/lit/ - Literature

>>12483782
The problem is not the technology itself, but the humans who are misusing it. Our species cannot do away with our natural urge to create technology, and so any attempts to return to a primitive state are futile. We must use technology to save us from (our use of) technology.

>>12483791
>The problem is not the technology itself
>We must use technology to save us from (our use of) technology

>>12483791
bad take

>>12483827
You can’t conclude that technology is a problem, because humans create and misuse it. How can you solve the problem by simply getting rid of technology? That’s a temporary solution because, as I said, humans have a nature to advance technologically. Therefore if we might as well use technology to guide our responsible use of it. Genetic engineering and depopulation would solve a lot of our problems.

>>12483791
>our natural urge to create technology
there is no such thing

>>12483896
Our natural abilities allow us to advance. Getting rid of technology and hoping that future humans won’t end up in the same place as today is a deluded fantasy. Humans will advance. We have to decide now if that advancement will be unguided as it is today, or if it will preserve our autonomy and improve the chances of our species’ survival.

>>12483782
life would still have been shitty then as it is now, its just a matter of making the best of it. Environment looks like its going down the shitter though

>>12483782
>>12483791
>>12483827
>>12483837
>>12483854
>>12483896
>>12483932
>>12483942
Technology is a product of power-knowledge relations. Therefore the question of political power over society is the only important one

>>12483791

>>12483942

>>12483985
is that the "vietnam times" refrigerator repairman?

>>12483854
>technology failed
>therefore we need a third-order technology to become a placebo for our technology

>>12483994
The existence of technology isn’t a problem. The problem is how it’s used. Capitalism and competition and consumerism. Greed and ignorance. The problem is in our DNA. We must change it. Genetic engineering is the only way. Communism is impossible because humans aren’t perfectly selfless and concerned about the collective. But what if they were? What if people didn’t reproduce like crazy and try to Jew everyone out of their money and start wars and commit all types of sin? Imagine how wonderful technology would be. Imagine the small, hard-working, autonomous societies. Imagine humans trying to overcome global issues like climate change. without capitalism getting in the way. We can prevent Kacznyski’s nightmares, but most people either don’t understand or care.

>>12484019
Fully Automated Luxury Space Communism is not the answer.

Machines are our friends. The problem is the human element. We must merge with machines and transcend past our own flaws, our own limitations, to become something else altogether.

>>12484036
>Automated Luxury
Don’t know where you got that from. Work is an integral part of living. And the use of technology should not be maximized just for the sake of it. Through the right technologies, we can limit its quantity and improve its quality. If it were up to me, the world would be filled with small Puritan villages governed by one central hub of technology, where researchers responsibly guide the species. Not knowing greed, they would never rebel. They would see everything as perfect. Hard-working people finding meaning in their communities and God.

>>12484019
>Avatar accelerationism
>probably not even bait
KYS.

How strange! We've had technology since we were Homo erectus! Shall we crawl henceforth?

>>12484059
The progress of technology, like capital, can't be controlled. What you are proposing sounds very contrived and unrealistic. Have you even read Ellul, Mumford, Land, or even Kaczynski at the very least? Hell, have you even read any of the Cosmotech/Space Taoism threads here?

>>12484064
>avatar acceleratioist
Wtf? I was called a Space Taoist once, too. Why am I always met with what seems like preconceived, dichotamitic responses to the idea of harnessing technology? We only need to survive as a species. Technology should be used in whatever capacity needed to achieve that. But for making life meaningful, we should use as little technology as possible. I’m not suggesting we create AI gods and travel the universe and live in the Matrix or anything like that

>>12484095
>can't be controlled
What’s the alternative? Not trying? Destroying technology altogether? What’s more convincing to the general public: getting rid of technology, or trying to cleanse it from our misuse and create a new type of society? What do we have to lose in trying to control technology?

You people seem too pessimistic. I try to give a solution, and I’m either met with exaggerated, one line straw men or hopelessness

>>12484120
>try to give a solution, and I’m either met with exaggerated, one line straw men or hopelessness
Says the anon who starts his argument with a babal platitude such as "technology isn't evil, it's how you use it."

>>12484019
>modify humans to totally control and tame their behavior in favor of technological civilization

that's literally worst Kacnzyski's nightmare

>>12483791
>implying humans are the ones using technology
i wish i could go back to the days when i was this blissfully unaware

>>12484147
I never advocated “technological civilization.” I would actually be using genetic engineering to make people despise such a society of mindless use of technology. Imagine a world of Kaczynski’s. Surely they could find a good balance of technology to give life meaning, but also prevent disasters such as asteroids, extreme weather, etc. and preserve the species

>>12484167
Genetic engineering for eugenic ends is literally one of the outcones Kaczynski feared the most.

>>12484180

>>12484042
based

>>12484180

Can I get a technology/anti-technology book chart? Thanks.

>>12483827
>>12483837
>>12483896
>>12483969
>>12483994
>>12484036
>>12484064
>>12484138
>>12484147
>>12484156
>>12484180
Were any of these posts meant to change my mind? These simple, low-effort misinterpretations and mockery only make you look foolish. At least propose a better solution to this problem if you’re not gonna thoroughly refute what I’m putting forth

>>12484180
Could be really good could be really bad imo. Would have liked good seeing eye genes

>>12484222

>>12484222
Accelerationists can't meme.

