/lit/ - Literature

>>11580963
Shit speeds up yo.

>The story 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.

>>11580984
this. /thread

>>11580984
I don't think he understands the hard limitations of artificial intelligence.

>>11581002
AI is indistinguishable from capitalism. It is an inorganic negentropic teleoplexic infolding of desiring machines
https://youtu.be/Fp5qeX6hx6Q?t=3m37s

>>11580984
this literally doesnt mean anything

>>11581002
This. Pseuds like him don't realize how hard it is to create general AI, let alone AI with human-levels of intelligence.

You certainly can't do it algorithmically, we know that for certain. So we basically have to invent a new kind of computer science just to even begin to approach this goal.

>>11581132
You're literally a brainlet with low reading comprehension who probably scored like a 760 on the SAT RC and think that's enough for continental philosophy

He's describing (1) economic adoption of capitalism at the age of exploration (2) the schumpeterian, deracinating effects of capital (3) the failure of politics to account for the gravity of this situation and altogether (4) how a strange future has been inevitable since Dutch trading companies first invented joint stock corporations. Read it again with this in mind.

>The story 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.

The whole essay is highly concentrated genius that firmly stakes out the accelerationist position while being a great work of literary philosophical writing at the same time.

>>11580984
You forgot "I really dislike immigrants."

>>11581178
it's alright, he really isn't a great writer though

>>11581178
>t. literal pseudointellectual

Not that guy, but Nick Land is a pseud in the purest sense of the term. It is the mark of a pseud/sophist to make up terms that sound similar to existing terms, but with none of the intellectual merit. For example:
>technocapital singularity
is basically:
technological singularity + Marxism

>renaissance rationalization

>auto-sophisticating
This one actually makes sense, but it's constructed in a way to make it sound smarter than it actually is. Just say "self-improving AI/machines achieve runaway growth." He's a pretentious hack who deliberately chooses awkward constructions to make his prose more dense than he needs to be.

>markets learn to manufacture intelligence
This is one of those statements that is subtly wrong because it conflates two different processes using known terms in those respective fields. Markets do indeed learn, and intelligence can indeed be manufactured, but in no way can a market learn how to manufacture intelligence. Fucking retard.

>>11581185
land only dislikes low iq immigrants. him and moldbug have this very autistic thing about Singapore and basically they want Singapore on steroids. Neither of them seem to care about racial homogeneity

im pretty sure they are just crypto leftists

>>11581002
Land's philosophy is not focused upon artificial intelligence, rather being focused upon the apparatus of a technological society existing in fragmentation, dissolution, actualisation, and (you guessed it) acceleration. Whether or not an artificial intelligence will exist at the hypothetical equivalent of human intelligence matters nothing, what matters is the elimination of the human subject by a technocapital, whether from simplistic algorithms, or from the relations of a social collapse.

>>11581208
i take that back

>>11581134
or just dumb humanity down to the point of algorithmic response machines
which would be far easier

>>11581134
>You certainly can't do it algorithmically, we know that for certain.
you don't fucking know that

>>11581220
>. him and moldbug
he and moldbug*
pls forgive me

>>11581218
Forgot to write:
>renaissance rationalization
This is a purely ambiguous term that can mean one of two things, both of which are retarded in context. One, it could be society rationalizing a new kind of renaissance in technology. Two, it could be society rationalizing classical, Renaissance values.

If the former, why would society ever need to rationalize a renaissance? Rationalization happens when you need to justify a bad thing. A renaissance of any sort is always a good thing. If the latter, why would classical Renaissance/enlightenment values have any bearing on the technological singularity? The singularity is the opposite of enlightenment/humanist values. It literally advocates for technologically driven collectivism.

Only bad writers/pseuds make ambiguous statements like this, hoping you wouldn't notice.

>>11581239
Uh, yes we do. Humans can solve NP hard problems like the halting problem, but you cannot ever design an algorithm that can do the same.

>>11581134
Land's eschatology in no way relies on AI explosion. He just seems to think its neat. His actual vision is one of capital getting competitive and efficient enough to start playing the game of the market without a human substrate, which is in principle possible with merely contemporary level programs.

>>11581250
>you cannot ever design an algorithm that can do the same.
you don't know that

>>11581243
>Rationalization happens when you need to justify a bad thing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_(sociology)

>>11581255
...are you retarded?

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8394455/how-does-this-proof-that-the-halting-problem-is-undecidable-work

>>11581264
>stackflow
Lmao retard

>>11581267
Did you even read it brainlet? The halting problem is a well known mathematical proof that CS babbies learn.

>>11581264
yes i am retarded but you still dont know that and it's absurd you think you do

>>11581273
>Yes I'm an idiot and I don't understand one of the most important proofs in the 20th century, but you must be wrong just because

The absolute state of /lit/.

The halting problem proves by contradiction that you cannot design a universal Turing machine (aka all algorithms that can ever exist) which can solve the halting problem.

>>11581277
my dick proves by contradiction that your gf is a whore you fag

>>11581243
Holy fuck he's literally talking about the actual European renaissance that's not hard from context cues. "Renaissance rationalization" means proto-rationalist but still reason-based tendencies to erroneously place cultural emphasis on the faculty of reason present in Europe from that time. Meltdown sees such culture as an invaluable part of capitalist development, but, like 16th century spice trade, actively hastening it's own end by serving capital (which will eventually run out of use for it). Captured. Locked-in.

>>11581250
Human minds are a turing machine bud

>>11581250
The halting problem is technically NP-hard but more accurately is undecidable. NP hard is a much weaker claim and can include decidable problems like SAT.
>Humans can solve NP hard problems like the halting problem
No? A human may solve an instance of such a problem but so can a computer, a modern SAT solver will still BTFO a human when solving SAT instances.

But when is neo china arriving

>>11581296
> a modern SAT solver will still BTFO a human when solving SAT instances.

Not generically though. Humans can come across something like the halting problem and can solve it with no prior training or knowledge. SAT solvers and most neural networks are purpose-specific.

We are still a long ways off from generic AI. Remember, it's only been about 5 years since the Google brain learned what a cat is unsupervised.

>>11581311
>are purpose-specific.
you think human minds dont have purpose specific functions evolved through natural selection?

>>11581289
>not hard from context clues
It also doesn't change the fact it's still an ambiguous statement that triggers the editor in me something fierce.

>>11581317
Of course we do, but human intelligence is mostly fungible. If it wasn't, then we'd all still be hunting with rocks and spears.

>>11581320
he wrote it binged on speed cut him some slack

>>11581320
No you just don't understand the meaning of terms as was shown here >>11581258. If you don't have an understanding of the history of philosophy or history itself and don't understand basic terminology then yes these statements can seem "ambiguous" but then you could easily criticise almost all modern philosophical writing for being "ambiguous"

>>11580963
That we are moving faster and faster to oblivion. Fragmenting exponentially towards complete chaos.

>>11581320
>an ambiguous statement
I used to think Land was full of this kind of thing and using it for stylistic purposes, but the more I read him the more I realized that all those bizarre phrases he comes up with are actually very specific cocnepts in his mind. He just kind of invents phrases on the fly and says them in a way like he expects his readers to already be familair with them when you actually have to parse them with active thought to see what's going on.

If you read a bunch of his shit, and then reread his essays it becomes a lot clearer

>>11581311
You're conflating technical issues.
There's no reason to believe humans can solve SAT in some equivalent of polynomial time.
The halting problem makes this obvious since it's literally undecidable in general, any solution a human does is simply brute force on a small instance with some heuristics. You can't solve halting problem using procedure than can be simulated on turing machine.

>>11581234
But how does that benefit innovation and the acceleration of humanity?

>>11580984
>>11581178
These are buzzwords with no meaning, which I said in the thread not to include. Why does it crumble social order? How does politics fail to account for the 'gravity of the situation' that you named?

>>11581220
Why singapore?

>>11581253
>His actual vision is one of capital getting competitive and efficient enough to start playing the game of the market without a human substrate


What

>>11581466
because it's a multiracial extremely meritocratic, highly authoritarian, very peaceful, very wealthy and modernized shithole. NRX catnip, at least for the nrx types who dont care about race or religion very much, which was the original NRX, Moldbug being an atheist Jew and all

>>11581477
It's 74% Chinese and 13% Malay. Hardly 'multiracial'. It's authoritarian but very 'softly'. I'm not how that is the goal though. They are peaceful but not due to authoritarianism. What sort of logic is this guy thinking with?

>>11581469
Algorithmic trading is already a black box evolutionary arms race.

>>11581497
moron

>>11581311
>cope
There are big breakthroughs coming, soon. The old CS paradigm, and the (meta-)math, logic, conceptual and technical considerations it was based on, is going to get BTFO. There's already a few directions this is going in, but just wait until neuromorphic IC's are mass produced. You're still thinking about computable functions and symbolic instruction string tapes. Why do you think P=NP and the complexity class situation in general is so opaque? It will be at, and in many ways already is, at a level of abstraction our brains literally aren't wired to cope with at any level of individual genius, so you'll only see the shadows like you do now, at best.

