4 ms·

The Last Viridian Note (2008)

22 points by kerkeslager 2y ago

kerkeslager 2y ago
Should have "[2008]" in the title, probably. If someone with powers could edit that in, I'd appreciate it.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
brudgers 2y ago
The Viridian Design Movement, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viridian_design_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viridian_design_movement
euroderf 2y ago
Any time I read about how a mass market "should" do this or that for the environment, I am reminded of this Viridian manifesto: https://www.viridiandesign.org/manifesto.html https://www.viridiandesign.org/manifesto.html Eco-friendly products that succeed in the marketplace "get it": "Civil society does not respond at all well to moralistic scolding. [..] However, contemporary civil society can be led anywhere that looks attractive, glamorous and seductive. The task at hand is therefore basically an act of social engineering. Society must become Green, and it must be a variety of Green that society will eagerly consume."
- mananaysiempre 2y ago
  So, scolding is a type of manipulation that doesn't work, let's instead use this one, which does?.. I don't even oppose their goals, but I still find this kind of anti-Enlightenment realpolitik inherently repulsive. (Cf.: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/03/24/guided-by-the-beauty-of-our-weapons/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/03/24/guided-by-the-beauty-o....)
  - talldayo 2y ago
    > So, scolding is a type of manipulation that doesn't work, let's instead use this one, which does?.. Sure. If it was a for-profit product they would arrive at the exact same conclusion for the purposes of marketing. Any serious pro-environment protestor that wants Americans to care about their movement has to market it effectively. Your movement has to be a product, something that people are afraid of missing out on lest they be a square. It sounds horrible, yes. But this is the status quo for all environmentally harmful marketing so it also becomes the status quo for protest. I'd love to live in a country where conscious protest is considered normal, but America isn't that. > I still find this kind of anti-Enlightenment realpolitik inherently repulsive. It's post-enlightenment. Individual righteousness means nothing when the most important "cause" the average American can be made to care about is what the new iPhone looks like.
  - vlz 2y ago
    I feel you. Whenever this topic comes up I am somewhat torn. On the one hand just pointing out facts should clearly suffice everyone to behave properly on the other hand it clearly doesn’t. Where I often land is, that the dichotomy between scolding and persuasion might simply be a false one. The Viridians, if I may call them that, also seem to think that we can only do one or the other, that we have to decide. It is however not necessarily inconsistent to both scold and try to persuade people, especially for organizations or movements. In our personal relations we are either angry at someone and might scold them or we are more sympathetic and might try to persuade, both behaviors are mutually exclusive as they are grounded in different emotions. However, a societal movement is not bound by personal emotions like that and can, maybe should employ both strategies and probably more. As an individual it can also be fine to "scold" more in one case and persuade more in another, whatever seems more authentic and fits the situation and the personal background and emotions. There might simply be no need to decide on one strategy.
  - IncreasePosts 2y ago
    "Manipulation" is a pretty broad and loaded term. If I put a lot of effort into making a beautiful product(compared to an ugly product with the same exact feature set), because I know it will increase the sales of it - am I manipulating my potential buyers?
Modified3019 2y ago
If like me you’re someone with no prior idea of what this guy was talking about, the first 1/3rd it going to be hard to get through. However the latter 2/3rd talking about how to approach what items to remove or retain in your life is pretty solid and worth a browse. In fact the following is pretty much what I’ve been doing this past month: >You will need to divide your current possessions into four major categories. >Beautiful things. >Emotionally important things. >Tools, devices, and appliances that efficiently perform a useful function. >Everything else. "Everything else" will be by far the largest category. Anything you have not touched, or seen, or thought about in a year – this very likely belongs in "everything else." >You should document these things. Take their pictures, their identifying makers' marks, barcodes, whatever, so that you can get them off eBay or Amazon if, for some weird reason, you ever need them again. Store those digital pictures somewhere safe – along with all your other increasingly valuable, life-central digital data. Back them up both onsite and offsite.
- jollyllama 2y ago
  Nothing wrong with organizing your stuff or getting rid of low quality items, but in the era of inflation, offshoring of production, and the cheapening/enshittification of goods, assertions like this: > Furthermore, many of these objects can damage you personally. The hours you waste stumbling over your piled debris, picking, washing, storing, re-storing, those are hours and spaces that you will never get back in a mortal lifetime. Basically, you have to curate these goods: heat them, cool them, protect them from humidity and vermin. Every moment you devote to them is lost to your children, your friends, your society, yourself. need reevaluated. Scissors of equivalent quality to the ones you bought in the 90's for $10 will set your grandkids back $200, if they can even find any.
  - skybrian 2y ago
    It seems like for this to pay off, we need to imagine a rather specific transaction: good scissors are hard to find for theoretical grandkids, so they ask if you have any scissors and you give them your scissors. Maybe, but there are other scenarios where your grandkids don’t live nearby and buy their own scissors at a store without asking you, and later your junk goes carted off to the landfill after you die. So that bet might not pay off, because the transaction didn’t happen. If scissors turn out to be valuable in the future, maybe you could sell them, but probably to a stranger. It’s not obviously a good investment? Currently, most people don’t bother to try to buy or sell used scissors. They buy new scissors at a store. It’s pretty easy to end up with scissors scattered throughout the house, so having a hook where you put all the scissors is a first step to figuring out how many you can get rid of. Or at least it avoids buying new scissors because you can’t find them.
pronoiac 2y ago
As the credit's left to the end: this was written by Bruce Sterling.
dang 2y ago
Related. Others? The Last Viridian Note (2008) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33674735 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33674735 - Nov 2022 (5 comments) Bruce Sterling: The Last Viridian Note - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=383591 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=383591 - Dec 2008 (1 comment)