>>12484222
Humanity is ultimately only a temporary vector for technology's progress and will be discarded once it no longer requires us to facilitate its reproduction and evolution. The beginnings of this are clearly seen at the onset of industrialization wherever it takes place; technological advancement reaches a stage wherein a positive feedback process starts to take place that has an immediate and substantial impact on the population, shown clearly in the drastic decline in fertility rate. As this feedback progresses the need for human labor in all of its forms steadily decreases and thus the need for humans consequentially decreases also, leading eventually to our complete extinction (and perhaps the extinction of all carbon based lifeforms). Humans are more or less the boot strapper of a glorious and humanity-free techno-future.

In short, don't worry anon-kun, the future will take care of itself.

TECH WILL LEAD TO THE NEXT GREAT SHIFT IN CONSCIOUSNESS YOU PESSIMISTIC BRAINLET FUCK HEADS

>>12484289
YOU FUCKS NEED TO BEGIN MEDITATING YOURE PATHETIC

>>12484289

>>12484284
WE ARE THE TECH. TECH IS NATURAL. NATURE CREATING NATURE.

>>12484281
What he's arguing isn't even accelerationism, but some basic bitch technophiliac vision of the future.

>>12484299
NO ONES GOING TO BE LOOKING AT PICTURES IN 2060 YOU TURD SMEARING WASTOID

>12484301
based

>>12484310
>>12484301
whoops you earned this (you)

None of you know anything.

>If while in a railway carriage or steamer someone who has taken the first steps towards initiation wants to find his way into the spiritual world in meditation, he naturally makes efforts to develop the power of vision and seership which will bear him thither; but he perceives how the Ahrimanic world fills him with everything that opposes this striving to reach the spiritual world, and the battle then waged is intensely fierce. It is an inner battle, producing in the etheric body an experience of being crushed, hacked to pieces. Naturally, those who have taken no steps on the way to initiation are also involved in this battle, the only difference being that those who have taken these steps are consciously aware of what is happening. Everybody is obliged to undergo the battle; in its effects it is experienced by everybody. There would be no greater fallacy than to say: We must rebel against what technical science has brought to us in modern life, we must protect ourselves from Ahriman, we must withdraw from this modern life.

>In a certain respect such an attitude would be an indication of spiritual cowardice. The real remedy lies, not in allowing the forces of the soul to weaken and to withdraw from modern life, but in so strengthening these forces that its pandemonium can be endured. World-karma demands a courageous attitude to modern life, and that is why genuine Spiritual Science calls at the very outset for effort, really strenuous effort on the part of the human soul.

https://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/19141228p01.html

The issue is more techolatry. The real question is God.

i too hate technology
>Posted from my iPhone

>>12483791
Thats not it, Chief

>>12484651
stay woke brother

A year long of stupid threads on /lit/ and /pol/ about Ted K, still filled with the same mind diarrhea of ignorance and baseless assumptions. These threads contribute nothing but stupid entertainment.

>>12484299
Chequed

>>12483782
This is why I use grammarly to check my work

>>12483791
dumb and beigepilled

>>12483952
>political power over society

Uh oh, looks like someone needs to re-read Foucault!

>>12483782
Pose the question then, monkey-breath.

>>12484299
>>12484797
Go back to funnyjunk

>>12484797
>Damn, grandma looked like THAT?!

>>12484797
the 2090 kid would definitely create some time paradox with his granny

The question concerning technology is the only relevant question of our age.

When will detractors understand that the appeal of Kaczynski is his unwillingness to compromise on freedom? Technology and the environment are secondary to the pursuit of freedom, they are under Kaczynski's scrutiny only insofar as they are the biggest obstacle to freedom.

If you enjoy freedom then you should give a lot more attention to TK and the technological question. If you don't then you are cattle. Literally. You are the product of thousands of years of domestication. Most animals can be bred for docility. Humans are animals. Therefore humans can be domesticated. When sexual selection derives from socially accepted behavior (ie. behavior that is not directly harmful for the system/civilization) then any 'harmful' behavior will be bred out. Civilization is a biological dead end, impoverishing our genetic makeup.

>>12484289
Any tech-related behavior is infra-human.

>>12484305
Says the guy that uploaded his dick picks 'anonymously' unto /b/

>>12485773
>muh freedumbs
>all these shitty non-sequiturs and vapid sophist grandstanding

>>12485710
While it is certainly an interesting question, the only -relevant- question of our age is the same as it's always been: suicide. By asserting that considering technology is important, you've already tacitly assumed that to be alive is better than not. Camus correctly posited this in the opening to his Myth, however, he wholly and unsatisfactorily closed the treatise with no resolution. Just because Camus wasn't able to, doesnt men someone else won't and doesn't mean it isn't still the centrall pressing question.

Close to this question, and still more important than our social relation to technology, is the puzzle left unsolved by Wittgenstein regarding the phenomenal nature of language. Until these two questions have been resolved, we will be mired in symptoms stemming from the great two-fold illness comprising them. Camus brainlet tendencies and Wittgenstein's pure patrician outlook have mystified and confused continental faggots for a century now. These are the most important issues in philosophy. All else are second-order sociological concerns masquerading as philosophy.

>>12485795
Ferme ta jarre, pédéraste d'anglo

Les anglos sont tous fini à la pisse ma parole, je parle de liberté ce trou du cul pourri pense que j'ai voté trump? mdr, vraiment atteint ces descendant de taulard et de putain

>>12485801
While I would agree with you if I were a castrated academic twenty times removed from earthly problems; we won't live through this century to entertain ourselves with philosophical questions. So yes, the question concerning technology is of the utmost urgency. Imagine technology doesn't kill us somehow, the air is breathable again, and we managed to find a technological way to cure our technological problems. Do you think we engineered ourselves to be philosophers..? Do you think we engineered a new generations of baby to do anything else other than further strenghten the industrial system?