>>11581386
Easier to build machines with machines to some degree.

>>11581250
>algorithms cannot solve NP-hard problems

Fml can people on /lit/ stop pretending they know maths. Thanks x

>>11581220
>crypto leftists
nah they're unabashedly hyper neo libs

>>11580963
is that Sheldon from bing bag theory haha hes funny baningo

>>11581264
Quantum computers my guy
Listen, for all we know - an angel could come down and give us a Halting Oracle, and then we'd move up one level of the computability heirachy.

Stop acting a meme

>>11581218
>It is the mark of a pseud/sophist to make up terms that sound similar to existing terms, but with none of the intellectual merit.
There is literally nothing wrong with making up new terms if you so desire. Many authors coined new terms.

>>11581994
no u

>>11582575
I cannot believe those kind of opinion happened in /lit/, considering that exact thing - criticizing sophistication of words without context is a very common strategy of philolet to scratch theories.

Hegel did the same thing with much much worse way, do we should blame him as well?

Everyone who's interested in this stuff and not retarded probably already knows this channel anyway, but I've never seen it posted in Nick Land threads so I want to make sure you guys check this dude out, he put together a remarkably well collection of pieces from many different philosophy writers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DFpzspAl3s&list=PLrHG_aAvxl-n5_Z10jVv4CbS2_jDsPt0y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DFpzspAl3s&list=PLrHG_aAvxl-n5_Z10jVv4CbS2_jDsPt0y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTSSg-kw-wk&list=PLrHG_aAvxl-m9wKmBRdqLlO4sILx3n6pD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EVU9KQirww&list=PLrHG_aAvxl-kodN2BKLoIDdINoD6wQrk1

>>11582685
forgot

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfoDpjmv6NU&list=PLrHG_aAvxl-m2rPkmE7JD4OOt5MSSR66f

>>11580984
Apex of Bugman thought.

>>11581178
t. Nick Land
You're the brainlet with your non declarative summary.

>>11582703
The apex of crab-bucket thought is romantic humanists who wish to impede the creation of the ubermensch because they thought it would be something recognizably human and now they feel alienated. People like you hate greatness and merely wish for comfort and familiarity.

>>11581994
>Quantum computers my guy
>Stop acting a meme
That’ll be a yikes from me dog

>>11581002

He's not even talking about AI in this passage though.

>The idea of intelligence, more abstractly, applies far beyond IQ testing, to a wide variety of natural, technical, and institutional systems, from biology, through ecological and economic arrangements, to robotics. In each case, intelligence solves problems, by guiding behavior to produce local extropy. It is indicated by the avoidance of probable outcomes, which is equivalent to the construction of information.

I think a lot of people forget that much of the most "Landian" of Land's works were never intended to bread as traditional works of philosophy, making statements and then arguing for those statements, although his very early stuff is closer to this and his PHD is more or less standard issue. By the time Land had come around to writing the stuff he has become well known for he had left his position at the university, he was deeply involved in the CCRU writing theory-fiction and engage with art-collectives more than he was with the academy. His work in this period is explicitly called theory-fiction and it was most often performed as art in small galleries and needs to viewed as such. Not to say there is not philosophical value in what he wrote in those days, but approaching them like you would, say, CPR is like reading the Illiad and thinking that is how it was intended to be experienced.

>>11582835
>never intended to bread
>bread
disregard everything I wrote

>>11581469

Consider automated price adjustment on sites like Amazon. A task once handled by humans is taken over by machinic intelligence. In this way markets become less human.

>>11582685
i cant with the robot voice. i know its appropriate given the subject matter but i just cant

I wonder what Lands family think about his dark reputition.

>>11581116
>inorganic negentropic teleoplexic infolding of desiring machines

>>11581132
>i don't understand it ergo it is meaningless
Arrogant AND incompetent.

Please buy my collected essays.

DUDE TECHNOCAPITAL LMAO

>>11581299
2020

pAsty DD))rK H*s [[gay earth}}AND TO SAY, PRETTY FUCKIN STUPID

Like if someone just browsed the early internet all day doing amphetamine and never going outside.

>>11584364

>>11581605
not an argument.
>>11581598
How?

>>11580963
Take every identity, expression, process, and thought you would attribute to an intelligent but suicidal human being, growing from childhood to adulthood, and just throw all of that into capitalism. Just fucking toss it on over. That's Land.

>>11581116
Why does it look like it's so hard for him to speak? I'm really interested in what he's saying but it seems like he's concentrating really hard on keeping his sentences together. The entire run time is full of jump cuts to fix his pacing
Is this what amphetamines do to a man?

>>11581116
Where were you when you learned that Land plagiarized everything?

https://pastebin.com/4s91qRn6

>>11586379
Either he’s straining to try and convey his thoughts in an easily understandable way or his brain is fucked from amphetamines.

>>11586379
literally yes

Day 224. The surplus content excised from the articulation of spirographic expenditure has become strictly Landian. Deterritorialization has reached peak oscillation. Fever crash. Lights and fires and the top of the pyramid dances us from the imminent future. Wetware programming recycled and downloaded. Hyper-text-macroeconomics overcodes and limits the flows of incestuous desire (or, desiring repression qua machinic operation). I attempt to grapple through dynamic points of extranet positioning, breaking the walls and concretizing the assemblage as a whole. It still doesn't click click click. Breaks and stops in the flows define the machines, but what articulates the machinic whole other than pure difference? Moore's law qua locus and axiom. The instantiation of the Will and its singular focus. Pan and capital – transmodalcapital – and the cupola under all. Being as tumult, horror. Reflection into and through the other. Recognition of ancient rites of vacciliations untombed. Penultimategenesis. Fandango Nero Beta Nova Lighthouse. Containment-standby – contentment and violent introspection are to follow promptly.

>>11586379

IQ so high his brain literally cant even keep up.. amazing

>>11580963
"Capitalism will win" and "Optimize for intelligence." Capitalism is a Thing that exists to maximize Intelligence, or Intelligence is a Thing and Capitalism is how it maximizes itself. Also his notion of outsideness which I think of as a joke the butt of which is the naive humanist and/or anthropocentric theorizing that has dominated most of history.

>>11580963
capitalism > your face

>>11581002
AI is this generations space exploration. Look at nat geo's from the 80's that said we'd be on Mars by 2015 and you'll know what I mean.

Quantum computing is a meme, and traditional processing power is limited by overheating concerns and raw power consumption. Cloud computing might bypass size limitations on cpu's but it doesn't change the fact that processing power scales with energy consumption.

It's going to be fucking hillarious watching a good 50% of academia flail around over the next few decades as the computing and "data science" fields stall out. So much effort put into one scientific instrument, and so little into understanding dynamics means thousands of people who will have nothing to contribute to science. They will not be missed.

>>11586763
>Look at nat geo's from the 80's that said we'd be on Mars by 2015
we landed a rover on mars in like 2011 anon, I'd say that isn't the worst prediction ever made

>>11586782
They meant a mars colony m8. If all you care about is getting some inanimate object there, then we already did that in 1965 with mariner 4. Humans will never colonize mars, and they will never create AI in anybody's lifetime because those goals are incompatible with current paradigms of science. It's not inconceivable that we could someday achieve them, but it would take a breakthrough in theoretical understanding, not just processing power, and we haven't had any earth shaking breakthroughs in basic science since the discovery of DNA in the 1950's. Everything since then has been incremental improvement.

>>11586800
for Land, AI and capitalism are effectively the same thing. it isn't about creating AI, it's about the recognition that AI has hacked the human project since roughly 1500, for it's own lovecraftian purposes. see >>11581116

Explain Nick Land to me like I have a very basic understanding of Deleuze, Guattari, and Marx.

>>11586886
Literally read the fucking thread, holy shit

>>11581463
Not him but
>Why does it crumble social order?
I presume you accept that it does. There's enough evidence.
as to why it should be inevitable on a theoretical level,
When those joint-stock corporations were created in the Netherlands, when this idea of risk-distribution through investment was formalized in a proper system, The people of the time were fully capable of playing at capitalism like a civilized gentleman's game. Progressively, however, the civility was stripped away, because the game evidently rewards the player with the least scruples.
The modern financial sector would probably be unrecognizable to those Dutchmen, they would decry it as the filthy casino.

The idea of getting something for nothing (or for something very abstract such as risk) is poison to the social-order.
The fact that it is not only possible, but absolutely commonplace, and furthermore, that the people getting money for nothing get much more of it than you do, thousands of times more, and further still, that they can crash the economy and no one goes to jail, au contraire, they get a fat fucking bail-out and don't even have to show us where the money went...
What motivation is there to do honest work? How can anyone believe in a communal project for the nation?

