and technology progresses is pretty much up to the race(s) own whims and whatnot.
Don't forget that for the most part, Furrae's 'cubi were relatively savage and vicious until Fa'Lina came onto the scene.. (i think, i might of gotten something wrong there), and gave them a safe haven to learn and develop their own culture, as it were.
I might be looking too far into this, but then again, a lot of folks do that here, =p
i mean, look at our technological progression, most of it's been in the name of commerce, really. bigger, faster aircraft, latest vehicles, computers, mobile phones, everything.. and who isn't to say that a mobile phone wouldn't be seen as "magic" to a more "primative" culture. Primative is a relative term, however, i mean, it's a term we use for anybody who doesn't use what we use in terms of technology level, on a magic level some could call us primative for not being able to manipulate energy on a metaphysical level or somesuch..
i'll shut up now.. :mowdizzy
Actually most of our more interesting technology (jet engines, spaceflight, nuclear power, sound recording, transistors, integrated circuitry, computers etc) all came from conflict. You are right though, AFAIK Beings haven't had the same input that we have had - personally I suspect that some of the Being technology was stolen from Earth >:3
Quote from: Tapewolf on February 25, 2007, 10:28:23 AM
Actually most of our more interesting technology (jet engines, spaceflight, nuclear power, sound recording, transistors, integrated circuitry, computers etc) all came from conflict. You are right though, AFAIK Beings haven't had the same input that we have had - personally I suspect that some of the Being technology was stolen from Earth >:3
oh i agree on the technology made from conflict thing.. mind you, they only survived 'cuz a lot was left after the world wars to study such things.. there's the whole "being blasted back to the stone age" thing, we've all seen it in films and games, effectively.. powerful civilisation becomes too big for its boots, war ensues, either civil or whatnot, gets blasted back to something primative, survivors scatter and try to eke out a living any way they can, bringing technology levels down a fair few notches.
edit, bringing to a per race perspective, magic users may have discarded or disregarded tech as a curiousity, or seen them as inefficient items to be disposed of, never to be seen again..
or said magic users see them as a potential threat to their status quo and made sure it was forgotten for good.. blah blah blah..
also, do note that in previous DMFA comics, even Furrae's Tech seems to have a slight magical residue in one way or another.
Quote from: Grenn on February 24, 2007, 10:09:47 PM
Dangit! I know I've heard that rant line before about the land war and a sicilian...... but I can't place it. Ack!
Can anyone else? THis is threatening to drive me mad :mwaha
What's even more interesting is that this was his first day on the set, it was pretty much ad-libbed, and he went home thinking he's flubbed his lines so well that he wasn't going to be invited back, ever.
There's also the point "You have six fingers on your right hand. Someone was looking for you." where Wesley gets hit on the head. Apparently they were faking the hit over and over, and it wasn't looking right, so Cary Elwes told Christopher Guest (that's Wesley and Count Rugen, respectively) to actually hit him.
The reason the scene goes black is he did. And filming stopped for the day whilst Cary went off with a concussion...
"You've been following me all your life, only to fail now? I think that's the saddest thing I've ever heard."
Quote from: Tapewolf on February 25, 2007, 06:37:12 AMIt's not that cut-and-dried - IIRC Amber was saying that the level of technology and culture in Furrae varies with the region.
You should note that I *did* say that this is a fantasy setting, and that it doesn't have anything to do with real life. My previous statements on the matter are a matter of the public record. ``The whole thing is anachronistic by its very nature, so trying to actually make it work is a fool's errand.''
Quote from: Tapewolf on February 25, 2007, 10:28:23 AMActually most of our more interesting technology (jet engines, spaceflight, nuclear power, sound recording, transistors, integrated circuitry, computers etc) all came from conflict.
Well, our most recent interesting technology. I'm not sure of the steam engine's provenance or the difference engine (both were produced in close proximity to--but not during--wars), but the cotton gin was designed to actually prevent conflict, and the metal type printing press was first used to publish the Bible.
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on February 25, 2007, 11:02:35 AMWhat's even more interesting is that this was his first day on the set, it was pretty much ad-libbed, and he went home thinking he's flubbed his lines so well that he wasn't going to be invited back, ever.
You do have to admit that there is a certain insane quality to that speech.