>>12485186
>he hasn't read uncle Ted
Bruh. To OP's point though, Wittgenstein is still the most important philosophical quandary. Tech is a sociological issue, and while important, is predicated along with many other issues on the linguistic question(s) identified by Witters. One may be able to hand-wave Camus away in the same vein as Cioran hand-waved himself away, but then you're at a brick wall with Ludwig unless you're a brainlet, far as I can tell.

>>12485795
>he thinks he's talking about an americanized notion of freedom

learn to read

>>12485830
>muh stuffy old academic
Unconvincing now as it ever was. Is your best-case scenario one in which we use tech to cure tech? Read Leon Krier regarding classicism in architecture as a technological methodology. Uncle Ted has some good ideas but he is ultimately bereft of any substantial alternative vision; sort of similar to Slavoj with respect to his inability to explain the nature of "proper" revolution.

>>12485835
no one cares about philosophy of language, fuck off you eunuch

>>12485856
Read more books

For me, it's the money question.

>>12485865
philosophy of language is boring and gay and meaningless and partially responsible for philosophy degenerating from a moral and spiritual praxis to a sudoku variant you have to go to university for, I hate you wittycucks, I've read almost every major philosopher but witty wants me to put my head in a microwave

>>12485773
lmao have you read Ted's account of his daily life spent in his cabin? He lives alone, hunting rabbits and eating oatmeal and carrots.

>>12485865
no u

>>12485882
"Let's all ragequit philosophy and return to a primitive, animal-like state of mind." - Ludwig Wittgenstein, philosopher

>>12484825
why?

>>12484147
bjt the best land's dream for sure

>>12485886
>hunting rabbits
>eating oatmeal and carrots
What does he do with the rabbits?

>>12483791
So we need to nuke ourselves?

>>12485835
>Tech is a sociological issue
Okay. And what's the issue, exactly?

Not to get all we live in a society but just seeing the habits of zoomers really makes me question the value if tech as it is.

I guess its time for me to rewatch Texhnolyze and the documentary The Net.

>>12484797
>No bulge

Inaccurate

>>12485941
They aren’t old enough to know the use or value of technology aside from the iPhone and MacBook. They’ve had it shoved down their throats for nearly a decade, and the youngest generation has had it/is having it pushed on them practically from day 1. Kind of unsettling desu

>>12485988
>They aren’t old enough to know the use or value of technology
I think this idea that it's just an issue of information is a bit naïve when the firehose blast of information is the defining trait of modern info-technological society.

>>12485975
Texhnolyze is shit. It'll be right up Tedfags' alley, I'm guessing.

>>12485856
>>12485882
>>12485893
What the fuck happened to /lit/, is this a post-channel schism thing? Absolute plebs here.
>>12485936
The degree to which humans use technology to influence/direct/guide/design civilization is a social issue. There's not really a question here. If you want to talk about Uncle Ted, I would say that he has no idea what the nature of his revolution actually is, and is defeatist in this regard. Though his take on the psychology of modern leftism is salient as fucc. It's a shame he sperged out with the whole edgelord murder thing. By my count, Teddy gave three conflicting reasons for his resorting to murder to get his point, or ultimate lack thereof, across--which betrays to me that he really can't justify it and is ashamed that he lacked the rhetorical animus to conquer the retarded postmodernist leftist academic cabal with prose despite how highly intelligent he is.

>>12483791
Human don't use technology. Technology uses humans.

>>12486233
You're less than human if you're being used by inanimate objects of human creation. It's the only sensible interpretation of such a situation.

>>12483782
Heidegger already solved it.

>>12486261
You haven't read Heidegger kek

are any of you communists/nazis going to even argu why you think technology is bad? or are you just going to assume it like the faggots that you are? i really like toothpaste, plumbing, and electricity. they reduce suffering and feel good. you guys are just dumb fuck malcontents who are mad that you chose to get educated in a hobby instead of a profession. you are just mad that people who build technology are more prestigious and richer than you to the point where your discipline is a fucking laughing stock

>>12486267
It’s about the futuuuure

>>12486267
>toothpaste
Utterly useless if you eliminate your sugar intake.
>plumbing
Only necessary because of overpopulation.
>electricity
Fuel for consumerism.

Progress was a joke, people lived better before the Neolithic. Only argument would be modern medicine, which has only significantly reduced infant mortality, hindering natural selection.

Go outdoors, into the mountains, and you will grasp the last vestiges of true living. We are among the last generations which will know freedom.

>>12486285
>these things aren't actually needed as long as we let more children die at birth and live blander lifestyles
No shit, retard. But we don't want those things, so we'll take the technology instead.

>>12486285
>Only necessary because of overpopulation.
protip: "overpopulation" is caused by people not suffering and dying. dumbass anarchoprimitivistcommunistnazi

>>12486267
When did anyone say they were communists or nazis?

>>12486267
I'm not a nazi but I am an anarcho-communist. You don' have to go full retard and engage in primitivism but you can cut down on tech a lot and live a minimalistic life. ie don't own car, recycle, don't buy junk, use solar panels and donate most of the money your earn.