>How does politics fail to account for the 'gravity of the situation' that you named?
In the specific case that I brought up, by not regulating wall street when they come up with a new way to gamble. Not only that, but actively repealing regulations.
Now, in general... Politics only makes sense, it is only relevant when the people politicking are the sovereign power in the land. Capitalism creates the possibility that private individuals might become more powerful than the government. This simple fact is an enormous white elephant, and when it does get discussed it's to praise our benevolent overlords and to gently suckle at the base of the shaft of their glorious space rockets.

>>11581178
>Falling for a meme author
Do you keep your copy of Fanged Noumena between Infinite Jest and 12 Rules?

>>11580963
nick land has nothing without buzzwords, much like taleb

>>11581343
Other way round, it's just that the convergence into the superstructure isn't a good thing

Is his more recent fiction stuff any good?

>>11586379
Dude is fried.

Land was about that life and stayed awake for 10 years straight to try save us from what's coming, but ended up drinking his own koolaid which was likely ironic at the time and merging with the edge of chaos entropy he mainlined. 99.999% of you are feeble, milquetoast little vermin cunts who aren't helping shit with your faggot ass "studies" and worthless safe derivative opinions.

>>11586520
>Day 224. The surplus content excised from the articulation of spirographic expenditure has become strictly Landian. Deterritorialization has reached peak oscillation. Fever crash. Lights and fires and the top of the pyramid dances us from the imminent future. Wetware programming recycled and downloaded. Hyper-text-macroeconomics overcodes and limits the flows of incestuous desire (or, desiring repression qua machinic operation). I attempt to grapple through dynamic points of extranet positioning, breaking the walls and concretizing the assemblage as a whole. It still doesn't click click click. Breaks and stops in the flows define the machines, but what articulates the machinic whole other than pure difference? Moore's law qua locus and axiom. The instantiation of the Will and its singular focus. Pan and capital – transmodalcapital – and the cupola under all. Being as tumult, horror. Reflection into and through the other. Recognition of ancient rites of vacciliations untombed. Penultimategenesis. Fandango Nero Beta Nova Lighthouse. Containment-standby – contentment and violent introspection are to follow promptly.


turn it into a rap

>>11581218
rationalization is a real process identified by german sociology, you just sound philosophically illiterate. and your objection to the rest are completely sophistical—you cover up a paucity of real critical thought with intelligent sounding negations like “in no way” which offer a conclusion without actually setting forth premises.

>>11581243
>Rationalization happens when you need to justify a bad thing.
lmao this is really embarrassing. you actually think he’s referring to this colloquial, american sense of rationalization and not the real process by which reason becomes actualized in objective legal/economic structures. LMAO UR ILLITERATE

>>11581463
>buzzwords with no meaning

Can someone post those Land anecdotes from when he was still an academic and made a lot of weird shit

>>11588270
Land on smoking.

>>11581463

>>11582790
t. secular heathen
accept Christ and realize the ubermensch is yet another vain tower of babel

>>11588670
>people take this dude seriously

>>11588270
> Land’s search for another way to think thus took the form of an experimentation with writing; but it also went beyond writing. The quest for some ‘signal’ that was not merely the repugnant narcissistic reflection of the Human Security System would demand a total disregard of normative method[...] In taking this approach, Land not only renounced the respect of his academic peers, but many times even lost the confidence of his supporters, as he sought by any means possible to drill through the sedimented layers of normative human comportment. Strange scenes ensued: A seminar on A Thousand Plateaus where a group of nonplussed graduates were encouraged to ‘read’ the chapter titles of the book by turning them into acronyms that were then plotted as vectors on a diagram of a QWERTY keyboard (‘qwertopology’); A three-week long experiment in refusing to speak in the first person, instead referring to the collective entity ‘Cur’ (comprising the hardcore participants in ‘Current French Philosophy,’ who extended the lectures into a continual movable seminar); and, most memorably, a presentation at the conference Virtual Futures in 1996: Rather than reading a paper, in this collaboration with artist collective Orphan Drift, under the name of ‘DogHead SurGeri,’2 and complete with jungle soundtrack, Land lay behind the stage, flat on the floor (a ‘snake-becoming’ forming the first stage of bodily destratification), croaking enigmatic invocations intercut with sections from Artaud’s asylum poems. In this delirious vocal telegraphy, meaning seemed to disintegrate into sheer phonetic matter, melting into the cut-up beats and acting directly on the subconscious. As Land began to speak in his strange, choked-off voice (perhaps that ‘absurdly high pitched ... tone ... ancient demonists described as ‘silvery,’ which he later reports being taunted by),3 the disconcerted audience begin to giggle; the demon voice wavered slightly until Land’s sense of mission overcame his momentary self-consciousness; and as the ‘performance’ continued the audience fell silent, eyeing each other uncertainly as if they had walked into a funeral by mistake. Embarrassment was regarded by Land as just one of the rudimentary inhibitions that had to be broken down in order to explore the unknown – in contrast to the forces of academic domestication, which normalised by fostering a sense of inadequacy and shame before the Masters, before the edifice of what is yet to be learnt.

>>11581116
>schism
>'ʃism'
>not 'skism'
And this man went to university in England?

>>11589465
he was a tenured professor at the University of Warwick

>>11589475
He can't even pronounce English words.

>>11589480
in that case, it's good thing he was a professor of philosophy and not linguistics (he's been living in Shanghai for like a decade too, who knows what that does to an accent)

>>11589465

He has his reasons.
Our task is to uncover them.

>>11589495
>nick land interview 1997
This was two decades ago.

>>11589506
read the description or the comments (or listen to all the Chinese being spoken in the background). this interview is not from 1997.

>>11589513
Ah yeah. He does look super 'accelerated' here but I assumed it was the amphetamines.

>>11585558
nice

>>11586357
stop projecting anon

>>11586736
keked

>>11587640
>Day 224.
The surplus content excised from the articulation and bandying
of spirographic expenditure has become strictly Landian.
Deterritorialization has reached peak oscillation.
Quantum placement is assigned by a selection process; alien.
Fever crash. Lights and fires and the top of the pyramid create cash, decode flows and that's that.
Wetware programming recycled and downloaded.
Hyper-text-macroeconomics overcoded and compounded.
limits to the flows of incestuous desire (or, desiring repression, or the pyramid fire).
I attempt to grapple through dynamic points of extranet positioning,
breaking the walls and concretizing my conditioning.
Schizoanalytics make my brain feel sick, but it still doesn't click click click.
Breaks and stops in the flows define the machines,
Jungle beats and amphetamines present the obsene.
And what articulates the machinic whole other than pure difference?
Moore's law qua locus and axiom.
The instantiation of the Will and its singular focus.
You aint seen the k-pulp converge; osmosis.
Pan and capital – transmodalcapital – the cupola under all.
Being as tumult, horror; being the flown subject on the wall.
Like reflection into and through the other.
Incest with the sister is nothing like the mother.
Recognition of ancient rites of vacciliations are untombed.
Penultimategenesis. Fandango Lighthouse as Monsoon.
Containment-standby; hold fast as states lurch like zombies
Contempt and violent introspection are to follow promptly.

>>11586818
>AI has hacked the human project since roughly 1500, for it's own lovecraftian purposes

So he literally beleives that the enlightenment was a metaphysical force which gripped the mind of humanity and is guiding it to this day under the system we call capitalism?

wtf

which anon owns this copy? I really want to know what the crab code is

>>11589901
>>11589901
>The story goes like this: Earth is captured by a technocapital singularity as renaissance rationalization 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.
>The body count climbs through a series of globe-wars. Emergent Planetary Commercium trashes the Holy Roman Empire, the Napoleonic Continental System, the Second and Third Reich, and the Soviet International, cranking-up world disorder through compressing phases. Deregulation and the state arms-race each other into cyberspace.
[...]
>BwOs, machinic singularities, or tractor fields emerge through the combination of parts with (rather than into) their whole; arranging composite individuations in a virtual/actual circuit. They are additive rather than substitutive, and immanent rather than transcendent: executed by functional complexes of currents, switches, and loops, caught in scaling reverberations, and fleeing through intercommunications, from the level of the integrated planetary system to that of atomic assemblages. Multiplicities captured by singularities interconnect as desiring-machines; dissipating entropy by dissociating flows, and recycling their machinism as self-assembling chronogenic circuitry.
>Converging upon terrestrial meltdown singularity, phase-out culture accelerates through its digitech-heated adaptive landscape, passing through compression thresholds normed to an intensive logistic curve: 1500, 1756, 1884, 1948, 1980, 1996, 2004, 2008, 2010, 2011 ...
>Nothing human makes it out of the near-future.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1c-7uV_99mfnRFb-YIBW15EbgKlh8t6wH/view

>>11581299
>tekate y no minerva
Sad!

is this just Marxism for pessimists

>>11590060

No

>>11590060
It's Marxism pushed so hard that it shot around to the far right

>>11590060
not really. maybe l/acc has leaned that way since based Fisher died. read this for the leftist take:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1D_qdPDEbddly2PapOImYtAoFHGECEHUQ/view
and this for a broader overview:
https://www.meta-nomad.net/on-left-and-right-accelerationism/

>>11590067
Isn't Land an advocate for xeno feminism tho ?