My, my, my......we're all hooked on Princess Bride now, are we? Well i am too now. Man, that's a great movie.
"I've got my country's 500th anniversary to arrange, my wedding to plan, my wife to murder, and Guilder to frame for it. I'm swamped."
HUMPERDINCK! HUMPERDINCK! HUMPERDINCK!
Except for a nice MLT, mutton, lettuce, and tomato sandwich especially when the mutton is nice and lean, and the tomato is ripe, *tsp tsp tsp* they're so perky i love that.
I can quote that movie better than The Holy Grail.
Somebody get Abel an MLT.
Ah, the stutter. Demeaner of children, bane of dignity. Second in awkwardness only to hiccups.
Quote from: superluser on February 24, 2007, 11:12:55 PM
The bit about the land war in Asia is good advice.
Anyways, I've been trying to work the ``Missus Soulstealer--she dead'' bit into something, and I think I've done it:
(http://www.frontiernet.net/~superluser/soulstealershedead.jpg)
Why yes, I am easily amused, why do you ask?
According to Cortana... you're wrong... ;D
Also, It's not a strange assumption to ask Abel if Miss Soulstealer killed him. In a world where undead are normal, Abel might just be very very fresh...
Undead aren't yet, at the time of this strip, "normal" - if they can ever really be named so....
In any case Abel Needs to calm down and talk to his mom about this. I have a bad feeling that Abel's mom will go all revengy and go after Kria hmmmmmmmmmmmmm that is what will happens next.
Quote from: Taross on February 26, 2007, 02:07:39 AMAccording to Cortana... you're wrong... ;D
I think Cortana is pretty much the epitome of a Hollow Man (or a Stuffed Man), so I'm not sure that I would put too much trust in her opinion.
First off: The Hollow Men. *snicker* That was incredible, and I'm saving a copy, superluser.
Second: Actually most of our more interesting technology (jet engines, spaceflight, nuclear power, sound recording, transistors, integrated circuitry, computers etc) all came from conflict.
Um, the United States was not at war with anyone when Edison invented the light bulb or phonograph, or the Wright Bros. invented the airplane. Honestly, the only things I can think of as war tech are tanks (British, WWI), atomic bombs and self-sealing gas tanks (American, WWII). And maybe radar, but a lot of airlines wanted that.
The worst thing about Fat Man and Little Boy was the stigma attached to nuclear power plants: here, war actually delayed technological progress (as it often does). DARPA played a real role in the ARPAnet, but by the time TCP/IP came along, it was pretty much a civilian-led project with DARPA in rather nominal control.
War usually only refines what tech is there. For instance, the Rolls-Royce Merlin V12 was a stellar engine with twin stacked superchargers, but two things made it truly superior to German designs: high octane gasoline and ethylene glycol antifreeze. Both American, both civilian developments.
In fact, I would note that if anything, a large civilian industrial infrastructure drives war. First, overseas trade must be protected, so you need a permanent navy/air force. Second, an advanced, technological economy makes people expensive to replace, so smart military leaders leverage technology to spare lives.
Quote from: somercet on February 28, 2007, 02:53:47 AM
Second: Actually most of our more interesting technology (jet engines, spaceflight, nuclear power, sound recording, transistors, integrated circuitry, computers etc) all came from conflict.
Um, the United States was not at war with anyone when Edison invented the light bulb or phonograph, or the Wright Bros. invented the airplane. Honestly, the only things I can think of as war tech are tanks (British, WWI), atomic bombs and self-sealing gas tanks (American, WWII). And maybe radar, but a lot of airlines wanted that.
Most of those are pretty solid counterexamples. I could be wrong about the transistor as well. You're probably right about magnetic recording too, since it was mostly a refinement of pre-WW2 technology, although the magnetofon was a military secret and was supposedly designed to record Hitler's speeches. The Wright aircraft was definitely designed to sell to the military.
IIRC both integrated circuitry and teflon came from the space program, which is difficult to categorise - it was relatively peaceful yet the whole point was to needle the Soviets, and the original rocket technology was developed in WW2.
Concorde was a supersonic bomber.
QuoteSecond, an advanced, technological economy makes people expensive to replace, so smart military leaders leverage technology to spare lives.
The counterargument is that losing less of their own people means they have less to lose by starting a conflict, but yeah.
