<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The three watches</title>
	<atom:link href="http://trilema.com/2019/the-three-watches/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://trilema.com/2019/the-three-watches/</link>
	<description>Moving targets for a fast crowd.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 21:24:45 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://polimedia.us</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mircea Popescu</title>
		<link>http://trilema.com/2019/the-three-watches/#comment-127631</link>
		<dc:creator>Mircea Popescu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2019 19:02:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trilema.com/?p=82170#comment-127631</guid>
		<description>In point of fact, the common cultural artefact labeled "pocketwatch" was in common use since about the 1550s, when they came up with screws and therefore started making them flat. Before that they were more spherical, yes, but certainly in common enough use.

To summarize for the RTFM-avoidant, consider that relatively fewer people had ever been on the sea by 1700 than had touched a pocket watch by 1600.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In point of fact, the common cultural artefact labeled "pocketwatch" was in common use since about the 1550s, when they came up with screws and therefore started making them flat. Before that they were more spherical, yes, but certainly in common enough use.</p>
<p>To summarize for the RTFM-avoidant, consider that relatively fewer people had ever been on the sea by 1700 than had touched a pocket watch by 1600.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stanislav Datskovskiy</title>
		<link>http://trilema.com/2019/the-three-watches/#comment-127630</link>
		<dc:creator>Stanislav Datskovskiy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2019 18:58:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trilema.com/?p=82170#comment-127630</guid>
		<description>@Mircea Popescu Henlein's orb ~= ipnoje. Ornament.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Mircea Popescu Henlein's orb ~= ipnoje. Ornament.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mircea Popescu</title>
		<link>http://trilema.com/2019/the-three-watches/#comment-127629</link>
		<dc:creator>Mircea Popescu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2019 18:22:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trilema.com/?p=82170#comment-127629</guid>
		<description>If it ain't so, you'll have to explain why you seem to think Peter Henlein lived in the 1700s rather than the 1500s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If it ain't so, you'll have to explain why you seem to think Peter Henlein lived in the 1700s rather than the 1500s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stanislav Datskovskiy</title>
		<link>http://trilema.com/2019/the-three-watches/#comment-127628</link>
		<dc:creator>Stanislav Datskovskiy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2019 18:18:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trilema.com/?p=82170#comment-127628</guid>
		<description>@Mircea Popescu AFAIK the sub-tower-sized clock was largely an ornament in the contemplated bottom slice.

You are free to think that my conclusion came from a failure to RTFM, if you prefer; but this ain't so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Mircea Popescu AFAIK the sub-tower-sized clock was largely an ornament in the contemplated bottom slice.</p>
<p>You are free to think that my conclusion came from a failure to RTFM, if you prefer; but this ain't so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mircea Popescu</title>
		<link>http://trilema.com/2019/the-three-watches/#comment-127627</link>
		<dc:creator>Mircea Popescu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2019 17:44:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trilema.com/?p=82170#comment-127627</guid>
		<description>I thought your disagreement was strictly with the "1760s and onwards" slice of the "from early 1500s to late 1700s" domain, and brought on the grounds of having done a lot of reading on that specific part of it (and no great reading on the others, leaving it thus to shine out incommensurately).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought your disagreement was strictly with the "1760s and onwards" slice of the "from early 1500s to late 1700s" domain, and brought on the grounds of having done a lot of reading on that specific part of it (and no great reading on the others, leaving it thus to shine out incommensurately).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