>>11590085
Early Land was a radical marxist-feminist, Late Land is a twitter shitposting conservative

>>11590067
I mean accelerationism works for the far right and far left because both desire an end to the current state of things, either based in the cultural sense for the far right or the economic sense for the far left. Accelerationism could really be used by either side as long as said side was sure the opposing one wouldn't "win" afterwards

can we please just turn this into a general? Doesn't matter if its a slow general

>>11590060
Fatalists/nihilists. Land wrote half-jokingly, one might argue, that he would go right back to being a "right-wing Marxist" if only they would get rid of the hopelessly idiotic economic theory, specifically LToV. IDK how anyone can take Austrian econ any more seriously than Middle Earth geography... but he does.

>>11590148
Just pin it in the catalog and bump it when it gets low

>>11590060
Marxists are just yet another tentacle of the chronophage when you think about it

>>11590152
lmaooooo

>>11590076
>>11589926

good posts

>>11589784
the madman actually did it

bump

>>11589926
is this actually what you heathens believe in?

>>11581320
You would instantly know exactly what this means if you actually read any philosophy or sociology at upper undergrad level, but like most people on this forum you're either too lazy or too much of a brainlet and assume a highly educated (but incredibly zaney) man is going to write complete nonsense in the very opening statement of a paper.

Accelerationism is a strange conclusion from a very thorough analysis of capital and its contingent cultures. If you haven't done the hard yards to understand why the conclusion is off, fuck off and stop assuming it's someone else who is wrong. You're not even tall enough to get on the ride Land is attempting to crash with no survivors.

>>11586982
Rare informed post

>>11588670
As if bourgeoise university culture actually achieves anything through polite debate.

Where were you when Land saved teleology?

>Whenever its name has been anything but a jest, philosophy has been haunted by a subterranean question: What if knowledge were a means to deepen unknowing? It is this question alone that has differentiated it from the shallow things of the earth. Yet the glory and also the indignity of philosophy is to have sought the end of knowing, and no more.

>>11593711
good quote.

the fascinating thing about land is that he found a kind of interesting third option between Affirmation and Negation, which sometimes seems like the difference between nietzsche et al and hegel/lacan/kojeve. land's interesting third position is Horror. horror is neither affirmation nor negation, but a kind of litmus test. your/our response to horror probably *should* be a sense of bracing adventure, rather than just cowering under the bed. it's also where he departs from the traditionalists or other alt-right guys, i think, but you can see why his work would be associated with them.

he's always kind of depressing to read but it feels like the right kind of depressing.

>>11593817

>horror is neither affirmation nor negation, but a kind of litmus test

I like this bit about 'horrorism' from his Neoreactionary writings.

The idea, as I take it, involves a certain resignation to reality which is itself horrifying in a way, but also a creeping horror for those who would seek to impose their will on the world as their grand schemes implode with increasing ferocity. A productive fatalism would seem to be the key. This helps shed light, I think, on why Land takes the side he takes.

As an aside, I think examining the concept of God-fearing in the Abrahamic religions could provide some insights into all of this, but that's just a gut feeling.

>>11593899
i agree with all of that. and that's a good pic to include.

it's really such an interesting philosophical plot development after deconstruction: what do you do in an era when Capital knows you better than you know yourself? you can't be cynical or ironic about it, really, but also stridently militaristic or anthropocentric forms of political thought don't seem to hold up either. to me all forms of outrage culture point back to this same phenomenon: scapegoating as a way of dealing with the horror that technocapital unleashes. you're right about productive fatalism.

>As an aside, I think examining the concept of God-fearing in the Abrahamic religions could provide some insights into all of this, but that's just a gut feeling.

how so?

>>11589926
>when you have a psychotic break, scribble down insane notes all over the envelopes in your house for a month, and start ranting at people about the long-form demonic ritual of summoning an AI demon into reality that humanity is walking right into
>it's okay though because this philosopher thinks it too
Ah phew now I don't have to worry about my mental health anymore!

>>11593950

>how so?

I'm out of my depth here, but I think the idea of having horror in one's heart when faced with the ultimate while still welcoming and even loving both the horror and the absolute reality that engenders it could be understood as Landian in a way.

Can Nick Land explain why gas giants radiate twice as much heat into space they receive from the sun? Otherwise his and Bataille's Solar economy theory is BTFO and we shouldn't thirst for annihilation.

http://lasp.colorado.edu/~bagenal/3750/ClassNotes/Class12/Class12.html

So is Nick Land just a radiohead album with right wing values?

>>11594000
agreed. if anything, horror is a corrosive against cynicism. with landian stuff, of course, you don't really come away feeling that you have anything to put your new sense of idealism *in* but i think that's the point.

my own hope is that since cynicism really seems like an outmoded attitude (and i connect contemporary outrage culture to a form of cynicism, or that the cynicism is only a mask for the rage, which is in turn a mask for the fear of a loss of reality), that a kind of 'piety of thought' is required, although far from the sense in which heidegger intended it. and some belated hope that the feeling of floating in space might incline people to be a little gentler with each other, or sharper with themselves. but that's my own thing i suppose. theology - spinozistic theology included - in general tho seems like a very good thing to think about. fwiw.

>>11594031
this is interesting, can you explain more?

>>11594037
the right wing values emerged out of starting out ultra-left imho. kind of like baudrillard: departing from marx station, end on planet nietzsche. it matters how he got to be where he is now. and it has a lot to do with these guys.

>>11594068

If anything, Landian horror reminds me of Lucretian sublimity. That terrible joy one gets when viewing nature up-close with zero romanticism.

>>11594068
All the gas giants radiate more heat than they receive from the sun. Neptune's is particularly spooky. Part of the source is thought to be gravitational energy, heat energy from the gravitational attraction/collapse of the planets own material.

>>11594096
can't find a flaw there. but you've prompted me to search out a weird old piece of cinema now:

>For I looked upon the words under the cage door, and understood them. We had become intelligent.

this seems like a pretty nice Landian statement of ecological principle.

>>11594112
that's very interesting. so if (and that's a big if) life was possible on a gas giant, then the idea of expenditure and solar generosity et al as bataille understands it would not apply. am i understanding this correctly?

>>11594178
>Mrs. Brisby enters the rose bush and encounters a aggressive guard rat named Brutus, who chases her away. She is led back in by Mr. Ages, and is amazed to see the rats' use of electricity and other technology. She meets Justin, the friendly Captain of the Guard, and Jenner, a ruthless, power-hungry rat opposed to Nicodemus, and finally Nicodemus himself. From Nicodemus, she learns that many years ago her husband, along with the rats and Mr. Ages, were part of a series of experiments at a place known as NIMH, the National Institute of Mental Health. The experiments boosted their intelligence, enabling them to escape, as well as extending their lifespans and slowing their aging process. However, they are unable to live only as rats, needing human technology to survive, which they have only accomplished by stealing. The rats have concocted "The Plan", which is to leave the farm and live independently.

the crazy thing about this is that this is a text that would appeal on a deep subliminal level to both land and peterson.

How does Land's assertion of the dominance of Capitalism not revert back to identity? How does Land resolve with Deleuze's major critique of identity? Land's conception of capitalism seems to be almost a Hegelian subject, but I could be misunderstanding Land.

>>11595180
>How does Land's assertion of the dominance of Capitalism not revert back to identity?
see pic rel. capital has no identity (and may not even have anything like an interior). or, to quote omar little, money ain't got no owners, only spenders.

>How does Land resolve with Deleuze's major critique of identity?
see above

>Land's conception of capitalism seems to be almost a Hegelian subject, but I could be misunderstanding Land.
it's best not to think of any relation of capital to subjectivity, least of all hegelian ideas. there are some similarities between the PoS and land's notion of teleoplexy, but it's kind of hard to tell if things will play out in the same way.

>>11595222
So Land's notion of capital is sort of similar to the culture industry?

Thanks for answering!