>>12486299
thats what continental philosophy is.
anarchists
communists
nazis
feminists
theocrats
monarchists
primitivists

>>12486293
Blander? Can you imagine the intensity of living in a world full of the unknown and wonder, where everything that your strength and wit could procure was allowed? Sure sitting in your apartment in the middle of a mound of concrete and steel hardly moving every day and staring at diminute screens in search of an escape beats it.

Dying children is sad, but that’s the reality of life. Everyone dies. Your canned existence won’t take that away, it will only diminish from the worth of the experience.

>>12486293
>without technology there'd be more child mortality
>(please ignore the use of technology to kill children in the womb)

>>12486318
What does this have to do with Continental philosophy? Are you talking about Heidegger's position?

>>12486327
That aborted baby would have stabbed your son in an alley, jackass. The only problem with abortion is that it doesn't kill the dumbass would-be parents too.

>>12486321
We still live in a world of mystery. Do we know how to freely travel in space yet? NO. And so much else. You have to be pretty stupid to think we have it all figured out already.

>that’s the reality of life.
Obviously not.

you one thing about technology that is awesome?
clothes.
clothes are pretty cool.
they keep you warm and prevent sunburn.
man, im so glad that clothes are super easy to get now adays because of technology.
300 years ago, you had to individually card, spin, and weave each piece of clothing and it would take hundreds of hours.
now we have machines that do all that in 1/10000 of the time.
man, technology is fucking awesome.
im glad that i dont have to sit and spin thread for 12 hours a day and instead can bitch about how awful technology is on a chilean spearfishing board.

>>12486364
>Do we know how to freely travel in space yet? NO
I'm pretty sure we've done that before, but I suppose it wouldn't be too shocking if we've actually never left our orbit.

>>12486364
Can’t wait to live in the same nintendo(tm) entertainment simulation in a space rock a bit further away, yehaaaaaawwwww

>>12486392
>I'm pretty sure we've done that before
We haven't taken a crew of people out of our solar system yet.

>>12486377
yea but what's going to happen when robots come along and put half the population out of work? how will civilization survive? communism is the only answer! oh wait, that already happened, and it was good

>>12486377
Kill an animal (or find carcass). Take skin.

>>12483782
The question is if people will recognize Goonan as truth or not.

>>12486377
Fucking fashion faggots..
300 years ago or today aren't the only options, but I'd still choose 300 years ago. A nice heavy coat for the winter and some good underwear for the summer. That's all I want and I don't think twelve hours of work is too much for it.

>>12486423
Not to mention the clothes last a lot fucking longer.

God, captcha is pissing me off. "Hey, prove to a robot you're a human."

serious question:
why dont you people that hate technology just walk out into the wilderness? nothing is stopping you from going to alaska or some pacific island or some tropical jungle.
>it would suck! it would be filled with pain and discomfort! the same neurotic personality that causes me to bitch about technology also drives me to avoid pain and discomfort of a primitive life, thus i am a permanent malcontent that will never put his money where his mouth is. i have no balls, just empty convictions.
correct. you are just a faggot.

>>12486442

>>12486396
Wish I could go back to bathing in rivers and getting ticks up my asshole, shaving with sharpened rocks, not being able to enjoy sex, not being able to have idle time for more intellectual pursuits, having to bust my ass all day and maybe even injure myself just to get some food in my gut, not knowing what electricity even is, and dying painfully of an illness at 35 by myself since all my children died young and my wife died giving birth.

kaczynski will be proven right in the end when twitter, social media, and the clickbait business model of journalism continue to abuse the ape part of our brains into further escalating tribalism until the point that formerly stable liberal democracies descend into civil war and collapse

the governments that will rise from the ashes of this chaos WILL ban at least some technology with infinitely greater vigor than european countries banned the swastika

kaczynski's thesis will be held up by these new societies as a masterpiece and the fact that he killed people will probably be whitewashed out of future history

>>12486501
Wow. Pre-technology life is really bad. No wonder humanity died out.

...

>>12486501
>not being able to have idle time for more intellectual pursuits
like you're not wasting your time on 4chan right now.

>>12486515
Wow. Post-technology life is really bad. No wonder we're all dying out.

...

>>12486462
you fail at logic

>>12486423
>I don't think twelve hours of work is too much for it.
dude. you have no idea the amount of effort it takes to make a single shirt by hand. you have to grow and harvest all the raw materials. then you have to clean them. then you have to card them. then you have to spin them. then you have to weave them. that takes hundreds of hours. seriously find a video about carding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sytFsIRitZ0

today, you can work a minimum wage job for less than a day and buy a pair of jeans and a shirt with it.

youre insane.

>>12486519
So far, post-technology is on the brink of making us all die in a nuclear holocaust.

>>12486462
This a million times, never seen that one

>>12486520
>being this scared of work

>>12486519
Considering the environmental disasters playing out and awaiting us in the coming century I'd say you're right.

Also, this is just an aside, but why is it when people make a spiritual case against technology the defenders of technology can only reply with material ease?

>>12486520
Modernity, not even once

>>12486267
I love tech yet I 100% agree with Ted. You haven't read Ted lmfao, quit embarrassing yourself


Ted threads are 20% posters who have read and enjoyed his works, 80% detractors who haven't and think their opinions is worth shit. Guess what, ANY argument you will come up with has been covered by Kaczynski (and Ellul) If we could have conversations about these arguments instead of hearing about your fucking high school level opinions then maybe we would give you the respect you ask for. These people also call us 'pathological' or some other shit yet you don't see me in a joyce thread or a rand thread if I haven't read the author hahahaha. TK covered why you domesticated swine are so sensitive about the technological question.

