/lit/ - Literature

Can someone give me a quick rundown on Nick Land?

discount yudkowsky

>>11804642

>PRC bow to Land
>In contact with GNON
>Possess machine-like abilities
>Control Shanghai with an iron but fair fist
>Own bunkers & automated factories globally
>Direct ancestor of the last human
>Will inspire the first automated cities on Mars(Landland will be be the first city)
>Own 99% of human enhancing research facilities on Earth
>First android babies will in all likelihood be Land babies
>Both early and late Land said to have 215+ IQ, such intelligence on Earth has only existed high in Singaporean Office Buildings & Area 51
>Ancient mayan scriptures tell of one pale face who will emerge from the earth and will bring an era of dark enlightenment and unprecedented technological progress with him
>He owns Nanobot R&D labs around the world
>You likely have Landbots inside you right now
>Land is in regular communication with the Basilik and Skynet, forwarding the word of GNON. Who do you think set up the meeting between Schumpeter, Deleuze & Moldbug in cyber-space the (First meeting between the three will happen in 1000 years) and arranged the Accelerationist leader's first trip to Antarctica in history literally a few centuries earlier to the Land bunker in Wilkes land?
>Has learned fluent mandarin in under a week
>Nation states entrust their deep-learning AI program with the inscrutable oriental. There's no silicon in Silicon Valley, only in Shanghai
>The man is about 6 decades old, from the space-time reference point of the base human currently accepted by our society
>In reality, he has been turned into a timeless being existing in a perpetual state of pleasure by the basilik until the end of the universe. We are aware of his plan. We know he's no benevolent

One of the most compelling and unnerving collective research enterprises to have surfaced in the twentieth century, the real pertinence of the Ccru’s work is only now beginning to reveal itself to an unbelieving world. To plunge into the tangled mesh of these conspiracies, weird tales, numerical plagues, and suggestive coincidences is to test your sense of reality beyond the limits of reasonable tolerance—to enter the sphere of unbelief, where demonic currents prowl, where fictions make themselves real. Hyperstition.
https://www.urbanomic.com/book/ccru-writings-1997-2003/

>>11804655
omfg what are the chances?

>>11804660
Can I get a quick rundown on GNON and The Basilisk?

>>11804665

>>11804673
Holy shit, how is Land going to recover from this.

>>11804673
source of Negastrani interview?

Capital is sentient (insofar as humans create an object capable of plagiarizing their stupidity).

>>11804722
>>11804655
It appears that the Noumena is indeed fanged, just not as Land had proposed it.

>>11804642
he's a meme and probably made this thread

>>11804743
I don't think whoever made this image even knows what acceleration means.

>>11804743
Same as the last thread.
He was getting awfully butthurt to the point of making accusations of plagiarism. Suspicious, but one would have to be completely devoid of identity to believe this shit in the first place so it could be a larper.

>>11804743

>>11804654
YOU MOTHERFUCKER HOW ABOUT YOU FUCKING SAY THATY TO MY DDFACE YOU MOTHERFUCKING NIGGARDLY SHITEHEAD

>>11804660
more of this please

land intimates that the BwO becomes materialized as automated factories, as much as hegel was completed by marx

it is objectively impossible to think about this and not have a pretty interesting time

>>11805150
>also tfw no qt space-engineer gf to ask where you would like to go from here

>>11805150
>completed by

well. maybe complicated by would be a better way of saying it

>>11805150
Marx already said this 200 years ago.
Land is a larper and a pseud.

>>11805267
and marx was *right.* he was right about a lot of stuff. that's why i'm saying there's no point in shitting on him. even land wouldn't say this. he's not saying *marx* was wrong, his beef is with hegel, as was deleuze's. but even D&G aren't disagreeing with marx. *nobody* is disagreeing with marx.

but here's the other thing: you and i don't have to share that. i think hegel's pretty dope. i certainly like lacan. and i like heidegger too. we don't have to choose one guy and exclude the others. the question is entirely about choosing a couple of guys and *making something interesting happen with the association.* make a Killer Combo and light up some of our brains. it's not about a revolution that annihilates All That Stands Before It, all this does is reproduce itself. it's just about making something interesting, and useful: a concept.

we have to be more intelligent. there's no point in being drones. those are the rage zombies. there are better things to make.

>>11805333
>*nobody* is disagreeing with marx.
I disagree with Marx about labor.

The labor theory of value utterly incoherent from a non-anthropocentric perspective and the modern marxists need to fix it.

>>11805333
You are missing the point entirely.
The problem is that Land is unironically larping as the devalorisation process. He accepts Marx in a sense, but only insofar as he sees the valorisation process as a good thing.

>>11805375
come and talk about this in the other cosmotechnics thread, i genuinely want to hear this but i don't want to be in two threads at once.

>>11803295

>>11805397
same here please.

>>11804673
nigger, Land is clear as fucking day post- Fanged Noumena

>>11805398
Just read Austrians and marginalists, they utterly btfo LToV.

Capital loves the Cathedral

>>11805397
>tfw Land is the Martha Stewart of the Cagie

>>11805445
I don't think the process of capital accumulation and acceleration loves anything else but itself. It wouldn't work if it had subjects of interests other than shareholders.

But, they do work together as long as its profitable I guess.

>>11805436
>believing this...

>>11805436
yeah, but that's the great balancing act. side too much with the austrians, create rage: you don't understand alienation! side too much with the rage, create ultralibertarians: you don't understand *anything*!

>and neither necessarily can code

the tao of 21C economics will be nothing but spooky apocalyptic hijinx. and something like Drone Theory is going to be in order. you want/don’t want to be a drone. don’t produce drones, don’t ask for them, don't rely on them, don't serve them. don’t confuse drones with people. and don’t confuse yourself with people if you are a drone.

my body is most definitely *not* ready for this but i don't think i have a choice.

>>11805489
21C economics is, in the end, quite simple - as per:
>>11804655
It is the process of undoing the instrumentarium of thought, and so getting to that point, which is difficult.

>>11805507
it *is* simple, for some. a lot of us - including me - are just not wired the same way. i would give my left ballsack for some kind of new theory that de-escalates the tribalism of today, which i see as drawing all of its cues from the animal spirits, but in need of a kind of two-way perspective. land committed academic heresy by shifting his allegiance from the marxists to the austrians, and uniquely came up with a view of economics that accounted for the structural blind spots of both sides (and again, these are blind spots which, as axioms, also possess enormous explanatory power.)

i actually *do* see civilization on a trajectory towards a kind of neo-rationalism, but first we may get a Thirty Years' War over the future of progressivism, and it's not going to be pretty. it could be spectacularly ugly, in fact. fear is the mind-killer but rage is its co-pilot.

>the instrumentarium of thought
unironically a lovely phrase, anon.