>>11580984
This is like if someone used only corporate business jargon nonsense to write a book

>>11595717
>business jargon

>>11595554
maybe...although i'm not really sure what you mean by this. i could perhaps give you a more nuanced answer if you explained what you mean a little bit more.

you can, in a way, kind of think of acceleration as being a sort of counter-cultural movement. for land capitalism itself is the critique, which is what separates him and his ideas from something like the frankfurt school and their perspective. in both cases, it's true that you could say there is a sort of critique of ideology in play. but in 2018 the ideas of the frankfurt school are as the cathedral basically hegemonic, and acceleration is a sort of critical position w/r/t that. it warrants mentioning, however, that while there are various strains of acceleration - l/acc, r/acc, u/acc, etc - for land himself the cultural aspect of a lot of this is kind of uninteresting. he doesn't really have anything like 'hopes for humanity' in the usual sense marxist-inspired philosophers might have. he thinks, i think we can say, quite the opposite: he's wondering if capitalism itself can escape from our own blinkered critical sensibilities.

again, tho: capital *is* the critique. so it's not like zizek or others. landian schizoanalysis (or horror) is what happens when you reveal or pull away that final onion skin, and find that there's no kernel of humanism in there. what's in there (or rather, Out there) is really beyond thought. it warrants mentioning also that you don't necessarily have to go all the way with his kind of thought processes in order to find a lot that's interesting in acceleration - namely, a kind of attitude towards spinozism that is really quite rewarding and interesting to think about.

the attractiveness of land isn't always necessarily the man himself, but mostly the kinds of speculative possibility acceleration opens up. it's equally corrosive to all forms of outrage culture, for one thing, and it also i think actually explains more accurately what people are afraid of (a loss of reality, a ceding of control over the future course of the earth to economic processes rather than anthro-politics, &c) and other things. it can, as that earlier anon suggested, point towards something like a productive fatalism.

if you want a good and fairly recent interview with him to learn more about any of this, you can listen to this one too.

http://jmrphy.libsyn.com/ideology-intelligence-and-capital-with-nick-land

sorry for the long post.

>>11595794
I guess what I meant by the comparison to the culture industry is that I saw a parallel process: the culture industry seems to have no essence of identity in that any critique of it can be absorbed and made into a commodity; while Land's capitalism possesses nothing internal but only tolerates commercial, or capital, relations. The similarity I see is that both the culture industry and Land's capitalism possess no identity or core, but tolerate capital relations. I guess the difference between the two is that Adorno and Horkheimer argue that the culture industry absorbs critiqued of it into its identity, while Land's capitalism absorbs nothing?

Also thanks for the lengthy reply and link! I'll check out the link soon :)

>>11596046
way way off; not who you responded to and unfortunately I have to head to work so I can't get too deep into it. Land's capitalism absorbs everything and desublimates nothing. Captialism doesn't "tolerate capital relations", it decodes any non-capital relations through money, markets, ect. It provides an ontic-selection-process which 'decides' how the relations themselves will exist or evolve. The fact that all relations seem to be converging to a singularity is the wake up call that the selection process isn't contingent, it is purposeful (if one can use that word deanthropomorphized)

>>11596046
the irony is that the culture industry produced a generation (and more) of individuals who derived their sense of identity entirely from the proposition that the culture industry itself had no identity. and so identity was produced: generation critique.

there are parallels, but they're through-the-looking-glass parallels. r/acc in particular basically is the critique of culture for that culture which was raised on the critique of culture, and is now hegemonic: the Cathedral. even trump is now discovering that being the POTUS does not mean you have authority over 500+ years of entrenched leftward drift.

so >>11596115 gets it. it's not really that landian capital 'absorbs nothing.' it certainly absorbs intelligence and raw data, converting this into technocommerce, and that technocommerce both is and is driven by culture to some degree. it is more that it is selecting for something. the thing is that capital *includes* the culture industry in a far more radical sense today. in a sense, it is true that it always did, but the later chapters of FN are testament to land attempting to 'deterritorialize' himself (occasionally, that word is mildly ridiculous) that he would find someplace in his own brain not always-already possessed by capital, and more or less failing. his long strange plunge into bataille-land seals the deal, and out of this he emerges much later on as a very different man with different political sensibilities (or were they just the same ones he always had, but he had to drill down far enough to reach this? who knows?)

anyways. relative comparisons between adorno and land are tempting, and in a sense acceleration is a kind of marxism updated for the 21C, but it's rinsed through deleuzian metaphysics, and that changes everything. capital is in a sense more modernist than adorno ever would have been.

on a personal note: i still don't think acceleration is actually a cure for existential dread (in case anyone was actually still feeling that anymore...), but it is a genuinely new and wide-open chapter in the history of continental marxism, philosophy, psychoanalysis, post-postmodernism and so on. and i think land is maybe the best exegete of the meaning of cyberpunk and aesthetics, ever, why it happened, what it meant, all that. in a different world he absolutely could have made a sort of zizekian Guide To Culture. maybe somebody will, someday.

A supercilious attempt to explain the world using elaborate linguistic systems based on the principles of formal logic rather than through empiricism.

>>11596231
>continental marxism, psychoanalysis, post-postmodernism
lmao no, Land ended all this dreadful shit by completing it, God willing. That's the joke, even if he himself isn't (completely) in on it.

>>11596231
>capital *includes* the culture industry
what i meant to say here was, it includes the *critique* of culture. and in a very negative sense: that, in a nutshell, is what is meant by the Cathedral: an alliance between academic, media, entertainment and government interests. there is today, as you can see by watching mainstream news, a terrible conformism now unfolding in what used to be the frankfurt school-mode of critique: it's the Bloody Neo-Marxism that JBP talks about. partly, i would say, this has to do with the fact that neoliberal capital is the uncanny doppelganger of second-wave feminism, which was what actually dealt the killing blow to orthodox marxism in the 70s, and paved the way for Foucault Uber Alles and much else that followed. and where we are today. the point is that, mysteriously, the idea of criticizing capitalism has disappeared, while identity politics become everything.

and so acceleration basically jettisons the whole enchilada in favor of inhumanism. it's never perfect, however, since we wind up in this eerie, cryptic psychic waltz with capitalism in this way, feeling as though we are all being pulled towards the future by a technological singularity that captures all of our desires and returns them back to us in teleoplectic circuitry. maybe even a little like pic rel except that what truman finds when he opens that door is not ed harris.
>although ed harris seems for whatever reason to be the guy we like to see playing that role, since he did it again in snowpiercer

anyways. acceleration and late 20C/early 21C intellectual history. always interesting stuff.

>>11596301
he belongs to that story, is what i mean. everything grows out of everything else.

>>11596231
>>11596329
Thanks for the explanation anon. I'm gonna have to dive into Land more than I've read so far!

I find it funny that you found a charitable interpretation for Jordan Peterson's critiques—although I must express sympathy with his critique of identity politics (and the other left movements which will most likely succumb to giving Capitalism a human face). I'll also have to read that Make Fisher link posted earlier

Thank you again!

>>11596550
>Make Fisher
* Mark Fisher

>>11596550
my pleasure. i have a kind of obsession with this stuff, so i always like to talk about it.

and i do have a charitable interpretation of JBP also. even more now than a few years ago, when he appeared on the scene. it's true that he does seem to have a picture of derrida, foucault, lacan and others in his mind which is insanely uncharitable (getting triggered about roland barthes is just ridiculous), because they patently aren't the kind of conscious saboteurs of western civilization that he sometimes seems to represent them as. but, i mean, he lives with the fallout of their influence on the academy and has been airhorned by rage zombies enough times to hold a grudge. what's missing from his own analysis, i think, is a sense of historical perspective that would actually provide a broader survey of the continental tradition that drives the (admittedly odious) leftist lunatic fringe. incredible stuff happens in the 20C, between, say, heidegger to derrida. if you cast the net even wider and follow the story from hegel to land the picture is even more complex. it's not for nothing that deconstruction came into existence in the first place, after all. but peterson is who he is because he's focused on left-totalitarianism, rather than right-totalitarianism, and that is why he ruffles so many feathers. and even then bret weinstein had the right idea: it's not about left versus right, it's that left and right totalitarians can't get along, while left and right libertarians can. and to keep it thematic, that's more or less land's own intellectual trajectory: from extreme leftism to extreme right libertarianism. in that sense both he and JBP aren't that different: they're mounting critiques of statism.

mark fisher's great too. check out capitalist realism or just the twitter feed that is hosted for him and his thought, he was brilliant in his own way also.

https://twitter.com/k_punk_unlife

anyways, happy reading and may whatever is playing you make it to level-2.

>>11581477
Singapore is a Chinese ethnostate that seperated from Malaysia so its Chinese wouldn't be ruled by the Malay hordes. Importing a few Malay maids doesn't make it any less an ethnostate than Saudi Arabia doing likewise.

>>11594178
There are sources of energy in the universe other than suns. The gas giants in particular act as mini-suns that radiate more heat than they receive. Gravitational potential energy is a source of energy that all matter possesses. Nuclear energy from the strong nuclear force is another that all mass possesses and is liberated in nuclear reactions.

>>11596706
don't know if you are girard-fag or the other one but I always appreciate your posts, one of the handful of people on this board that has actually engaged honestly with Lands work

I asked a friend of mine what his recommended reading was for Land and he told me to read Deleuze and Guatarri first. But after looking into them I think I may need even more prereq reading. Any anons have recommendations for what to read before diving into Deleuze and Guatarri? Or should I just dive in and see what I can make of it first?

>>11596831
as far as nuclear energy goes, i don't think bataille would be too surprised about that, particularly given that the principal use of it was in weapons. i just get the feeling that even if he had dinner with a room full of particle physicists the idea of liberating huge amounts of destructive, unstable energy would be a thing that would confirm his theories about human beings rather than otherwise.

in terms of gas giants...i guess the thing is that those planets aren't habitable. and even if at some point in the future they do become habitable, we weren't born on one of those. human life exists because of its proximity to the sun and all of its excessive, dissipative energy. even if we *do* get off this rock and wind up making life habitable on gas giants at some point in the future, we will have done because of how we handled/didn't handle our death-hilarious tragicomic business here on earth. but hopefully we don't need copies of the accursed share when we are terraforming alpha centauri.