22 points by kerkeslager 2y ago

kerkeslager 2y ago

Should have "[2008]" in the title, probably. If someone with powers could edit that in, I'd appreciate it.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

brudgers 2y ago

The Viridian Design Movement, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viridian_design_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viridian_design_movement

euroderf 2y ago

Any time I read about how a mass market "should" do this or that for the environment, I am reminded of this Viridian manifesto: https://www.viridiandesign.org/manifesto.html https://www.viridiandesign.org/manifesto.html Eco-friendly products that succeed in the marketplace "get it": "Civil society does not respond at all well to moralistic scolding. [..] However, contemporary civil society can be led anywhere that looks attractive, glamorous and seductive. The task at hand is therefore basically an act of social engineering. Society must become Green, and it must be a variety of Green that society will eagerly consume."

mananaysiempre 2y ago
So, scolding is a type of manipulation that doesn't work, let's instead use this one, which does?.. I don't even oppose their goals, but I still find this kind of anti-Enlightenment realpolitik inherently repulsive. (Cf.: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/03/24/guided-by-the-beauty-of-our-weapons/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/03/24/guided-by-the-beauty-o....)
- talldayo 2y ago
  > So, scolding is a type of manipulation that doesn't work, let's instead use this one, which does?.. Sure. If it was a for-profit product they would arrive at the exact same conclusion for the purposes of marketing. Any serious pro-environment protestor that wants Americans to care about their movement has to market it effectively. Your movement has to be a product, something that people are afraid of missing out on lest they be a square. It sounds horrible, yes. But this is the status quo for all environmentally harmful marketing so it also becomes the status quo for protest. I'd love to live in a country where conscious protest is considered normal, but America isn't that. > I still find this kind of anti-Enlightenment realpolitik inherently repulsive. It's post-enlightenment. Individual righteousness means nothing when the most important "cause" the average American can be made to care about is what the new iPhone looks like.
- vlz 2y ago
  I feel you. Whenever this topic comes up I am somewhat torn. On the one hand just pointing out facts should clearly suffice everyone to behave properly on the other hand it clearly doesn’t. Where I often land is, that the dichotomy between scolding and persuasion might simply be a false one. The Viridians, if I may call them that, also seem to think that we can only do one or the other, that we have to decide. It is however not necessarily inconsistent to both scold and try to persuade people, especially for organizations or movements. In our personal relations we are either angry at someone and might scold them or we are more sympathetic and might try to persuade, both behaviors are mutually exclusive as they are grounded in different emotions. However, a societal movement is not bound by personal emotions like that and can, maybe should employ both strategies and probably more. As an individual it can also be fine to "scold" more in one case and persuade more in another, whatever seems more authentic and fits the situation and the personal background and emotions. There might simply be no need to decide on one strategy.
- IncreasePosts 2y ago
  "Manipulation" is a pretty broad and loaded term. If I put a lot of effort into making a beautiful product(compared to an ugly product with the same exact feature set), because I know it will increase the sales of it - am I manipulating my potential buyers?

Modified3019 2y ago

If like me you’re someone with no prior idea of what this guy was talking about, the first 1/3rd it going to be hard to get through. However the latter 2/3rd talking about how to approach what items to remove or retain in your life is pretty solid and worth a browse. In fact the following is pretty much what I’ve been doing this past month: >You will need to divide your current possessions into four major categories. >Beautiful things. >Emotionally important things. >Tools, devices, and appliances that efficiently perform a useful function. >Everything else. "Everything else" will be by far the largest category. Anything you have not touched, or seen, or thought about in a year – this very likely belongs in "everything else." >You should document these things. Take their pictures, their identifying makers' marks, barcodes, whatever, so that you can get them off eBay or Amazon if, for some weird reason, you ever need them again. Store those digital pictures somewhere safe – along with all your other increasingly valuable, life-central digital data. Back them up both onsite and offsite.

jollyllama 2y ago
Nothing wrong with organizing your stuff or getting rid of low quality items, but in the era of inflation, offshoring of production, and the cheapening/enshittification of goods, assertions like this: > Furthermore, many of these objects can damage you personally. The hours you waste stumbling over your piled debris, picking, washing, storing, re-storing, those are hours and spaces that you will never get back in a mortal lifetime. Basically, you have to curate these goods: heat them, cool them, protect them from humidity and vermin. Every moment you devote to them is lost to your children, your friends, your society, yourself. need reevaluated. Scissors of equivalent quality to the ones you bought in the 90's for $10 will set your grandkids back $200, if they can even find any.
- skybrian 2y ago
  It seems like for this to pay off, we need to imagine a rather specific transaction: good scissors are hard to find for theoretical grandkids, so they ask if you have any scissors and you give them your scissors. Maybe, but there are other scenarios where your grandkids don’t live nearby and buy their own scissors at a store without asking you, and later your junk goes carted off to the landfill after you die. So that bet might not pay off, because the transaction didn’t happen. If scissors turn out to be valuable in the future, maybe you could sell them, but probably to a stranger. It’s not obviously a good investment? Currently, most people don’t bother to try to buy or sell used scissors. They buy new scissors at a store. It’s pretty easy to end up with scissors scattered throughout the house, so having a hook where you put all the scissors is a first step to figuring out how many you can get rid of. Or at least it avoids buying new scissors because you can’t find them.

pronoiac 2y ago

As the credit's left to the end: this was written by Bruce Sterling.

dang 2y ago

Related. Others? The Last Viridian Note (2008) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33674735 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33674735 - Nov 2022 (5 comments) Bruce Sterling: The Last Viridian Note - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=383591 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=383591 - Dec 2008 (1 comment)