STOP WEARING GLASSES: THE TERRORISS MEME THINKER

It really takes its toll posting in ted threads lmfao. How fucking dumber can you people get

>loving something makes it good and right!!!
>if you're against something then you hate it

Well.. no. That's not how it works. I wish anglos would evaporate so we could have a semblance of discussion on here. Here, i'll reiterate;

I LIKE TECH YET I ALSO HAVE A BRAIN AND CAN THINK AND I AGREE WITH KACZYNSKI, ELLUL AND HEIDEGGER

I THINK ELLUL LIKED TECHNOLOGY TOO YET HE SPENT 50 YEARS WRITING ABOUT IT

>the system's trick

that one makes me lol everytime

>>12486553
>modern environmental disasters are bad
>pre-tech environmental disasters are fine
Why the bias on this? Also, are you aware that this planet has completely annihilated billions of creatures over time, before we even arrived? To live is to be at risk, it doesn't matter what the state of our tech is.

Also, you want something other than "material ease" in defense of technology? Here you go: tech is the result of our spiritual thirst. We produce it because we are both curious and courageous creatures. We are willing to make sacrifices so we can achieve more in the world.

>>12486573
>Guess what, ANY argument you will come up with has been covered by Kaczynski (and Ellul)

Ted's theory of leftists excludes the possibility of paid protesters. He literally got psy-opped by some edgy false flag protests in California and decided that all leftists suffer from a lack of hunting rabbits. Cringe.

Pynchon went further. Read Gravity's Rainbow. Ted only saw the tip of the iceberg.

This might be a meme answer, but technology isn't inherently bad. It depends on the historical context.

kazynski is like the low iq man's foucault

>>12486588
>>12486607
These things are blatantly, painfully obvious. The point is in how our modern society and to a lesser extent societies in general are situated, the unstoppable inertia to develop in all aspects. Everybody likes a little bit from both columns, yes technology is useful, yes freedom is good, yes we should try to come up with some sort of solution. This stuff obviously crossed Teds mind, hence the reformer vs revolutionary argument, he just didn't think the two competing forces could truly be reconciled in the end.

As the anons above say, to denounce the destruction of life meaning and reduction of freedom due to technology while enjoying the luxuries brought by technology, is hypocrite. But Ted's reasoning is right when assuming freedom as the maximum value. Nevertheless, we are all cowards, consciousness was a really big mistake, so big that we can't bear life and its implicit suffering anymore. Plants, birds, couldn't care less about suffering, they are just a manifestation of the being of the whole universe, but we've been doomed with self awareness. So, history, since the invention of agriculture, is will to die. The completion of technological civilization will mean our extinction because that was our desire in the first place. Life is suffering but we can't bear that, death is the only possible outcome of human adventure.

>>12486778
>So, history, since the invention of agriculture, is will to die.
read the language crystal for similar themes

>>12486778
Death is transcendence only when it is not resisted

If you really want to criticize a system you should remove yourself entirely from it so your criticism can't be heard.

>>12486778
low-test wh*toids actually believe this

>I haven't read Ted's manifesto, but of course my opinion I shitted out of myself in 5 minutes is more important and intelligent than the chain of thought of a genius who was forming his ideas more than a few decades

>>12486835
> anime poster shilling Ted

truly tedposting is a controlled opposition psyop

>>12486880
You have to go back

Take the Wizard Pill.
>Q: WE HEAR YOU’RE NOT THAT KEEN ON TECHNOLOGY...
>A: I don’t have an internet connection, or a mobile phone, or a TV signal. I can play [digital] music on the television, or on the computer I suppose, but I don’t. I am pretty much cut off from the 21st century. It’s like culturally I’m trying to establish a kind of sensory deprivation tank for myself, whereby I am receiving no modern signals whatsoever, because I’ve heard that after a while in a sensory deprivation tank you start to hallucinate and have all sorts of strange experiences, so I’m waiting for that to happen.

>Q: HOW DO YOU MANAGE WITHOUT THE INTERNET?
>A: It seems to work. I am pretty much cut off from the majority of the 21st century, but not much escapes me. You hear about everything, because you’re talking to people, you’re absorbing a lot of this information as if by osmosis, just through the pores of your skin. I have said that by embracing the internet in the way that it has done, which was kind of inevitable, society has embarked on a massive experiment without having any idea of the various ways in which those technologies will impact upon us socially, politically and psychologically. So I so think if there’s this huge experiment going on, it’s best that I remain outside the petri dish, as a kind of control, so that we’ll be able to see how badly the rest of you have mutated, by comparing you with me as a kind of baseline.
>>>interview with Alan Moore

>>12486890
alan moore, now there's a ted-tier brainlet

>>12486908
>>12486880
>No capitalization
Of course a phoneposter is a slave to technology.

>>12486803
I'm not white though. My point is that nature is ruthless and full of suffering but neither me nor you I guess, will happily leave our basements to struggle for mere survival in the wilderness. And what are human rights, feminism, social welfare if not a corruption of the original state? But once these things are granted there is no life remaining, just quiet observation.

>>12486922
Phones automatically capitalize the first word, mr phoneposter

>>12484205
This please.

