Dust bowls and rice bowls

A surprising fact from the same Nov 33 issue of Electronics as the microwaved “bun sandwich”:

More people than ever before live on the nation’s farms.

Not only has the drift of farm boys and girls to the city been stopped, after thirty years of continuous growth of the city population at the expense of the countryside, but for three years past the movement of the rural migration has been just the opposite way: it now is from city to country. In fact, in these past three years the replacement of farm population has more than equalled in numbers the total population withdrawn from rural districts in the preceding third of a century, so that now more people are living in farm homes than ever had farm homes before.

Most of these 6,000,000 farm houses are without electricity for lighting. Their radios must be battery operated. It is time the radio industry gave more attention to sets especially designed for this vast farm market.

FDR started to electrify those farms, and the radio industry did respond to the farm market.

I’ve always been suspicious of the standard narrative of the Dust Bowl. My ancestors lived in Okla during those years, stayed and prospered. I delved into the subject in detail here.

It’s true that many farms failed because of Wilson’s semi-forced growth. In WW1, government and bankers encouraged city people to try farming on shitty land. Nobody bothered to train them or guide them in selecting land; the bankers just wanted to create a bunch of mortgages. This failure happened in the mid-20s at the same time when the fake NYC boom was creating many unnecessary industries in cities, so the migration was toward cities. When the fake boom ended, the unnecessary businesses failed and the people returned to farms, which are NECESSARY.

In other words, population takes care of itself when allowed to move easily.

China has been FORCING movement in both directions, not just encouraging with fake booms. Mao destroyed farms to build industry, then in 1968 destroyed industry to rebuild farms. After 1980 China moved to the city again. Now Xi is switching back to 1968, destroying industry to rebuild farms. This constant forced movement leaves no time to develop the skills of farming.

Most of the video is synthesized English. The segments featuring a Henan farmer are linguistically interesting. I don’t understand Chinese, but I’ve heard enough of the usual urban dialects to tell the difference. He’s from the Chinese version of Arkansas. Slow and careful, much more music than the urbanites, longer diphthongs, clearer aspirates.

No transitionals

Evo News has yet another article on the failure to find ‘transitional fossils’.

Since I’ve been reviewing and condensing old blog into new blog lately, I’ve acquired a feel for the strata of my viewpoints. There aren’t any transitional fossils in this record either. When I crystallize a new understanding, the viewpoint shifts abruptly.

A similar pattern happens in changes of skill or technology. When a new way of making a telescope or a gun or a radio appears, the industry gradually adopts it.

Telescopes go from alidade to lens in one step, carriages go from horse to engine in one step. There are no telescopes with half lenses, no carriages with 20% of a horse and 80% of an engine.

Some companies continue making the old (living fossils), some make both old and new, and some new companies start fresh with the new.

It’s the same with new ways of composing music or art or literature. The new either takes over or fails. The old continues in some places, and often reaches new heights of perfection just before it collapses. But there are no transitional fossils.

We know how these sudden jumps happen in our own learning and technology. The change happens in MINDS, and even within the MIND there are no transitional neurons. Some sections of memory or limbic system remember the old, just as some companies continue building the old. The sequencers in the cerebellum archive the old skill or the old song, which remains available forever in case the new fails.

But where is the MIND that creates the shift in animal phyla and species? Is the God Studio an itinerant, checking in on various planets from time to time and implanting new genomic ideas?

Reviewing Aberree, part 3/7

Alphia Hart had a powerful and unique view of copyrights:

Copyrighting everything you write is a confession that you have little faith in your ability to continue producing salable stuff — and that there may come a time when you’ll have to fall back on your own, protected material to make a living. When we can’t produce new copy for The ABERREE, The ABERREE ceases to exist, because we’re certain no one wants to read tomorrow what we said yesterday and today.

Alphia practiced what he preached, and specified in each issue that his work was NOT to be copyrighted.

I reached a similar conclusion a long time ago in making courseware. The restrictions of ‘digital rights’ get stricter and more tangled every year, but they don’t bother me because I have CONFIDENCE in my own ability to produce new images and animations.

= = = = =

Here’s a corollary which isn’t quite obvious:

If you want to leave a legacy, don’t copyright your work.

Despite his probably fake modesty, Hart did leave a legacy. His work is still eminently worth reading 60 years later.

BUT: If he had copyrighted his work, or even failed to EXPLICITLY turn off the copyright, his legacy would be GONE.

Thanks to recent anti-Hubbard types who found the collection and scanned and uploaded it, all of Hart’s work is readable. If he hadn’t made a point of turning off the copyright, those blessed preservers couldn’t have done their job, and his work would be lost.

A similar situation exists in the recordings of old-time radio. The obscure syndicated shows are better preserved and more available than the big network shows. Why? Because the networks still exist, so a copyright could be enforced. This makes it possible for one of the OTR vendors to play copyright troll games, forcing the other vendors and the free service at Archive.org to delete items it wants to sell. Even though the one trollish vendor has no inheritance rights to the recordings, the potential of a copyright makes the big network shows harder to find and hear. And because they’re less widely distributed, they’re likely to disappear when that one trollish vendor goes out of business.

A much more important application of this principle was already operating at the time when those radio shows were made. Local stations and small syndicates and small civic orchestras were able to play live music as long as it was classical. Modern copyrighted music could only be played by networks who had enough money to pay the royalties. THEREFORE: Classical music has been performed and enjoyed and remembered much more widely than modern copyrighted music.

We have a dense and constantly performed legacy from composers who worked before copyright laws. Similarly with literature and visual art.

Not everything is great, but some work that was considered trash when written has been appreciated later because it was PRESERVED in some form. PRESERVED work can be revived and re-judged.

When the work is copyrighted, it has much less chance of being preserved and reprinted or replayed, no matter how good or mediocre it is.

Natural law and Sharia law agree: Use it or lose it. Everything in nature is meant to be useful, meant to serve. Copyright prevents use, so copyright guarantees loss.

= = = = =

From personal experience: When a publisher owns exclusive copyright, the publisher may go bankrupt or merge, or it may simply decide to stop selling the item. At that point there’s no automatic procedure to revert the item to public domain, or to return it to the author’s possession. Sometimes a revert contract is written, but big corporations don’t obey laws. They can and will prevent ANYONE from using the material, even though they’re not using the material either. Total and permanent loss.

= = = = =

Note for clarity: Before Disney bought the law in 1996, the US copyright law was less monopolistic. There was no ‘intrinsic’ copyright. You had to register an item specifically if you wanted to claim protection, and the protection was officially turned off when you stopped paying for renewals. There was a solid fence between protected and public domain, so there was less room for monopolistic lawyering.