Comment by DigitalNoumena | Hacker News Reader

Comment by DigitalNoumena | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I find too many foundational problems and contradictions within e/acc to take it seriously. They are speculating with ideas that IMO have potential but the priciples are more a poorly though out sci-fi ideological statement than a philosophically comprehensive theory. Just the first few points of the manifesto make no sense to me:

> The overarching goal for humanity is to preserve the light of consciousness.

If all physical processes are subservient to a thermodynamical "telos", how could any manifestation of free will emerge? Not even going to get into how problematic it is to cite conciousess as a fundamental goal of when we cannot even assess its existence in other beings.

> Technology and market forces (technocapital) are accelerating in their power and abilities. This force cannot be stopped.

What? Cannot be stoped? How could humanity possibly play any role in an unstoppable process? Surely no one can deny capitalism to be the result of specific choices in human history? Hence why we can concieve alternatives to capitalism and can very well choose them over capitalism.

> Technocapital can usher in the next evolution of consciousness, creating unthinkable next-generation lifeforms and silicon-based awareness.

Can? How could it not if the claim is that it's unstoppable? Concisouness again?

> HUMANS HAVE AGENCY RIGHT NOW. WE CAN AFFECT THE ADVENT OF THE INFLECTION IN THIS PROCESS

Scratches head...

I would love to have a rigorous debate about some of these ideas but come on... I was recently in an X space with some of the writers of this manifesto and was very disappointed.

> If all physical processes are subservient to a thermodynamical "telos", how could any manifestation of free will emerge? Not even going to get into how problematic it is to cite conciousess as a fundamental goal of when we cannot even assess its existence in other beings.

Agreed, this is a point which I don't think is empirically backed as rigorously as the rest of e/acc. Consciousness preservation is a side effect of the currently most successful form of life (humans) also evidently having consciousness.

> What? Cannot be stoped? How could humanity possibly play any role in an unstoppable process?

I take issue with the claim of "cannot be stopped". Certainly the extinction of humanity would result in capitalistic acceleration ceasing. But we'd simply be knocked a few levels down the emergence ladder. Darwinistic acceleration would continue to proceed on a biological level, eventually begetting a species with the ability to accelerate on shorter time-scales (intelligence) and across larger spatial scales (culture). I'd say that humanity doesn't play a role, but is rather an instrument of this acceleration process.

> Surely no one can deny capitalism to be the result of specific choices in human history? Hence why we can concieve alternatives to capitalism and can very well choose them over capitalism.

I don't think capitalism is necessarily the global maximum of economic systems for thermodynamic acceleration, but it is certainly the most effective system in existence at the moment. We can conceive of alternatives, but if a subset of humans were to choose them, historical precedent suggests that they would be out-accelerated by capitalism.

> Can? How could it not if the claim is that it's unstoppable? Concisouness again?

Given long enough time, it will. But it might need multiple reboots and bumps down the emergence ladder if we fuck up.

You do bring up some great points about agency vs instrumentality that I'd like to think longer about though.

e/acc isn't a serious idealogy but is kind of just a bit with some philosophical backing. Its definitely a lot of fun.

Its a bit unrelated, but I don't think your statement about capitalism being a result of human choices is correct. Capitalism is the emergent property of a multi agent resource collection game where one's resources compound in proportion to their quantity. Its the outcome when agents don't co-operate.

The best quality of life features of modern society, such as human rights and safety standards, only emerged due to coordination working against the forces of capitalism.

> Its the outcome when agents don't co-operate

Cooperation is a choice, as you very well say immediately below the above statement.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com