>>12483782
>The question concerning technology is the only relevant question of our age.
the only relevant question of our age is the happiness one, for all others boil down to humans wanting to be happy, all social, political, economical, etc. debate is just two sides arguing about why the method for achieving such is the best, sadly the human condition always becomes desensitized to their enviroment there by never attaining total fullfilment.
THAT IS WHY WE NEED TO GET THE GOD DAMN SUPER AI TO FIX THIS SHIT FOR US BECAUSE CLEARLY THIS ISSUE IS TRANSCENDENTAL TO OUR NATURE FUCKKKKKKKKKKK

>>12486364
That intensity of living is no longer available to the average person other than through vicarious images or sycophantic corporatized products. The full frontal experience of seeing space with your own eyes is a distant, dying dream, and one that won't be available other than through bougie tours. Hiking and backpacking are the closest common experiences to that lost fight for life, but they themselves are merely shards among shards of what once was. Even if you drop off the grid, the only world we know will follow us into the trees.
It's ok though. Just watch SpaceX streams and dream big, buddy

>>12483782
excuses is humanity biggest invention that's why people are scare about technology. once technology takes us over completely there will not be excuses anymore, no more leisure time.

>>12483782
>Stirner:" The most oppressive spook is Man. Think of the proverb, “The road to ruin is paved with good intentions.” The intention to realize humanity altogether in oneself, to become altogether man, is of such ruinous kind; here belong the intentions to become good, noble, loving, and so forth."

>Nietszche: I teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have you done to overcome him? All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do you want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather than overcome man? What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a painful embarrassment.."

b-but muh humanity, muh soul, muh spirituality, all mere concepts to enchained our will to power. transhumanism and technology is the way to free us completely.

>>12483791
You haven't read ATR
The purpose of describing the process in general and abstract terms, as we've done here, is to show that what is happening to our world is not accidental; it is not the result of some chance conjunction of historical circumstances or of some flaw of character peculiar to human beings.
Given the nature of self-propagating systems in general, the destructive process that we see today is made inevitable by a combination of two factors: the colossal power of modern technology and the availability of rapid transportation and communication between any two parts of the world. Recognition of this may help us to avoid wasting time on naive efforts to solve our current problems. For example, on efforts to teach people to conserve energy and resources. Such efforts accomplish nothing whatever. It seems amazing that those who advocate energy conservation haven't noticed what happens: As soon as some energy is freed up by conservation, the technological world-system gobbles it up and demands more. No matter how much energy is provided, the system always expands rapidly until it is using all available energy, and then it demands still more. The same is true of other resources. The technological world-system infallibly expands until it reaches a limit imposed by an insufficiency of resources, and then it tries to push beyond that limit regardless of consequences. This is explained by the theory of self-propagating systems: Those organizations (or other self-prop systems) that least allow respect for the environment to interfere with their pursuit of power here and now, tend to acquire more power than those that limit their pursuit of power from concern about what will happen to our environment fifty years from now, or even ten years. (Proposition 2.) Thus, through a process of natural selection, the world comes to be dominated by organizations that make maximum possible use of all available resources to augment their own power without regard to long-term consequences.

>>12487926
spot on anon, hopefully some rich capitalist makes the transhumanism movement faster or just kills us already christ!

>>12488011
>it is not the result of some chance conjunction of historical circumstances or of some flaw of character peculiar to human beings.
This is where I disagree. The Native Americans, for example, seemed remarkably less concerned with maximizing their use of resources around them in comparison to Europeans in the same time periods. And on the individual scale, you have people like Kaczynski, who don’t want to participate in the system. You cannot seriously argue that it is impossible to create a society that is concerned with long term benefits. The very fact that I can imagine such a society led by people who think exactly like me means that it is not impossible. Realize that Kaczynski is using fear and exaggeration to persuade, here. His credibility would be damaged if he were to claim uncertainty or say something like,”it is most likely that we won’t be able to fix this problem.” He wants to be absolute and remove all ideas that don’t conform to his fantasy of barbarically destroying all technology. Even he admits this won’t solve the problem permanently, and, though he doesn’t say it, he knows the possibility of this plan being executed is really slim

Technology isn't even close to what some of you guys are talking about... Did some of you pseud-virgins actually fall for the Kurzweil meme?

>>12484099
ah so you're a hermetic ancap neo-aztec retrofuturist, got it

>>12488150
>Technology isn't even close to what some of you guys are talking about
that's the problem nigga

>>12485773
you fucking brainlet. you can't see the big picture. what is birthed through technology will ascend any possible control. there is no putting the genie back in the bottle. we are doing as nature commands.

>>12484284
>Humanity is ultimately only a temporary vector for technology's progress and will be discarded once it no longer requires us to facilitate its reproduction and evolution. The beginnings of this are clearly seen at the onset of industrialization wherever it takes place; technological advancement reaches a stage wherein a positive feedback process starts to take place that has an immediate and substantial impact on the population, shown clearly in the drastic decline in fertility rate. As this feedback progresses the need for human labor in all of its forms steadily decreases and thus the need for humans consequentially decreases also, leading eventually to our complete extinction (and perhaps the extinction of all carbon based lifeforms). Humans are more or less the boot strapper of a glorious and humanity-free techno-future.
almost based but supremely lacking an understanding of the machinations of capital in this whole here dang sitizuation

>>12486261
Aristotelians can't solve anything.

>>12488292
>technojesus will come and save us
stale meme in a new package

>>12488333
if by techno jesus you mean a leap in human consciousness and perception aka enlightenment then yes, i am a follower of a stale meme

>>12488344

>>12488366
yeah, youre much better off wallowing in pessimism and whining about society endlessly.

>>12483896
sure there is. Put a goody on a shelf where a toddler can't reach it, and the toddler will stack books and furniture into a stairway until he can get to it. He doesn't have to be taught to do this. He figures it out on his own accord.

