[sudo-discuss] FRe: Dystopia News: No-Sex Apartments.

Mon May 20 16:21:43 PDT 2013

Hi Matthew-

How many people at SudoRoom are in chronic econo-crunch or borderline
homeless? 

How many of us are likely to fall for developer horse-puckey that these
little prison cells are "futuristic" and "high tech", considering that
the ones in San Francisco are designed to accommodate nearly-wall-sized
Telescreens? 

Haven't we had numerous conversations including meetings, on the subject
of living arrangements and potential community developments?

How much of our listmail consists of two-word comments that would
ordinarily occur in a chat window or text message format?  Personally I
find it inconvenient to have to keep deleting listmail threads
consisting of "I'm locked out," and "Coming" and "Thanks," and "Is
anyone in?" and "Yes," and suchlike, but I have no desire to tell others
what they should and shouldn't post on the list.  It's not as if we're
being charged by the word, as with telegrams. 

There's method to my madness.  You don't have to trust me on that, and
you're welcome to not read anything I post, but at least I maintain
"subject header discipline" so you can spot the stuff you don't want to
read. 

Finally, please respect my nym rights by not using names for me other
than the ones I use in my own postings.  I don't go posting your PII
online, please don't post mine.  BTW, that's not even remotely negotiable. 

Peace-

-G.

=====

On 13-05-20-Mon 3:28 PM, Matthew Senate wrote:
> George,
>
> I do not think this email is relevant for the sudo-discuss email list.
>
> I agree it is relevant for sudo room, sudoers, and sudo room
> discussion with sudoers. However, sudo-discuss is a list with its
> purpose to discuss sudo room, its on-going projects, and relevant news
> (such as safety concerns in the neighborhood)--not necessarily every
> call to action or item of news.
>
> Cheers,
> Matt
>
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 3:07 PM, GtwoG PublicOhOne
> <g2g-public01 at att.net <mailto:g2g-public01 at att.net>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     No-Sex Apartments.
>
>     (Creative commons, with attribution to "G.")
>
>     In cities across the USA, a new "solution" to affordable housing is
>     being promoted: micro-apartments of less than 200 square feet.  New
>     York's conrol-freak in chief, Mayor Bloomberg, is promoting them (New
>     Yorkers call them "Bloom Boxes").  A developer in San Francisco is
>     promoting them.  And developers in Seattle WA are building them by the
>     hundreds.
>
>     The Seattle apartments were recently covered in a CBS News
>     article, here:
>     http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57582327/tiny-apartments-are-creating-a-big-backlash-in-seattle/
>
>     If you look at the picture, something immediately stands out: a
>     TWIN BED.
>
>     As the article says, "...(the) apartment comes with a small private
>     bathroom, a microwave and a mini-refrigerator. There's just enough
>     room
>     for a twin bed, a neatly hung rack of clothes and shelves."  (There's
>     not even room for a desk, so forget about working from home: it's back
>     to the plantation for you, worker-bee.)
>
>     And therein lies the catch, or more accurately the "nudge," to use the
>     Newspeak word for "manipulation."
>
>     A twin bed is sufficient for sleeping, but not sufficient for a
>     regular
>     sex life with others, much less a stable relationship.
>
>     Sure, you can manage it occasionally, but for the long term it's right
>     out.  Squeezing two people into a bed meant for one is miserable,
>     particularly in the hot summer.
>
>     This is one form of "birth control" that won't be controversial
>     with the
>     Vatican or other right-wing religious denominations.  I suppose that
>     also qualifies as a "feature."  (We won't mention the fact that
>     you can
>     carry on a satisfactory solo sex life in a twin bed, lest the twin
>     beds
>     be replaced with "stand-up beds" consisting of straps on the wall.)
>
>     There's no need for the Oligarchy to make an explicit No Sex rule.
>      They
>     don't have to, when they can just "nudge" the architecture to enforce
>     that outcome by "nudging" people who might think to disobey.
>
>     Best of all (from the Oligarchy's perspective), there's nothing to
>     revolt against.  A revolt against a type of architecture is like a
>     revolt against traffic jams or weather: there's no obvious
>     evil-doer to
>     hurl ballots and tomatoes at.
>
>     The Oligarchy likes micro-apartments because they are more profitable
>     per square foot of building, compared to apartments that let you
>     have a
>     bed big enough for two people, and a fridge big enough to let you keep
>     enough food that you don't have to go shopping every day.
>
>     The working masses (that would be us) who are being lined up to
>     live in
>     these boxes would do well to recognize that they are also about
>     the same
>     size as prison cells.
>
>     The only difference is that you have the key to your cell, just like
>     inmates in "honor system prisons" for white collar criminals.
>      That, and
>     there isn't a guard staring at you whilst you poop, though I'd be
>     careful about the tiny apartments that come with internet and TV
>     service
>     included (no choice of carriers either), as the "smart sensors"
>     won't be
>     far behind.
>
>     Smaller houses and apartments are of course part of a viable
>     approach to
>     sustainability: primarily through lower energy consumption and
>     proximity
>     to public transport.  Some years ago, a close friend and I came up
>     with
>     various designs for micro-houses, from about 160 square feet, up to
>     about 400 - 500 square feet.  A building with a 500 square foot
>     "building footprint" was sufficient for a family of four.  We were
>     designing for the sake of sustainability, and for the ability of
>     individuals and communities to build these houses for themselves
>     at low
>     cost.
>
>     But as with eating bugs, it's one thing to do it by the choice of your
>     own free will, quite another to do it by way of getting mercilessly
>     milked by the Oligarchy.  Especially when the Oligarchs continue
>     to live
>     in 12,000 square foot (and larger) mansions with sprawling lawns
>     on all
>     sides.
>
>     What the world can't afford, is the Oligarchy.  Darwin, take note!
>
>     -G.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     sudo-discuss mailing list
>     sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>     <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>     http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130520/9b88c884/attachment.html>