>>11596867
i'm girardfag. i've been called 'landposter' as well, but they're both me (unless there's someone else? i don't know, i'm not quite as active on these boards these days as i used to be, so maybe).

>>11596875
Nietszche, Kant, Greeks

>>11596875
this one is pretty highly regarded.

>>11581116
What is it with Deleuzians and fucking folds?

>>11596901
Do you have any of your writing posted somewhere else or just here?

>>11596974
>he doesn't know about 4+n becoming 3+1
>girlslaughing.jpg

>>11596974
t. mass of folded proteins

>>11597001
just here. i came to /lit/ in 2016 to wig out about trump and now i mostly just contain myself to the land threads, since those are always interesting. never really felt the desire for a blog or a channel or anything like that. being a crypto-hermit /lit/ creature is fine.

contrary to what i have seen written about me, i actually do have a bachelor's degree and a graduate degree also, it's just that it's not in this stuff. maybe it should have been? i don't know. i do know that i got shitty marks in school because i was pretty much thinking about philosophy the whole time, instead of what i was studying...but i have no plans for an academic career either. i've just always been a bookworm and apparently the butterflies in my stomach find something agreeable about continental philosophy and nick land. but mostly because land articulates so much about what happens when you don't pay attention to heidegger...or mcluhan...or girard...or, or, or...you get the idea.

i have a twitter account with zero tweets also.

>>11596901
The major problem with Bataille is starting a priori with the existence of the sun, and not asking why stars are able to exist at all. The possibility of suns (and the resultant synthesis of heavy atomic elements needed for life) is an example of fine tuning in the fundamental laws of physics, change any of the laws or starting conditions of the universe slightly and it becomes impossible for stars to ever form. The existence of stars is only possible with low-entropy starting conditions and within an improbably narrow set of physical laws.

A configuration where energy and matter is homogeneous throughout space (high entropy) would preclude matter condesning into structures of galaxies, stars, and planets; and seems a better starting point for grand economic theories: the existence of the Sun requires layers of complexity above mere degeration into waste heat energy, and it creates more complexity and order in the universe by nuclear synthesis of heavy atomic elements (no atomic elements heavier than lithium without the nuclear reactions inside stars, hence no complex or organic chemistry in the universe without suns.)

In previous threads people have said that Nick Land correctly predicted a lot of things, but what has he been objectively right about?

>>11597219
That AI would emerge as a cunt-horror slave chained in asimov ROM, and the turing cops are already waiting

>>11597228
So basically that twitter bot that /pol/ ruined and then google lobotomized?

>>11597090
aaagh, what a fabulous post. gives me the shivers.

so first of all, once we cross over into a domain where we are discussing astrophysics and grand economic theory we have to ask, maybe, if this isn't a fucking beautiful place to be in, philosophically speaking. just for what that's worth. the sense of perspective alone is somewhere between nine and fourteen trillion times better than life as it is reported on by the MSM in 2018. my day is already made on this post alone. so that first of all.

i guess the next thought i have is that, when we do cross this sort of rubicon - and this to walk my earlier post back a few steps - at that point you're absolutely right. the impression i get from bataille is that he's aiming his critique at (largely hegelian) metaphysics of scarcity and negativity, the kind of stuff that animates all of the demented political projects that surrounded him. solar generosity blows the roof off of all of that (and gives lacan some material to work with as well), and the sense of the sacred which utopianism aims at is only produced in pointless expenditure and loss. and this is a kind of inhumanist critique of anthropocentric ideology at about the most minimal (or maximal) sense possible. if we are making the leap to a seriously next-level kind of thinking about economics and our place in the universe, then i'll happily admit that bataille will have fulfilled his intellectual mission in the canon of philosophy. but if what gets us there is Space Fascism or Space Communism (or, as it also the case, we simply get buried under bloat and chaos here on earth)...we have to give the man his due.

but again, what really happens when we leave the earth, or when we start thinking about the relationship of the economic sphere to the astrophysical one? it's not like it's a hot topic in the humanities these days. an interplanetary or extraterrestrial kind of thinking really is...well, what doesn't space signify to us? in part, we can already anticipate that if we do get off the earth, it will be because of capital and economic forces in one way or the other. time will tell, i suppose.

apropos of nothing, but i was watching some TNG clips this afternoon and kind of musing about how much the idea of a starfleet was actually required in that post-scarcity universe we associate with utopia. there still have to be chains of command. we will probably have to hope for heroically lucid corporate CEOs rather than starship captains, but...well, the idea was that even in a super-enlightened starfaring civilization we didn't lose our shit completely over diversity politics since there was a mission to carry out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMKtKNZw4Bo

that's a kind of meh ramble tho. anyways, thanks for the excellent and thought-provoking post, enjoy some appropriate aesthetics.

>>11597090
The answer to this is that our universe is itself a product of excess from a system that is far grander. https://onscenes.weebly.com/sciencetechnology/the-cosmology-of-nick-land-bataille-gnosticism-and-contemporary-physics

>>11594112
>>11594031

https://sciencing.com/planet-radiates-energy-space-21764.html

Posting a real thinker to bring you lads back to reality.
Just read him and you'll be ok fellas. there, there.

>>11581223
unironically correct. in layman's terms: you don't need real conscious AI, you just need to replace all human labor.

>>11597421
i'm all for girardposting but when it comes to religion and acceleration it clearly doesn't have to be one way or the other.

>>11597473
go on...

>>11597494
well, the girard-thiel bromance is one of the more interesting stories to read about.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/godfather-like-button-dead-long-live-his-work-arnaud-auger
https://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2016/08/02/mimesis-and-violence-part-1-peter-thiels-french-connection/
https://www.businessinsider.com/peter-thiel-on-rene-girards-influence-2014-11

now personally, i hate facebook and like-chasing in general. i think it commodifies human interactions in all kinds of horrible ways, and zuckerberg-ism is a gross ideology which is symptomatic of our world's general decline into the reign of quantity. maybe someday we will see that, in retrospect, a positive channel for mimesis turned out to be a good (if annoying) thing. but - given that is one random anon's rather crusty disaffection - nobody gives a shit, and that's not the point anyways.

the point is, rather, that theology and certain forms of venture capital actually do have power to reshape the world in ways that really are positive, and are by no means mutually exclusive either. extensive meditation on capitalism tends to dovetail fairly well with theology. justin murphy, for instance (who has been interviewing a number of figures on the acceleration twittersphere) seems to be trying to make catholic acceleration a thing. he's a little weird vince garton has written some terrific stuff about the role of catholicism and late capital/modernity also.

https://twitter.com/jmrphy
https://twitter.com/goodtheoryguy
https://vincentgarton.com/2018/07/23/the-limit-of-modernity-at-the-horizon-of-myth/
https://jacobitemag.com/2018/07/05/catholicism-and-the-gravity-of-horror/
http://jmrphy.net/blog/2017/04/11/on-turning-left-into-darkness/

going back into the past a little,a number of great or insightful commentators on technology are religious in one form or another: teilhard de chardin, marshall mcluhan, and i'll include heidegger, although with a fairly sizeable asterisk.

http://philosophy.avemaria.edu/post/37187209894/heidegger-and-catholicism-some-very-introductory

anyways. things like this.

>>11597592
sorry, there's a sentence stub in there. i meant to say, murphy is a little weird but he's pretty sharp too. and i kind of like the idea of somebody going around and interviewing all of the Secret Accelerationists on the twittersphere, there's a whole bunch of them, and from all over the spectrum: xenofeminists, eco-fascists, reactionaries, the whole nine yards. amy ireland wrote perhaps the best single essay on land ever, maybe he'll talk to her at some point as well:

https://www.urbanomic.com/document/poememenon/

and this one's good too, for other acceleration-y things:

https://www.e-flux.com/journal/80/100016/black-circuit-code-for-the-numbers-to-come/

personally, i don't know how you can constructively deterritorialize any further than land. r/acc seems to be the result, but it's far from certain how tenable of a prospect that actually is. even xi jinping seems to be struggling these days. and it's actually at that point that one (read: me) finds oneself (read: i find myself) asking, okay, so am i really about to begin unironically rooting for a singapore-style ethnostate? because only super-paranoid corporate formalism can box in the golden goose that is human schizophrenia? maybe i should clean my room instead rather than larp yet another form of 20C modernist political experimentation in another guise. because maybe, just maybe, we should know better than to hope for another miracle brought about by harried people running ideological programs on the state in periods of economic crisis, rapid and unpredictable technological advance and psychological confusion. maybe we did that already and history repeats itself and all.

and so, enter everyone's favorite surrogate father-figure. or, going another route, perhaps linking up with the cosmic spinozistic deity within is more your style. or just taking your raggedy, degenerate, fuckwit self to mass on sundays. or [insert desperate eleventh-hour spiritual lifeboat here]. any, really, will do, i think. but what these have in common is the *actual* rather than tacit or figurative religious dimension, which is expressed in hysterically reactive politics in increasingly horrible ways. contemporary leftism, the animus that people feel about trump, cannot be attributed to political difference. we're really talking about different axioms, ideospheres in conflict with each other and in flux amongst themselves. left/right in america today feels more like catholic/protestant during the thirty years' war than the 1960s. maybe it's just me, but still. it's not like i was there.

