We need stories to be able to imagine and build the future.
I empathise with the author but he doesn’t really offer an alternative
I empathise with the author but he doesn’t really offer an alternative
The exoteric hoi polloi get pablum and propaganda. (They can't appreciate good scifi anyway). Give them moral fables wrapped in cowboys with laser-guns.
(Underwater Love, Smoke City, 1995)
And the film clip doesn't seem to be on YT...
Edit: can't find the full music video, but there's a clip just showing the "bullet time" bits:
The author provides an alternative, but perhaps readers might miss it.
Science fiction is fiction not science.
The alternative to science fiction is the scientific method and the elucidation of scientific fact.
But these individuals are outcasts, dropouts, social failures.
Not interested in education generally.
Not interested in conventional occupations.
They believe they know enough yet they barely know anything.
Understanding computers is a far cry from understanding life.
It's arguable, due to the time committment required, the more one understands computers the less one probably understands "the real world".
Are these individuals interested in scientific fact, or are they more interested in fantasy and belief.
Like Elisabeth Holmes.
Charles Stross, the author of this op-ed, makes his living writing science fiction and fantasy.
"Stick to what you know." Unlike "tech billionaires", Stross knows what he is talking about.
The problem is the future is being created by sociopathic, crony capitalist neo-reactionary cultists who want to rule over a broken world as its brutal philosopher kings, and consign everyone else into the mouth of Moloch. These are the people for whom the meme "Please don't create the Torment Nexus" was made. These people are the reason Ted Kaczynski is so popular amongst the tech underclass.
I don't know what the alternative is, but we should be concerned.
There was a recent thread about him here[0,1]. Plenty of people denouncing him, of course, but also lots of sympathy. I've also noticed a trend to reform (and excuse) his violent actions as being the effect of psychological torture by the CIA and MKULTRA. The linked article goes a bit deeper into how influential his manifesto has been on the culture.
[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36392976 [1]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/19/unabomber-te...
He is a minor TikTok celebrity.
The gutting of antitrust under Reagan was instrumental in allowing the massive hyperconsolidation in all markets, with tech very prominent among them. The Biden administration's repudiation of the intellectually and morally bankrupt Chicago school interpretation of antitrust paves the way for a much better future, but it's going to take time, and it's going to need our support.
I mean, one could just as well be a fan of sci-fi and realize the torment nexus is a bad thing, and not create it, even if one is a nerd with all the time, power and money in the world.
That's a deep kind of dream. Not saying the vision is entirely invalid, but maybe it isn't as intimate an understanding as the reader thinks.
It's a bit like religious literature that way.
Always has been.
We’ve tried it, it’s never worked, and because it relies on a fundamental denial of basic human freedoms, it will literally never work. The only question is how much misery it causes in the latest attempt.
This is also because China already tried pure communism. There were no corporations, all industries were state owned. This lasted about a decade and was a bloodbath with famines, and almost all intellectuals or people with degrees were executed for promoting inequality by their existence (not kidding - actual history (“Stinking Old Ninth”) - go look it up at your library). Be careful what you wish for when putting communism and inequality in the same sentence.
Do not assume China is the only guilty party. The USSR, as just one example, imprisoned 3,000 biologists for being on the wrong side of an evolution debate for being against Lamarckism. This culminated with banning study of neurophysiology, cell biology, and other fields. (The “Lysenkoism” purges - showing that, ironically, communist countries are among the most dangerous places to be a scientist.)
We have a system that is kind of working. Laws and regulations are ways to tweak the system, tune it for better performance.
So, lets say we notice that huge wealth inequality is having a negative impact, then we can tax the wealth, and yes, 'distribute' it, like to build roads. That does NOT mean suddenly we are communist.
People stuck in the Capitalist's/Communism argument, if they think it is binary, then really don't understand either one.
They sure are passing laws, yet there has been repeated failures at affecting the desired change despite near unilateral agreement among the lawmakers about the direction of the desired change. This includes the war on drugs, the prohibition, and so on.
I'm not disputing these laws have some effect, I'm disputing the ability to envision an outcome, and pass a law such that it has the desired effect.
That it was communist was propaganda so communist == bad.
It’s not about economics but the emotional tone of a society.
Under capitalism in the US I can let you die in the streets without lifting a finger. Guess you didn’t capitalize hard enough.
Though I think this is a bit of unfortunate expansion of its definition, as it leaves us with no term to use when talking about Fascism.
(Also I agree the notion of the Soviet Union as an elaborate Fascist false flag operation is pretty hilarious)
But this comes back to my point. This is essentially putting faith in Asimov-style psychohistory.
A communist system would have to be a layer over a capitalist one. It would be maintained by a foundation of billionaire dictators.
But, assuming a system controlled by billionaire dictators, we probably don't need any "ism". Just dictate. Ideally to everybody's benefit.