Quote from: Tapewolf on February 28, 2007, 06:56:19 AMThe Wright aircraft was definitely designed to sell to the military.
Wrong. After their first successful flights, they went into the airplane business, closing their bicycle shop. They never received grants for their work; they sold licenses to their patents and later built planes for the US military and a private French company.
Henry Ford perfected the assembly line and the Model T for no military purpose.
QuoteIIRC both integrated circuitry and teflon came from the space program, which is difficult to categorise - it was relatively peaceful yet the whole point was to needle the Soviets
Teflon: blundered upon during refrigerant research in 1938, patented in '41. Transistors: one model was designed for war-time radar, but the most common model today was civilian in origin.
Quoteoriginal rocket technology was developed in WW2.
And once again Robert Goddard is doomed to be an also-ran (http://www.time.com/time/time100/scientist/profile/goddard.html), crippled by the empty rhetoric of the mean and small who denounced V-2s, ICBMs, Newton's third law, the expense of the Apollo program. But he started the long march to XM/Sirius radio, satellite phones... all excellent civilian efforts.
Apollo's "purpose," insofar as the government was willing to drop a great deal of cash into it, was to counter propaganda that Soviet science was superior. If it comes to that, a great deal of SDI (Star Wars) was pure counter-propaganda. Sun Tzu would have approved. (And I'm sure Apollo stimulated more research, and more positive feelings toward the U.S., than a purely military project would have.)
QuoteConcorde was a supersonic bomber
And a financial bath. If it isn't cost-effective for the military, which is simply another, rather specialized market, how will it be cost-effective in the civilian sector?
QuoteQuoteSecond, an advanced, technological economy makes people expensive to replace, so smart military leaders leverage technology to spare lives.
The counterargument is that losing less of their own people means they have less to lose by starting a conflict, but yeah.
But a counterargument to what, exactly? Not war as a driver of tech.
The counter-counterargument to your argument that technology makes war less costly in casualties and physical horror: suicide bombers (including the most sophisticated of such attacks, 9/11), machine guns, weaponized anthrax, the Oklahoma city bombing, poison gas: none possible without modern tech.
Another counter-argument is to compare the Soviets to the Islamofascists: the former had to maintain their own standard of living and industrial infrastructure, thus were far more rational (I do not say intelligent) actors than the parasites of Al Qaeda and such groups. A few phone calls reminded India that outsourcing would stop in the face of an Indian-Pakistani war. On December 8th, 1941, some Pentagon officials sat down, did the economic math and concluded, "This is our war to win or lose." The Anglosphere economies (the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia) outweighed the Axis by something like 7:1. Those economies made us risk-averse. They made us victorious.
"Money is the sinew of war." -- Tacitus
Quote from: somercet on February 28, 2007, 12:40:14 PM
Quote from: Tapewolf on February 28, 2007, 06:56:19 AMThe Wright aircraft was definitely designed to sell to the military.
Wrong. After their first successful flights, they went into the airplane business, closing their bicycle shop. They never received grants for their work; they sold licenses to their patents and later built planes for the US military and a private French company.
Henry Ford perfected the assembly line and the Model T for no military purpose.
Quite right about the Wright Bros. The early planes had very little military use. They were slow, fragile, and wouldn't fly very far off the ground. I do recall that in an early war (maybe as late as early WWI), bombing runs in planes would consist of a guy in the plane essentially lighting the fuse and then tossing the bomb overboard.
I'm not sure if the assembly line would have succeeded had there not been a war to consume all of those cars.
Quote from: somercet on February 28, 2007, 12:40:14 PMTeflon: blundered upon during refrigerant research in 1938, patented in '41. Transistors: one model was designed for war-time radar, but the most common model today was civilian in origin.
The point-contact transistor was based on military research by William Shockley, John Bardeen and Walter Brattain. The most common model today is the Shockley transistor, developed by the same Shockley that used military research to develop the former.
Interestingly, the only reason that Shockley developed his transistor was to spite his erstwhile partners (Shockley was a total ass and later developed some quaint ideas about eugenics). Had the point-contact transistor not been developed, Shockley would never have developed his own.
