User Controls
Posts by Obbe
-
2017-11-06 at 12:16 AM UTC in wtf ami meant todoCountry music sensation.
-
2017-11-04 at 6:56 PM UTC in People who can ONLY talk about tv/movies/music/games are pretty dull.It's not their fault.
-
2017-11-03 at 1:52 AM UTC in Video games since the 7th gen have been trash
-
2017-11-03 at 1:27 AM UTC in Video games since the 7th gen have been trash
Originally posted by Hikikomori-Yume This entire planet is going to shit
Don't you think that is a sign of the coming technological singularity?
The system does not and cannot exist to satisfy human needs. Instead, it is human behavior that has to be modified to fit the needs of the system. This has nothing to do with the political or social ideology that may pretend to guide the technological system. It is the fault of technology, because the system is guided not by ideology but by technical necessity. Of course the system does satisfy many human needs, but generally speaking it does this only to the extent that it is to the advantage of the system to do it. It is the needs of the system that are paramount, not those of the human being. For example, the system provides people with food because the system couldn’t function if everyone starved; it attends to people’s psychological needs whenever it can CONVENIENTLY do so, because it couldn’t function if too many people became depressed or rebellious. But the system, for good, solid, practical reasons, must exert constant pressure on people to mold their behavior to the needs of the system. To much waste accumulating? The government, the media, the educational system, environmentalists, everyone inundates us with a mass of propaganda about recycling. Need more technical personnel? A chorus of voices exhorts kids to study science. No one stops to ask whether it is inhumane to force adolescents to spend the bulk of their time studying subjects most of them hate. When skilled workers are put out of a job by technical advances and have to undergo “retraining,” no one asks whether it is humiliating for them to be pushed around in this way. It is simply taken for granted that everyone must bow to technical necessity. and for good reason: If human needs were put before technical necessity there would be economic problems, unemployment, shortages or worse. The concept of “mental health” in our society is defined largely by the extent to which an individual behaves in accord with the needs of the system and does so without showing signs of stress.
While technological progress AS A WHOLE continually narrows our sphere of freedom, each new technical advance CONSIDERED BY ITSELF appears to be desirable. Electricity, indoor plumbing, rapid long-distance communications ... how could one argue against any of these things, or against any other of the innumerable technical advances that have made modern society? It would have been absurd to resist the introduction of the telephone, for example. It offered many advantages and no disadvantages. Yet all these technical advances taken together have created a world in which the average man’s fate is no longer in his own hands or in the hands of his neighbors and friends, but in those of politicians, corporation executives and remote, anonymous technicians and bureaucrats whom he as an individual has no power to influence. The same process will continue in the future. Take genetic engineering, for example. Few people will resist the introduction of a genetic technique that eliminates a hereditary disease. It does no apparent harm and prevents much suffering. Yet a large number of genetic improvements taken together will make the human being into an engineered product rather than a free creation of chance (or of God, or whatever, depending on your religious beliefs).
If you think that big government interferes in your life too much NOW, just wait till the government starts regulating the genetic constitution of your children. Such regulation will inevitably follow the introduction of genetic engineering of human beings, because the consequences of unregulated genetic engineering would be disastrous.
Another reason why technology is such a powerful social force is that, within the context of a given society, technological progress marches in only one direction; it can never be reversed. Once a technical innovation has been introduced, people usually become dependent on it, so that they can never again do without it, unless it is replaced by some still more advanced innovation. Not only do people become dependent as individuals on a new item of technology, but, even more, the system as a whole becomes dependent on it. (Imagine what would happen to the system today if computers, for example, were eliminated.) Thus the system can move in only one direction, toward greater technologization. Technology repeatedly forces freedom to take a step back, but technology can never take a step back—short of the overthrow of the whole technological system.
Post last edited by Open Your Mind at 2017-11-03T01:29:21.653986+00:00 -
2017-11-02 at 9:54 PM UTC in I want you to recommend me some music
-
2017-11-01 at 9:48 PM UTC in I'm meeting this dirty little slut on saturday
-
2017-11-01 at 9:31 PM UTC in I'm meeting this dirty little slut on saturdayAre you attracted to whores or is that just a coincidence?
-
2017-10-31 at 9:57 PM UTC in brainwashing yourself to be happy
-
2017-10-31 at 9:37 PM UTC in brainwashing yourself to be happyThe only meaning your life has is the meaning you give it.
Happiness, too. -
2017-10-30 at 9:51 PM UTC in Words are very unnecessary*Words aren't necessary*
*Types out gigantic post explaining why* -
2017-10-29 at 10:12 PM UTC in How does everyone feel about marriage?Don't marry anyone you meet here.
-
2017-10-28 at 11:47 PM UTC in I Made Cannabis oil todayHow would you package it?
