🚀 go-pugleaf

taguebw@REMOVEwfu.edu wrote:
> 
> In article <gbjiuj9e5kw.fsf@ic.ac.uk>, Gerdjan Busker <g.busker@ic.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> > taguebw@REMOVEwfu.edu writes:
> >
> > > A minor point: there is NO evidence that plants respond to music or being
> > > spoken too. There is lots of psuedo-science claiming such but no scientist
> > > has proven this.
> > >
> > > But, plants do respond to external signals: light (intensity, wavelength,
> > > direction), temperature (both hot and cold), gravity, touch, volatile
> > > compounds from other plants,etc.
> >
> > Ah,  so what you are saying is ... an optical global network using plants?
> > With a backup option of using gravitational waves or infra red or in the
> > worst case TCP/IP via polination packets carried by bees?
> >
> > GJ.
> 
> No, I didn't say that at all! I was simply trying to clear up the common
> misperception that plants respond to music or being spoken to.
> 
> I'll let others develop plants as a global network ;-b.
> 
> My 2 electrons,
> 
> Brian
> 
> --
> Remove "REMOVE" to reply

Without compromising any opinions previously expressed by the learned
posters of c.o.l.h (and others), I would like to express both my
concerns and excitement at the proposal.

Firstly, resources such as plants are essential to the stable living
environment that the earth provides. It is essential that the plant base
is not compromised by technology, leading to mass destruction of natural
resources. It is well documented that algae can be used as memory
storage mechanisms, how far will this go? Is the Amazon going to become
the global hub of Organo-Communication? Will this lead to more careful
management of the natural resources like the Amazon? Will it lead to
malicious, power-hungry people and countries trying to monopolise these
resources? This must be carefully controlled!

Secondly, I am excited by the prospect of every "luser" of technology
having to have a desktop plant for communication. This will lead to a
healthier work environment. Having said this, these plants must be
maintained at least to a minimum standard. Work environments must be
smoke free, clean, and free from stress and tension which could
interfere with the plant's ability to have un-inhibited communication
abilities. A sad plant could have disastrous effects on network
stability.

Finally, is the organo-net principle going to be the saviour of the
Human (Rat) Race? If these Flora-Nets were slow, yet effective, it is
quite conceivable that it will necessitate the deceleration of human
culture. New York will expand Central Park. People will become more
aware of the potential of plants, thus leading to more peaceful
practices. Violence will decrease, and there will be a second revolution
of the Sixties Hippie Syndrome (I am pissed off that I missed it ...),
so this will be a good thing.

As an aside, I wonder whether the "happy" plants like Cannabis are
better suited to communication than "drab" plants like grass (not
technically a plant ..), or viscious plants like the 'dioneia Muscipula'
(Venus Flytrap). (Technically, is cannabis a grass (weed) or a plant?)

Well, all the best with your investigation.

Gus

P.S. How about investigating whether you can modulate the 4Hz frequency.
Also, what about massively parallel communication with something like a
corn field with every individual plant (grass) communicating a different
bit of information?

One final thing: Is "Interflora" the next rival of Microsoft?