Quote from: somercet on February 28, 2007, 12:40:14 PM
Quote from: Tapewolf on February 28, 2007, 06:56:19 AMThe Wright aircraft was definitely designed to sell to the military.
Wrong. After their first successful flights, they went into the airplane business, closing their bicycle shop. They never received grants for their work; they sold licenses to their patents and later built planes for the US military and a private French company.
http://www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/views03/1216-04.htm
See the 4th paragraph. I knew I'd read it somewhere, and it was probably from The Guardian some years back. Doesn't mean it's correct, of course - but at least I have a source now :P
While this doesn't help my argument any, it's an interesting piece of trivia, especially since you mention forgotten pioneers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stringfellow
...supposedly he landed lower than he started on the first attempt so it was disqualified on a technicality. The second attempt destroyed the machine and he lacked the funds to rebuild it. Or so I've heard.
QuoteApollo's "purpose," insofar as the government was willing to drop a great deal of cash into it, was to counter propaganda that Soviet science was superior. If it comes to that, a great deal of SDI (Star Wars) was pure counter-propaganda. Sun Tzu would have approved. (And I'm sure Apollo stimulated more research, and more positive feelings toward the U.S., than a purely military project would have.)
Indeed, but the point I was making was that if there hadn't been a cold war against the Soviets, they wouldn't have done it in the first place.
QuoteQuoteConcorde was a supersonic bomber
And a financial bath. If it isn't cost-effective for the military, which is simply another, rather specialized market, how will it be cost-effective in the civilian sector?
Too true. I'm not sure the reason it was ditched was strictly financial, though. The Government around that time firmly believed that aircraft had been superceded by guided/ballistic missiles and were obsolete - therefore they cancelled a sh_tload of advanced projects, including the TSR-2. I suspect the original supersonic bomber project went the same way.
QuoteQuoteQuoteSecond, an advanced, technological economy makes people expensive to replace, so smart military leaders leverage technology to spare lives.
The counterargument is that losing less of their own people means they have less to lose by starting a conflict, but yeah.
But a counterargument to what, exactly? Not war as a driver of tech.
No, it was to your apparent assertion that increasingly high-tech weapons will save lives rather than cost lives. If that wasn't what you were saying - and your following counter-counter-argument suggests it wasn't - then disregard it.
For the record, I'd like to think that we would have reached/surpassed our current technology level without the wars, but I'm not optimistic enough to really believe it.
Quote from: Tapewolf on February 28, 2007, 04:27:16 PM
http://www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/views03/1216-04.htm (http://www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/views03/1216-04.htm)
See the 4th paragraph. I knew I'd read it somewhere, and it was probably from The Guardian some years back. Doesn't mean it's correct, of course - but at least I have a source now :P
I shudder that you think of such a creature as The Original Moonbat as a "source". Here's a link (http://dailyablution.blogs.com/the_daily_ablution/2003/12/monbiot_were_ru.html) taking down George's fearmongering on Peak Oil, the greatest humbug since the Goracle's Global Warmening. Monbiot is just another deconstructionist Marxist pretending to knowledge he doesn't have.
To be blunt, my take on your provided article is: it is an utter fabrication and cheap propaganda (http://timblair.spleenville.com/archives/005406.php) from start to end, the effete, degenerate leavings of an economic movement that always had a problematic relationship with reality:
QuoteWhen Wilbur Wright was asked, in 1905, what the purpose of his machine might be, he answered simply: "War."
Really? My impression of the Wright Bros. was hardly one of monosyllabic inarticulates. Sorry, Mr Monbiot has no credit without co-signers, I mean, sources. I have no faith in him; I would sooner subscribe to the belief that the Joooos rule the world on the basis of
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the word of Adolf Hitler than believe Monbiot's sworn declaration that I am a human male.
Quote...supposedly he landed lower than he started on the first attempt so it was disqualified on a technicality.... Or so I've heard.
Yes. Anyone can fly from the top of a building to the ground; manned gliders were known before the Wright Bros. And the Wrights used a catapult once they left Kitty Hawk's headwinds for Dayton. The point was, they could fly, and climb, once they were in the air without stalling. Their engine (with an aluminum engine block, quite advanced) was always underpowered. That is a given. They used track and rails and an external platform instead of mounting wheels to their aircraft to save weight. Yes, we know.
