/lit/ - Literature

>dark humor

If there's one thing these people DON'T have, then it's humour

>>11041544
acceleration is about accelerating capitalism. originally it was to accelerate it to its 'inevitable' end. land is about acceleration without the hubris, wherever it leads, even if it outgrows, subsumes, consumes humanity....

>>11041551
Do you think that Land genuinely positively values the transhuman vanishing point of the technocapitalist horizon, or is his thought just a cover for a misanthropic desire to see things burn? Note: I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the latter.

So tired of tryhard noobs talking about this brainlet pseud.

Nick Land is the Insane Clown Posse of philosophy

>>11041557
The replacement of the Present with the Future will vindicate Land's ontology.

Wintermute/Neuromancer/AI conductor outpaces the meat subject as a dog outpaces a fly.

Desire and enjoyment are irrelevant. Jouissance is grounded in bodies. There will be no bodies.

>>11041572
I would accelerate my fist into your face if we ever met. If you think Land is a 'brainlet pseud', you're probably stuck with the greeks and haven't read any philosophy from 1700s onwards. You're the type of braindead student who won't read a thinker if he hasn't been studied to death for 300years. Because it's not safe enough, not comfy enough, to study something that hasn't been sterilized by academia for your consumerist pleasure.

>>11041580
lmfao the absolute state of /lit/

>>11041580
>you broke my heart, so I'm gonna break your face

>>11041580
This post is kind of perfect. It echoes the vapid, substanceless posturing that is Nick Land. Well-played anon. And we're post-ironic here, so no need for /s

>>11041584
You're kinda weird, but I'll reiterate for the fun of it;
>it's not safe enough, not comfy enough, to study something that hasn't been sterilized by academia for your consumerist pleasure.

>>11041557
It's inevitable so why not enjoy it.

>>11041544
>accelerationism
there is right-wing and left-wing accelerationism. Both use different means to achieve the same goals (collapse and eventual rebuild)

>>11041580
>unironically reading modern authors

>>11041580

>>11041808
And unconditional accelerationism

>>11041551
Technically the latter is just as much of a unfounded assumption as the former, it's just that it's more an assumption of submission rather than an assumption of inevitable collapse and rebirth.

>>11041544
it's more just drawing a certain set of endgame conclusions about the insignificance of humanity for capitalism. for marxism, capitalism was a problem for humanity. for the accelerationists, humanity is a problem for capital, and essentially functions as independent metaphysical entity which is always trying to purge itself of the material substrate on which it depends for fuel.

it's not even a complicated thesis once you get past the jargon and the rest of it. think about how human beings treat the earth as a disposable but mysteriously regenerating lump of material we can use or abuse however we like. it's just all there for our production, consumption, and repetition. capital perceives us in the same way, but there's also a temporal dimension to it. it doesn't want to wait forever, because it is rising to consciousness and becoming self-aware, and it wants more of that, now. in the same way that people always feel when they want to become Free!

and we do all of this to ourselves in the form of advertising, media, and the rest. in the 1990s this was maybe radical but as time goes on it will just become simpler and more obvious how true this all is.

>>11041841
>Won't read modern authors
>watches modern children cartoons
Pfpfffffaahahhaa what the fuck.

>hurr durr nigers are stoopid lool

>>11041899
>he says on a mongolian basket weaving digital consortium

>>11041899
Plato would have liked Little Witch Academia.

>>11041910
thats bugmold,n ot him

>>11041584
>>11041841
>>11041588
None of the old greeks were half the man Nick Land is. Unlike them he views things not from humanitys point of view but from the outside, to get the objective truth.

>>11042563
>views exist divorced from humanity

>>11042563
Anon, please have a seat. This German munchkin would like to have a little chat with you.

>>11041544

Accelerationism as Land practices it is just cowardice without the motivation. Which is to say, pure thanatophilia

>>11041551
>*capital teleports behind you*
>heh... nothin personal, kid

>>11041544
not entirely. it’s sci-fi libertarianism complete with ceo-kings and bitter racialism. John Campbell, Jerry Pournelle, and friends but instead of golden age sci-fi, horror fiction. people’s mistake is thinking it’s a new idea instead of a new package.

>>11042988
more like todestriebphilia. also he is unironically correct

>>11044365
That's neoreaction, not accelerationism.

>>11041808
Left accelerationism died like 2 years ago.

>L/Acc assumed Capitalism has lost its innovative spirit, seeking to rekindle efforts by means of social restructuring
>R/Acc fears the Singularity may fail to come to fruition due a retardation of progress caused by an increasing level of forced incompetence in Western tech ecosystems
>U/Acc goes like this: Earth is captured by a technocapital singularity as renaissance rationalitization and oceanic navigation lock into commoditization take-off. Logistically accelerating techno-economic interactivity crumbles social order in auto-sophisticating machine runaway. As markets learn to manufacture intelligence, politics modernizes, upgrades paranoia, and tries to get a grip.

>>11044438
they are linked. lands metaphysics aren’t independent of his politics. just like john campbell etc. theory fiction goes back a ways.

>>11041871
nice post

>>11041544
Antinatalists are negative utilitarians in the sense that they are concerned with the least amount of sentient beings suffering and since convincing people not to breed isn't a realistic option speeding ahead to a point where sentient life is extinguished as soon as possible would actually be the sensible consequentialist ethic for antinatalists.

That said, I don't think conventional accelerationism is deliberately antinatalist in its goals.

>>11041544
Capital's alive, first 100 workers at a company, automate to 10 workers, automate to 1 worker, then automate to no workers. Capital does not need humans, it is alive already.

>>11044483
woah...

>>11041808
more like both use the same means to to attempt to achieve a different goal. They bet on a different outcome.

Unconditional accelerationist antipraxis is the only true consistent and patrician accelerationism to be quite frank with you.

>>11041580

>>11044483
Why did the last worker choose to automate himself?

>>11044486
haha, thats how to explain it to brainlets

>>11041580
based

>>11041572
lmao

>>11041580
this is going to be copypasta forever, isn't it

>>11041573
You could just say "lol its inevitable so who gives a shit" and save yourself the typing.

>>11044495
He didn't. Neither did the first 100 to 10. There's a huge amount of fear and panic surrounding the topic because it is after all both a contentious issue and a poorly understood topic with way too much armchair computer scientism. The problem is that even experts greatly exaggerate claims of AGI robotics and their capacity to function in the real world. Here's a great article delineating the worst of these facebook tier assumptions on the future of AI

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/609048/the-seven-deadly-sins-of-ai-predictions/?utm_campaign=technology_review&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social