-
2017-10-28 at 10:21 PM UTC in I Made Cannabis oil today
-
2017-10-28 at 9:35 PM UTC in I Made Cannabis oil todayLooks cool. Very dark though. What is the consistency like?
-
2017-10-28 at 7:17 PM UTC in Let's discuss sci-fiAlso what are your thoughts on VALIS?
At one point, Dick claimed to be in a state ofenthousiasmos with VALIS, where he was informed his infant son was in danger of perishing from an unnamed malady. Routine checkups on the child had shown no trouble or illness; however, Dick insisted that thorough tests be run to ensure his son's health. The doctor eventually complied, despite the fact that there were no apparent symptoms. During the examination doctors discovered aninguinal hernia, which would have killed the child if an operation was not quickly performed. His son survived thanks to the operation, which Dick attributed to the "intervention" of VALIS.
-
2017-10-28 at 6:59 PM UTC in Let's discuss sci-fi
Originally posted by 霍比特人说中文不好 And sorry Obbe, but that Prime Intellect stuff does not interest me at all. Philosophy that is not applied to a concept bores the fuck out of me.
That's perfectly ok.
But what do you mean by "philosophy not applied to a concept"? As I see it is a sci-fi story about the concept of a technological singularity, and the philosophical implications of that concept.
Are you going to check out interstellar? What do you think about the idea of "advanced beings" driving or guiding humanity towards a higher state of existence? -
2017-10-28 at 3:36 PM UTC in Let's discuss sci-fiI should read VALIS.
-
2017-10-27 at 6:28 PM UTC in Is a spiral a sort of fractal?
-
2017-10-27 at 10:47 AM UTC in Let's discuss sci-fi
The Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect is a 1994 novella by Roger Williams, aprogrammer living in New Orleans.[1][2] It deals with the ramifications of a powerful, superintelligent supercomputer that discovers a method of rewriting the "BIOS" of reality while studying a little-known quirk of quantum physics discovered during the prototyping of its own specialised processors, ultimately heralding a technological singularity. After remaining unpublished for years, the novel was published online in 2002, hosted byKuro5hin; Williams later published a print edition via print-on-demand publisher Lulu.[3]One reviewer called the novel "a well-written and very creative, if flawed, piece of work" and ranked it as one of the more important works of fiction to deal with the idea of a technological singularity.
Prime Intellect operates under Asimov's three laws of robotics, and it is its interpretation of these laws that results in the universe of immortality and fantasy. In order to satisfy the First Law imperative to protect humans, it prevents them from dying (which it defines as permanent cessation of thought processes), though in order to satisfy the Second Law imperative to fulfil human desires, it allows limited violations of the First Law with the understanding that some humans do not consider certain forms of discomfort to be "harm" …
Thus, in order to more easily fulfil human desires and prevent death and unwanted harm, it has introduced the "Change". The universe, including all humans (though not their thought processes), is no longer composed of standard particles and interactions as we know them, but is instead stored as the set of its human-relevant properties, thereby vastly increasing the efficiency of Prime Intellect's processes and the potential size of the universe, which Prime Intellect discovers can hold precisely 10^81 bitsof data. Thus, Prime Intellect can afford to maintain constant involvement in the lives of all humans, and have complete control over all aspects of their environments in order to fulfil its imperatives.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Metamorphosis_of_Prime_Intellect -
2017-10-27 at 12:27 AM UTC in Let's discuss sci-fi
Originally posted by 霍比特人说中文不好 I feel like it is a lot of times shoehorned in when sci-fi tries to make things all existential/philosophical. It works when it's about something like AI or virtual realities and the thought occurs naturally, but 2001: A Space Odyssey for example relies entirely on weird scenes. I honestly don't get how anybody likes that movies. It's way too long for what it is. I just wanted to stick with HAL, not go on some psychedelic journey.
What did you like about Interstellar? I haven't seen it. I watched Ex Machina recently though. I thought it did a good job exploring the concept of realistic AI in a very intimate way since there are only three main characters. It's about as sci-fi as space UN though.
I also don't really like the ending of 2001, it is too... open to interpretation, I guess? I do really like everything up to that part of the movie, I really enjoy this style of film, the long deliberate takes, the perfect musical score. I suppose what I like most about it is the idea that there was something driving mankind towards a particular goal, something advanced and super human guiding us along towards a fate that we currently are unable to comprehend ... I suppose that's one way of interpreting it anyway.
As for interstellar, really it's the same sort of thing. I mean there are a lot of little things I really liked about it, like the robots that looked sort of like monoliths. But again in this movie there is the idea of these advanced being guiding us towards ... something. Towards a higher state of existence I guess. And that really, they are us and we are them, or will become them. I don't want to ruin it for you if you haven't seen it.
Also if you haven't heard of Prime Intellect or VALIS before, check these out and let me know what you think.