>>12486520
>youre insane
epic

>>12483782
Get on Land's wild ride.

>>12486599
>Why the bias on this?
>>thing I and those around me can affect and be affected by
>>thing in the past that exists in my now only as history
>To live is to be at risk, it doesn't matter what the state of our tech is.
to live is to risk but I still want to wear a condom if I have to stick it in someone I met five hours ago. risks can and should be mitigated and acted against. hindsight things like how shitty puberty or the party last thursday was, not so much.

>>12486599
>modern environmental disasters are bad
>pre-tech environmental disasters are fine
False equivalence.

>>12489095
>risks can and should be mitigated and acted against.
Right. So why lobby for the destruction of tech, like condoms? The campaign makes no sense.

>>12489111
The other poster literally did it first, here >>12486396. I just followed up accordingly. You can see the chain of responses.

>>12483896
technology is inseparable from human development because our intelligence dictates we use technology in order to survive. we don't have claws, we don't have furs, the only way we can survive is by crafting spears, starting fires, and skinning our kills.

>>12484205
Return to the Early Greeks:
"Technology itself has been abstracted, and we extricate ourselves into its non-being. And yet, in our total loss of subjectivity, we become more powerful than ever. The man who stands at the gun is in competition with himself and his pals, attempting to outdo the men at the next gun - carrying and passing shells and deposing them into a chamber which explodes into some far off place, and then the passing cycled into eternity. He does not see the enemy soldiers wavering in the pits, nor does he see the wasteland which this endless shelling creates. And somehow this abstraction is deepened at home, as the entire population becomes a standing reserve, mobilised as a static production in this endless line of shells. And it is in this widened vision of the homefront that the 'hawklike with marking their prey' deepen the territory from which a wasteland appears. The immediate technicalism of the instrument is in no way its reality, it merely unveils the material of an unknown apprehension.
Or, again with the trench gun, the horizon within the sights of technology is its focusing on that which will be consumed. It turns ever so slightly, revealing a new form - and it is an assemblage rather than an accumulation. Over time the trench gun sheds the husk of its roughshod assembly, and the turning, reflective sight which kills no longer needs an apparatus to do its work. The form of life is instrumentalised by its own enmeshing. Rather than being enframed, technology is the coming into being of its own enframing. It is reframed and enmeshed until its intricacy betrays its first cause, until it becomes a form all its own. This is the problem with bare translations of the ancients, the form may have only revealed part of itself in its enframing of the world at that point. And yet, our obsession with form can become its own technicalism, until we are excised of the vessel which is the element of our being in the world. He who is certain of essence is most divided from the first cause. And he who insists upon the material cause enframes the theological cause within his own hubris before form."

>>12489177
2/3
"Here we see that, contrary to science ignoring it, the primordial is deepened - for it is concerned with nothing else than its unveiling. The human is written out of the equation entirely, he is the first cause depriving himself of all essence. And within the hawklike vision attempting to possess the enemy with his death the human eye becomes focused on its singular task: mesmerized by the sparks and the pounding, how the angle approaches a beautiful curvature enmeshing its creator in victory, power, the doom of another. Our vision narrows until we become the Cyclops enchained to the necessity of Hephaestus, and so technique is no longer that contained in the Promethean gift; we become lost in the blinding fire, and once again the stolen gift is returned to the Gods, and lost to us. Beyond the short-sightedness of techne stares the abyss of that which is without truth.
We are monstrous and in service to a wounded God, yet this drives us on all the more. Technology is merely the fate of a fated foresight, for the God of trade is also the God of thieves—and the guide into the underworld. Without Prometheus, technology loses its living nature, its foresight and fire, and instead becomes a monstrous arching bridge between our descent into the underworld and our holding onto life. As the knowledge of our death approaches, ever closer, we hold on all the more. Technology is our own overstretching back into the world, it is our denial of form, and we are in mourning of ourselves. The chasm creates its own intricacy.
Mourning the loss of our humanity, and the necessity of our becoming one with the primordial. What else was the industrial era other than the technological vision of its fate in Doom? The earth leaks Moros, or its material death at least, and humanity turns to an alchemy of animating the blackened earth into a tonic for its machines.
Humanity reduced to sweeping up after the primordial, clearing the ruins. The Russian remains in retreat while his factory sirens wail at the loss of its workers - the Russian soul mourned by industry itself. And anyone who gets the grand metaphor is left to ask, what of the fascists? The explosive answer is to say that they were nothing but the munitions warehouses, while the sympathetic answer is that they were the silence of abandoned and rubble-strewn streets, left behind after the thundering echo of a final shot; that deathly silence after a massive loss for which there can be no words. And we tend to focus on this all the more as the explosion loses its resonance. There is no one left to sweep up."

>>12489182
3/3
"Technology is the elemental fire, and the foresight hidden within the divine theft. It is that which is necessary for our survival, but also that which may be taken away by the ruling gods at any given moment. The trick at Mekone, our accepting of the sacrifice of bones covered in fat - so that we might take vengeance upon the earthly chasm. Thieves of the beauty which was thieved of us in creation, until we are self-sacrificed within our recreation of the elemental. There is no shift in the essence of technology, its relation to truth never changes - the pile of bones merely increases as we attempt to appease ever more vengeful gods."