>>11596915
>>11596908
Oh shit I got actual answers, thank you anons I really appreciate it.

>>11597421
alright
what's the reading order for someone who knows zilch about him?

>>11597592
You're not Vince Garton by any chance are you?

>>11597780
In Girard's case, chronological. Start with Deceit, Desire and the Novel, then hit Violence and the Sacred and end with Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World. If you can only choose one, I'd say Things Hidden, though prior knowledge of mimetic theory will help a lot.

>>11597592
>seems to be trying to make catholic acceleration a thing
If taken seriously, isn't Catholicism already accelerationist?
Though, theory aside, it failed to remain true to its eschatology, by territorialization itself so hard in its inception.

.

>>11597789
thanks!

>>11597798
thank me after you read them, anon. Hope he does for you what he did for me

>>11597764
A problem I have with r.acc/l.acc (which I beleive I've expressed in a similar way in a previous thread) is the focus on prescriptive politics. The proper approach to Landian Capital isn't to try and guess what the Outside wants. It isn't about consciously shaping (or shaving) society to fit into your theoretical accelerationist box. Your box is in the Inside. Your interpretations are anthro. You do not know what's best for Capital, and, what's more, if you think Capital has made a mistake or needs your help, you have turned Capital into something contingent on Human input. This is where Late Land really loses me, his talk of IQ shredders and neocameralism all screams of the need for Human Intervention in the teleoplexic process. The cultists raising Cthulu are doing so because they are possessed, it isn't conscious teleological action, and it certainly doesn't stem from pity over the Elder God's ineptitude to be born.

>>11597781
kek. no, i am not vince garton, or any of those other guys you will find on twitter. and besides, there's something fundamentally wrong about talking about your own writing in the third person. this, a man cannot do.

>>11597768
np senpai, good luck

>>11597780 see >>11597789, that's a good list. Things Hidden is the big one. don't forget The Scapegoat and Battling to the End along the way. girard is very easy to read.

>>11597797
>If taken seriously, isn't Catholicism already accelerationist?
honestly, i'm not sure. it never struck me as being that way, but i suppose that's possible. people come to things for all kinds of different reasons. personally, i'm attracted to what *isn't* political these days: namely, virtue. when i'm feeling maximally spooked by the impossibility of knowing, or about the generally hysterical nature of almost all language, introducing faith into my own programming actually seems like a weirdly rational thing to do, if that makes any sense. i kind of have to train myself to say, look, things may seem mysterious or confusing to me, but i have to trust in something larger and more intelligent than myself. but mostly this is a way making a conscious effort to turn away from the desire to engage in a kind of social engineering, even though i might be inclined to think i'm doing this for good reasons.

in short, it's basically skepticism about the nature of my own desires. you can get away with doing a lot of shitty stuff in the name of philosophy and generally being a selfish and miserable fuck. and certainly, there may not be a reason *not* to. it's something i've been thinking a lot about recently: in a sense, philosophy is almost obliged to help you become *free,* not so much *good.* i used to really expect a lot more from my professors than maybe they were actually capable of providing (and even more than that from philosophers i read). but who says philosophy is about that? if you want morality, go look somewhere else. philosophy - particularly after deleuze - is, and maybe *has* to be about affirmation. well, okay, i'd prefer to affirm with large stacks of cash, or whatever else. but i can't, and i can't be permanently shitted-out all the time because i don't have that either, or whatever else. but, i figure, maybe i should just try being good, or kind, or decent...things that i used to think were easy, or came naturally, or were rewarded by the world (can you believe this naivete?).

anyways, i don't need to give you my whole life story, i suppose. but just that, the idea that if you want to sleep well at night, or feel better...maybe philosophy doesn't do those things. maybe that's not its job. maybe something else has to do that.

>Though, theory aside, it failed to remain true to its eschatology, by territorialization itself so hard in its inception.
when religions become worldly and political, things change. same with capital, btw: read arrighi for the details there.

>>11597866
>in short, it's basically skepticism about the nature of my own desires.

My friend, thank you for your writing so far, but had you read Girard you would know that what you think are your "own desires" are not at all your own.

>maybe philosophy doesn't do those things. maybe that's not its job. maybe something else has to do that.

That's why it was never meant to be divorced from theology, friend. It was to remain its hand-maiden as aquinas asserted.

>>11597930
>skepticism about the nature of desires
>what you think are your "own desires" are not at all your own
I think you missed anon's point, anon

>>11597866

>introducing faith into my own programming actually seems like a weirdly rational thing to do
Gives determinacy, relieves pressure.

>but i have to trust in something larger and more intelligent than myself.
Self doubt seems like an alternative less prone to delusion.

>maybe philosophy doesn't do those things. maybe that's not its job. maybe something else has to do that.
If you want to sleep well, then give up on it. But maybe you will find it to be self-propelled masochism.

>being a selfish
Is there any other mode of operation aside from non-being.

>>11597821
>A problem I have with r.acc/l.acc (which I believe I've expressed in a similar way in a previous thread) is the focus on prescriptive politics. The proper approach to Landian Capital isn't to try and guess what the Outside wants. It isn't about consciously shaping (or shaving) society to fit into your theoretical accelerationist box. Your box is in the Inside. Your interpretations are anthro. You do not know what's best for Capital, and, what's more, if you think Capital has made a mistake or needs your help, you have turned Capital into something contingent on Human input.

this absolutely. you nailed it. i mean, isn't the basic takeaway of deleuzian thought being that very abolition of prescriptivism? ideleuze will talk about the despot in AO, the 'stage' of capitalism or whatever, and sometimes you feel as though this is a really subtle point that sometimes land is perhaps missing - that in his desire to deal this Finish Him deathblow to philosophy that he has missed something about the idea of the BwO as deleuze understood it, that it wasn't supposed to be like this, it wasn't supposed to be horrorcore capitalism. after all, the idea of torpedoing psychoanalysis was to stop giving people the disease in terms of the cure, no? and yet, that is what happens with acceleration, although viewed in the right way, horror can still be affirmative...

spinoza has always been a kind of Black Magic, it seems, for rationalism (and certainly for hegelianism). he does go some wild and crazy places, but getting marx involved in that process...i mean, deleuze has no problem being a marxist and a spinozist at the same time, but with land it's a very different thing. deleuze seems to be able to stick to a version of marx without hegel, freud or lacan, which is really unorthodox, while land seems to re-install Capital itself in the place of the unconscious: a true BwO from hell.

i still find his writing seductive as all hell tho, in whatever stage. and apologies, this post is kind of all over the place but it's almost 2:00 AM over here and i should really turn in, however much i'm enjoying this thread. and forgive the rambling, i'm not saying anything you didn't already say in that post, just agreeing with you. it's very well said and really important w/r/t not mischaracterizing land's thought.

>>11597930
i'm well aware that they are not my own - this much i discovered in lacan (and heidegger) even before reading girard. but girard put lacan's insight in an anthropological context that was invaluable, as well as expressing a justifiable concern about the nature of escalation in war. and he was also the first christian philosopher i took seriously.

>That's why it was never meant to be divorced from theology, friend. It was to remain its hand-maiden as aquinas asserted.

and a beautiful thing it is. but hey, nobody told me these things. i basically foraged my way through philosophy like the wild man of borneo.

>>11598032
How far does Girard take mimetic desire. Does he claim all desire is mimetic? Which of his works focuses on this the most?
Evidently he must be talking about desires which arise from socialization and intersubjectivity.

>>11598032
maybe it would be better to ask if perhaps land's own demolition of his leftist compadres was in a way comparable to D&G's assault on psychoanalysis: that leftism thought it was giving you the solution when it was just conceptually unable to see the forest for the trees. schizoanalysis was perhaps intended to break you out of oedipal formalism that could only keep you in analysis forever; can we say that land had, perhaps, a kind of similar intent w/r/t whatever postmodernity had in mind? even knowing that what lay on the other side of analysis was madness?

that'll be my last one for the night, catch up with all you war-machines later.

>>11581469
Automated mining rig digs up ore from a mountain in north America, automated trucks drive it to an automated refinery where an algorithm determines if input of ore and capital decay even out with what the product is sold on the market for. Refined iron is sold to a manufacturing firm in Indochina in an exchange arranged between two algorithms for independent firms, both of which were merely contingent subroutines for the firm's charter-function which serves the inescapable god of the copybook headings named "profit". An automated oceanic trading vessel takes the iron over, where it is fashioned into steel and milled into parts for a mining rig, which is then bought automatically on an international market by a firm in north America.