To put the Wrights in their proper place in history: they corrected the figures for airfoil performance by rigorous experiment (their greatest achievement), they placed flight control as the main problem of flight and solved it (their second), and they built and flew a craft that was heavier than air (not a balloon, another amateur enthusiasm adopted by the military) and could turn, climb and land (merely their most visible work).
Not so much, then? Could you do it? Did Stringfellow?
QuoteIndeed, but the point I was making was that if there hadn't been a cold war against the Soviets, they wouldn't have done it in the first place.
Ah. Redefine, redefine. "War" doesn't drive technological progress, "rivalry" does. Again, aside from Tang and the speeding up of the integrated circuit, what did Apollo do again? The first computers owned by the U.S. government were used to process taxes. Just another Cold War by-product, then? I say it is another sign of a healthy, growing society using tools to adapt to (civilian) needs.
QuoteNo, it was to your apparent assertion that increasingly high-tech weapons will save lives rather than cost lives... For the record, I'd like to think that we would have reached/surpassed our current technology level without the wars, but I'm not optimistic enough to really believe it.
Indeed, that is what I assert, and I do have optimism. As bad as Okinawa and Iwo Jima were, the superiority of the American fleet, air force and intelligence guaranteed the island-hopping strategy would work; it sped up the conquest, and enabled the Americans to skip unnecessary islands. It saved lives, even Japanese soldiers' lives on those skipped islands.
Again, I say: a strong, civilian economy enables the military far more than the other way around. You can point to the Somme, Pearl Harbor and 9/11 and say, see what evil technology wrought. I reply, you cherry pick your data, and refrigeration and trucking keep more people alive than bullets or cruise missiles could ever kill.
Quote from: somercet on March 03, 2007, 12:52:48 PM
Quote from: Tapewolf on February 28, 2007, 04:27:16 PM
http://www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/views03/1216-04.htm (http://www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/views03/1216-04.htm)
See the 4th paragraph. I knew I'd read it somewhere, and it was probably from The Guardian some years back. Doesn't mean it's correct, of course - but at least I have a source now :P
I shudder that you think of such a creature as The Original Moonbat as a "source".
That may be. I have no idea who wrote the original piece I read 10-15 years ago, but the Guardian is usually a fairly trustworthy source, or at least it was when I used to read it regularly (again, about 10 years ago).
At some point I'll see if I can find a more immediate source, since the discrepancies you note intrigue me, but I don't currently have access to the references I'd usually use for this kind of thing.
Quote from: somercet on March 03, 2007, 12:52:48 PMI would sooner subscribe to the belief that the Joooos rule the world on the basis of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the word of Adolf Hitler
Godwin'd!
Given my previous interactions with people who won't pronounce Mr. Monbiot's name and instead call him a moonbat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonbat), and also given my previous experiences with those who deny that global warming is happening (though Goracle is a new one on me), I'm not sure if further debate is going to be productive, so I'm moseying on.
P.S. Thanks for killing my thread. :<
Quote from: somercet on March 03, 2007, 12:52:48 PM
QuoteNo, it was to your apparent assertion that increasingly high-tech weapons will save lives rather than cost lives... For the record, I'd like to think that we would have reached/surpassed our current technology level without the wars, but I'm not optimistic enough to really believe it.
Indeed, that is what I assert, and I do have optimism. As bad as Okinawa and Iwo Jima were, the superiority of the American fleet, air force and intelligence guaranteed the island-hopping strategy would work; it sped up the conquest, and enabled the Americans to skip unnecessary islands. It saved lives, even Japanese soldiers' lives on those skipped islands.
Again, I say: a strong, civilian economy enables the military far more than the other way around. You can point to the Somme, Pearl Harbor and 9/11 and say, see what evil technology wrought. I reply, you cherry pick your data, and refrigeration and trucking keep more people alive than bullets or cruise missiles could ever kill.
Very true. Had the american forces NOT dropped the bomb on Japan, they would have had to slog thier way accross the island of japan, thorugh the streets of japanese cities, and suffered huge casualties on both sides. The nukes that hit japan were nothing compared to earlier, but less impressive or advanced, attacks, including firebombing various cities to the point where they effectively ceased to exist.
google found me an excelent page on that, by the way... http://www.bookmice.net/darkchilde/japan/fire.html