throwaway43532's comments

Despite the many issues, I'd still suggest anyone interested in the Aztec empire at the time of the Spanish conquest to read The Conquest of New Spain by Bernal Díaz del Castillo. Díaz was present not only on the Cortés expedition, but on the earlier expeditions led by Córdoba and Grijalva.

The article mentions, plausibly so, that the issue of human sacrifice was often exaggerated by the Spaniards. Nevertheless, it is clear that the practice (and self-mutilation, primarily of the ears) was an important aspect of not just Aztec life, but many of their neighbors' as well.

Díaz writes, "I have spent a long time talking about the great cue of Tlatelcoco and its courts. I will conclude by saying that it was the biggest temple in Mexico, though there were many other fine ones, for every four or five parishes or districts supported a shrine with idols; and since there were many districts I cannot keep a count of them all. [...] Every province had its own idols, and those of one province or city were no help in another. Therefore they had infinite numbers of idols and sacrificed to them all."

Discussion of deities and their numbers aside, Díaz' repeated report is that sacrifices of various sorts were widespread, and that evidence of human sacrifice, or the holding of prisoners intended for sacrifice, was found almost universally from the coast to Mexico.

Edit: Reading again, on the subject of tzompantli, or a similar arrangement for sacrificed remains, Díaz writes, "They strike open the...chest with flint knives and hastily tear out the still palpitating heart which, with the blood, they present to the idols in whose name they have performed the sacrifice. Then they cut off the arms, thighs, and head, eating the arms and thighs at their ceremonial banquets. The head they hang up on a beam, and the body of the sacrificed man is not eaten but given to the beasts of prey."

> The human tendency to defer to authority may never be as terrifying as when that authority is held by an uncaring machine with a couple bugs.

To this observation I highly recommend E.M. Forster's The Machine Stops, first published in 1909(!).

[0] http://www.ele.uri.edu/faculty/vetter/Other-stuff/The-Machin...

How exceptionally Baudrillardian, or maybe the word is meta.

A class, in their search for authenticity, have "gentrified" the authentic experiences -- and hardships -- of an originating lower class into trendy symbols.

The social metamorphosis is complete when the symbol replaces the experience entirely, to the annoyance of the originating class; in part because the experience was a symbol of their own identity.

The effect is then highlighted in language ostensibly for the gentrifying class, on a virtual property catering to the same, and posted for discussion on another such virtual property.

Finally, like the author who pretentiously signals a more authentic worldview through the symbolic understanding and condemnation of the effect, so this poster signals the same through bemused expression of its symbolic and recursive nature.

"Hey throwaway43532, [PERSON] just found out you're at [PLACE] and is on their way with a weapon. I contacted the authorities, but you need to get out of there now!" might be a severe example.

There are many situations where a cell phone can allow you to send or receive information that could tip the scales in your favor.

> My goodness, all those people who went to concerts before cell phones must have been so hardcore, taking risks like that.

I get the point you're trying to make, but to me this just reads like gatekeeping.

Cell phones are useful and they can make people safer. In a world with cell phones not having timely access to one is riskier. In a world without cell phones it's a moot point.

The more interesting issue -- which others in this thread are discussing -- is whether the benefits of having a cell phone outweigh the harms people can cause with them, and whether policy can help strike an appropriate balance.