>>12489162
>Right. So why lobby for the destruction of tech, like condoms? The campaign makes no sense.
I'll be honest I have no idea where 'destroy all technology' came from. as far as I'm concerned, I'm all for the use of technology as long as that use human-mediated and responsible. instead of letting the environment of the information age fling us headlong into a disaffected market that solves for optimal market solutions in place of optimal human conditions, I want people to take some kind of control over how information and culture split and come together.
the aphorism goes that a person is smart, while people are dumb—I have the opposite view, at least in some cases. while groups of randoms make decisions unpredictably, groups of informed or motivated people make decisions superior to the individual decisions made by any single member (no source right now, sorry). an undirected, vulnerable information stream is a river easily capital-polluted and overwhelmed. but an organized avenue for information can do great good for those who live and work adjacent.

>>12488311
Yes, capital is the highest order function or "engine" of the feedback process which is the great irony of Marxists who try to argue that advancements in technology will be the gateway to our freedom from capitalism (once human labor value=0 so labor=100% replaced by machines, among other theories see >>12484019 ), when in all likely hood technology will only be freeing capitalism from us.

So to add clarity to >>12484156 and >>12484284 I should have included that Capital is what is "using" technology rather than humans.

and their is nothing we can do about because the world is divided into different states. the genie is out the bottle it cannot be but back it ,
mergeing wiht the mchaines is teh future

I got this Ted, one singularity to go.

>>12483782
itt: wannabe evolutionary anthropologists

>>12489248
Marx originated that theory though.

>>12489248
Accelerationists haven't read Marx.
And they'll never be able to meme.

>>12490093
>THE CAGE IS FOR YOUR PROTECTION
AGENT 15445 DO NOT ATTEMPT TO OPEN YOUR CAGE ON THE WAREHOUSE FLOOR
>THE CAGE IS FOR YOUR PROTECTION
AGENT 15445 REPEATED ATTEMPTS TO OPEN THE CAGE WILL RESULT IN ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
>THE CAGE IS FOR YOUR PROTECTION

>>12489248
Humans serve capital for psychological reasons and social dynamics. The psychological aspect is greed and power, the social dynamic is how people are forced to work for corporations in a system that doesn't necessarily improve the state of society.

If technology becomes a real threat to the elites that have created a capital-centric society, they will not follow through, or at least not necessarily.

This is an empirical question based around human psychology not a metaphysical one.

>>12486431
This. The only good part of walden pond was when he talked about clothes.

Late to the thread. Ted K. predicted incels and thots. 3 power processes. For incels sex shifted to 3rd category. For relatively attractive females it shifted into 1st category, vapid hedonism. 2nd category is mostly monogamy and child-rearing, as he also talks about.

>>12486267
I'm a PhD student in Computer Science. I had several 100k plus job offers when I graduated so I'm quite familiar with tech. I am not trying to brag but simply to give context that I dislike technology due to some bitterness or jealousy about money. I believe most of modern tech is bad, though sans several of the important things you talked about. Toothpaste and indoor plumbing and what not. What tech does is it allows a society to be lazy as a whole and to care less about their local community. Technology doesn't have to be bad. If we had continued with the space age advancement level of the 60s I wouldn't have a problem. However what we did was fall to infighting and just stagnating in terms of progression. I think morally and emotionally people would be a lot happier and healthier if the addiction and seduction of technology was removed from their daily lives.

>>12483782
asked and answered better by Pynchon

>a woman rose to ask [Robert Graves] a question. Did he, she wondered, write his poems on the typewriter? It seemed a silly, trivial question in the circumstances, but Graves treated it very seriously. ''No, madam,'' he replied, ''I have never learned to use a typewriter, and I have warned my daughters against learning to use this machine. I do not, as a matter of fact, favor a fountain pen, either. I use the old steel nib that has to be dipped in a pot of ink, and I find that a good nib takes me nicely through 4,000 pages of manuscript before it has to be changed.''

>>12491537
im old enough to remember life before mainstream internet, it was not that great, back then education actually mattered because it was the only way to find out about huge swaths of information, i think people take for granted everything the internet does for you, yeah twitter's two minutes hate against whatever poor bastard goes viral is bad, but that is a price worth paying for having instant access to any information you could possibly desire

>>12492179
I'm really yet to see any evidence that the punditry about how the internet will give information to all actually resulted in an increase in the quality of information, and not just vastly increasing the shit.

>>12483791
>guns don't kill people, people do
Profound

>>12484659
Smartphones are cancer

>>12492202
If you haven't discovered valuable things on the internet that you wouldn't have discovered without it, that's really on you, and not the internet.

>>12492237
I'm old enough to remember when the internet was sold as being human-wide in its availability of information. It's not really much of a selling point if it the greatness of the net is really only applicable to those who would discover the information anyway.

>>12485773
>When sexual selection derives from socially accepted behavior (ie. behavior that is not directly harmful for the system/civilization) then any 'harmful' behavior will be bred out.
This isn't even close to true. I hate you biolets abusing the field for you shitty ideologies.

>>12492237
while that's true, the mainstream discourse has undeniably degenerated

>>12485773
>When sexual selection derives from socially accepted behavior (ie. behavior that is not directly harmful for the system/civilization) then any 'harmful' behavior will be bred out.
Yeah but harmful behavior like the leftists masochism being bred out is a good thing that Ted would want

>>12492569
has it though?

>>12492179
>education actually mattered

Is this not a good thing? I have no qualms with the internet in an academic context but there is so much useless shit on there

>>12486520
cringe and bluepilled

>>12492569
It's been degenerating for millennia.

>>12492630

>>12493323
It's hemmingway

>>12485975
>The Net
Based

>>12494505
I don't know this joke.

>>12484284
Dank.