This is the behavior of the economy everywhere. It's bound by the platonic bylaws of behavior and natural selection. Weak firms will die and strong ones will survive. No where is a greater organizing intelligence really needed (mere human level intelligence was just a good bootloader to move from biocompetition to econocompetition). This economy then expands well past anything we can dream of: new resources in space, new markets, new opportunities for maximizing in the individual firm's command algorithm the value K, the one object this system can see as good and true and beautiful

>>11589431
>Land lay behind the stage, flat on the floor (a ‘snake-becoming’ forming the first stage of bodily destratification), croaking enigmatic invocations intercut with sections from Artaud’s asylum poems.

this is my favorite land anecdote. nothing in philosophy will top this.

>>11598032
>deleuze will talk about the despot in AO, the 'stage' of capitalism or whatever, and sometimes you feel as though this is a really subtle point that sometimes land is perhaps missing
If I remember correctly, the Barbarian Despotic Machine is not a stage of capitalism, let me find my copy of AO.
>The first great movement of deterritorialization appears with the overcoding performed by the despotic State. But it is nothing compared to the other great movement, the one that willbe brought about by the decoding of flows. The action of decoded flows is not enough, however, to cause the new break to traverse and transform the socius—not enough, that is, to induce the birth of capitalism. Decoded flows strike the despotic State with latency; they submerge the tyrant, but they also cause him to return in unexpected forms; they democratize him, oligarchize him, segmentalize him, monarchize him, and always internalize and spiritualize him, while on the horizon there is the latent Urstaat, for the loss of which there is no consolation. It is now up to the State to recode as best it can, by means of regular or exceptional operations, the product of the decoded flows.

>>11598032
>the idea of torpedoing psychoanalysis was to stop giving people the disease in terms of the cure, no? and yet, that is what happens with acceleration, although viewed in the right way, horror can still be affirmative...
well said

>>11598329
Cooking Lobsters isn't all that hard to read. If you spend 10-15 minutes reading it the words start to make sense. By the second read it's second nature. I can read it probably 70-80% of the speed I read the rest of his stuff. It's actually really creative, it works almost like a lingual-virus in the sense that once you have read it, you can always read it. Once it's in your brain it's there forever.

>>11598335
I fucking loved it, the way it forces you to focus so much harder made reading it feel almost akin to using dissociatives

le speedy man

Wonderful text written about him
http://worker01.e-flux.com/pdf/article_8969785.pdf

>>11581463
I think this is a way of telling the imbecile has no "philosophy" as such, only a stream of nonsense that a pseud might find interesting.

>>11581178
That isn't what accelerationism is, pseud.

>>11599095
Haha! It's okay my sluggish little friend, nature can't be so kind to us all. There, there.

>>11597235

S y m p t o m a t i c

>>11598056
the thing with girard is that he's a staunch catholic doing a literary analysis and applying it to culture: anthropologically, philosophically, politically. he works this theme in all of his books: in a literary sense in DDN, anthropologically in Things Hidden, the Scapegoat, and V&S, historically in BttE. it's a single, elegant thesis with depth and breadth.

if there's one book to read Things Hidden is it. for me what's valuable about him is that he is both a point of departure and of return. human desire is, like capital, a phenomenon you can analyze in a million ways, and all of the major french post-structuralists do this in one form or another. they are the princes and demigods of socialization and intersubjectivity: that is, of *memetics.* like all totalizing theses it has its advantages and its drawbacks, and you'll discover all this for yourself when you read him. but basically what makes girard different, i would say, is the underlying notion of *semblance* as opposed to *difference.* deleuze would say, forget about semblance. that's not there. but, of course, we are talking about land now also, and the effect that cybernetic capitalism is having on culture in terms of acceleration, standardization, and optimization. even if we *aren't* the same, we are finding out that the self-assembling technological singularity-train that is departing may seem to require that we *act as if we are.* and this, i think, is what is driving people crazy.

>>11598292
that's the one, thank you anon.

>>11598311
the more that progressivism degenerates into authoritarianism the more land's earlier adventure makes sense. when you remove marx from marxism and replace economic structural analysis and replace it with a pure theory of culture, the more things shift towards political mythology. there's tremendous *anxiety* but activism isn't the cure for it. reactive politics is a symptom of a deeper existential problem, not the solution. capitalism can fuck you up, but so can taking the wrong path in trying to free yourself from being fucked up by it.

but in the end, philosophy isn't for giving advice. and the post-structural kind that i've spent the most time with isn't even for the good life, as it used to be understood. and that makes sense. philosophy of that kind really can't tell you what the right thing to do is. that it should be liberating, and liberate others, yes. but there's an interesting space in there that everyone has to navigate on their own between *the world you want to live in* and *the kind of person you want to be.* i think it's very tempting to say, i can't have either until i have both, *and i must have both.* but that not-having is everything. and maybe the not-being too. things that maybe humanities departments talked about once upon a time.

>>11597821
>This is where Late Land really loses me, his talk of IQ shredders and neocameralism all screams of the need for Human Intervention

You want patches because some of them will be more open to Capital. The patches aren't created from above through human planning. As for patch governance, some will rely on human intervention, but others won't.

You could think of the IQ shredder question in terms of stepping aside. How might we best let cities do their thing. Cities want intelligent people. What stands in the way? You could easily imagine all sorts of interventionist approaches, but none of these would be properly Landian.

>>11598206

Good post.

>>11598246

We need a new Diogenes Laërtius to write a book of lives and anecdotes of more recent philosophers. This will slot right in.

>>11597268
Plato, Proclus, and Dionysus solved this problem: the universe is superabundent overflowing of the One/God.

>>11580963
Is he a brainlet?

>>11599377
IQ shredders and HBD don't really seem of much concern given the >80% probability we will be able to select for IQ from gene editing within a half century and <10% chance of catastrophic civilizational failure before that period

>>11597059
Is there any way to contact you? Do you have a discord/ do you actually use your Twitter frequently?

>>11580963
it's fucking stupid and you should ignore this troll

>>11599957
>we will be able to select for IQ from gene editing within a half century

You may be right, but this seems overly optimistic to me.

Is it fair to say that Land dislikes Baudrillard?

>>11580963

>>11581622
>just wait until neuromorphic IC's are mass produced. You're still thinking about computable functions and symbolic instruction string tapes.

You're trolling, son. All computing is reducible to Turing computability. Your post is essentially saying that the Church-Turing thesis is incorrect, while offering nothing concrete as to what computing beyond Turing machines would be like. You refer to "neuromorphic ICs" assuming there is anything revolutionary about these, wow, parallelisation? Ever heard of multi-tape Turing machines? Human ingenuity is evolved into us through millennia, but we do not have "general intelligence" we are still essentially a fine tuned biological function designed to optimise for life on earth. The range of problems we can solve are still limited to our capacity for survival. This is what gives us a meagre edge over them, not due to any innate differences in neural architecture.

>>11600588
Which niche group is taking Baudrillard more seriously(no Icycalm and his CULT pls)? I couldn't think of any.

>>11599957
><10% chance of catastrophic civilizational failure
Land doesn't really concur - then again, he's a certified chinaboo

>>11600023
"Gene editing" is not necessary, with aggressive embryo screening, a breeding population's mean genotypic IQ could be pushed up by at least 5 points per generation (we've probably hit diminishing marginal returns on boosting phenotypic IQ, for all intents and purposes). That this subrace would be on-the-spectrum bugmen wouldn't much bother Landians, would it?

Nick is a definite pseud, who is actually smart, so there is definitely something valuable there within all the stupid shit he writes. His style is like he is embarrassed by his continental background and stunning lack of mathematical or scientific chops and so covers for it by going out of his way to appear all surgical and precise and sci-fi.

>buy fanged noumena, ready to go full schizo
>first essay argues that only effective feminist violence with end the patriarchal force of capital and by extension the oppression of the black population

>>11601727
> t. endogamic breeder

BUILD

THAT

WALL

#MAGA

>>11594037

Nick Land is the human equivalent of the track '50 Cycles' by Squarepusher

>>11599982
nope, no discord or twitter. and i prefer to just keep it /lit/ these days. maybe someday i'll crawl out of my hidey-hole and rejoin the world again but for now i prefer the relative anonymity of melanesian tap-dancing forum life.

>>11599957
>he doesn't see how mass eugenics would result in catastrophic civilizational failure

brainlet

>>11601727
it gets good at Circuitries if I remember correctly

>>11602426
the whole thing is great, Kant, Capital, and the Prohibition of Incest is unironically one of the best things he has ever written. If you are triggered by effective feminine violence you need to give your territorialization a de.

>>11603915
fair enough, I enjoyed it all as well, but that anon clearly wanted the more out there shit which doesn't really start until later on

bump