[Noisebridge-discuss] [intellectual claptrap] Toward a theory of utilization
jim
jim at systemateka.com
Sun Feb 17 17:10:07 UTC 2013
don't forget the tragedy of the commons.
On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 02:51 -0800, Tony Longshanks LeTigre wrote:
> It's not set in stone. Hopefully it will never be set in stone. It is
> lava—flowing, changing, Protean.
> If you rarely use your car perhaps you could share it with several
> other people who rarely use their cars or wish they had a car to
> rarely use. A carshare.
>
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 2:43 AM, ryan rawson <ryanobjc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> I rarely use my car, and it has sentimental value to me. Now
> what?
>
>
> I feel like the philosophical issues here and legal theory
> kind of screw it all up
>
> Sent from your iPhone
>
> On Feb 17, 2013, at 2:03 AM, Tony Longshanks LeTigre
> <anthonyletigre at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > We hold as a precept that the Law of Use trumps property
> > (w)rights. The Law of Use states that things (resources,
> > space, useful objects of all sorts) should be utilized,
> > rather than hoarded or sitting useless gathering dust. It
> > furthermore states that things hoarded & gathering dust may
> > be seized & used for legitimate reasons by those who need
> > them, without any violent act of aggression being committed.
> > This would of course not apply, or would apply less, to
> > items of primarily sentimental (personal) value & especially
> > to items that ARE currently being used legitimately by their
> > owners or current possessors. If this seems like common
> > sense, we agree with you; we only wish Common Sense were
> > more common these days.
> >
> > A l'il excerpt from something I've been working on. The word
> > 'law' is problematic, but we haven't figured out what to
> > replace it with yet. 'Rule' is just as bad...? We could
> > reverse it to waL or Wal. Or coin the new word "lawk,"
> > pronounced the same as lock. Or "theorel" (theoretical +
> > law). Or "lege" (pronounced the same as liege) as a sort of
> > back-formation from the adjective 'legal." I kind of like
> > lege, as a noun for a rule of behavior that is not a law as
> > it exists (theoretically) in an anarcho-pacifist culture
> > without a state or criminal justice system in the form we
> > now know it. The adjective form of lege might be 'legic.'
> > Something that did not follow could be termed 'alegic' (as
> > opposed to 'illegal' in current mainstream reality). Makes
> > it more like an allergy than a crime, which seems like a
> > promising direction—toward compassion rather than
> > punishment.
> >
> >
> > Tangential:
> > <I have zero tolerance for people with no compassion.>
> > < > = irony quotes
> > Is satire a subset of irony? What about sarcasm? Venn
> > diagrams, algebraic equations, to elucidate, please. A
> > numberpoem to preserve in amber our brave new (embryonic,
> > pre-owned, gently used) wisdom. Send for the court
> > mathpoet....
> >
> >
> > +11+
> >
> > Things change so quickly—& not nearly enough; I have no time
> > to feel sad about what never happened.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> You should read my diaries after I die—I talk about you a lot in
> there.
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss
mailing list