35 ms·

> The modern world has such a ridiculous disconnect. Agreed. This, to me, is the essence of cyberpunk. To Gibson, 'The future is already here — it's just not v

by arcanus 10y ago

> The modern world has such a ridiculous disconnect. Agreed. This, to me, is the essence of cyberpunk. To Gibson, 'The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed' > Just another place for the wealthy elite of the world to slowly ruin, maybe the next step is the moon? Mars, haven't you heard? > The system is rapidly growing out of control and no one seems to be able to stop or halt the insanity. Worse, they are complicit in it. This entire situation amounts to a local minimum, because everyone is working towards their own short term interests. I don't see how we break that cycle, however. The trends are global. I'll admit I'm certainly not doing my part: I'm leaving academia and taking my signing bonus, RSUs, etc. and joining a mega-corp.

rjzzleep 10y ago
You know, everyone blames the mega rich. I blame everyone else. If you're completely honest and you assume that shits going to hit the fan, would you care more about the happiness of 1 billion random people you've never met or the happiness of 100 that you know? On paper you'll say 1 billion, but in reality if someone shoots your mother you cry, if someone shoots someone in Syria you most likely won't ever notice. But here's a list of things partly responsible: 1. The mere idea that justice is something that will be served at some point is ludicrous. There's no universal concept of morality to begin with. The more money you have, the less like you are to be indicted or pay penalties for virtually anything. Why would you give that might away? 2. That disgusting cult of happiness that is more prevalent in San Francisco than anywhere else in the world is the very foundation of forcing people to be happy with what they have. Institutions like Landmark Forum that are actually requirements for certain management positions make sure that people don't actually critique or change things that are messed up. 3. Everyone knows that we're eating up our resources and dump the rest into the seas all the while doing so. The result is that a lot of things available today will be luxury super rich items in the not too distant future. Tuna and Cocoa amongst them(just wait and see). If I had money I'd invest in huge warehouses to make money with those things in 20-30 years. That's exactly what superwealthy do. There have been more than one buyouts in bankrupt countries in the last couple of years. Buying resources while everyone is hoping for the utopia where we can create something from nothing. 4. The only way this stuff could possibly change we pull the handbreak right now. But it's absurd to think that that's a possibility. Nobody even so much dares to talk about the consequences of a full stop change. If you do, you're the pessimist. People don't want a change of course, they want the illusion of change so that can stay happy until they crash in the cement wall at 200mp/h. At the very least I have enough Schadenfreude in me to always enjoy these arguably predictable changes like the refugee "crisis" in europe
- hga 10y ago
  Everyone knows that we're eating up our resources and dump the rest into the seas all the while doing so. The result is that a lot of things available today will be luxury super rich items in the not too distant future. Not sure how old you are, i.e. did you live through the '70s "Limits to Growth" Zeitgeist era? If not try, say, watching the 1973 movie Soylent Green, where the two protagonists just marvel at a jar of strawberry preserves they found in the dwelling of a rich person, and then go to your favorite grocery store's jams and jellies section.... Maybe someday we'll see that future you envision, but having already lived through at least one cycle of this, not to mention the ongoing global cooling -> global warming -> climate change one, I don't worry quite so much (and by now have a lot more than just these surface level observations to base that on). ADDED: And this was a major theme of Heinlein in his '50s juveniles, most directly his 4th, published in 1950, Farmer in the Sky, but also see his last really good book, The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress in 1966, where it was plot significant that the moon colony (or was it colonies?) grew wheat and shot it back to the Earth using a mass driver.
  - chronic6l 10y ago
    I'm probably one of the people you hate. Global warming is real and is accelerated by humans. I still don't give a damn. I will throw all my waste in the trash and drive gasoline vehicles. I'll let someone else fix it.
    - logfromblammo 10y ago
      I'll care about the Earth when I can feel like I can actually own a piece of it. I have no skin in the game, really, other than some vague dread of total environmental collapse. Ted Turner, now, he has a great reason to be an environmentalist. Let the burden of environmental protection fall primarily on those who claim the most ownership of it. If Ted wants me to separate my recyclables and watch TBS on a TV constructed from recycled material and powered solely by renewables, he can damn well pay me something to do all that. You don't ask the team that loses by 50 points every game to start playing with their shoelaces tied together. And you don't ask the poor to sacrifice for the benefit of the rich. Developing nations are going to burn coal, and non-rich people are going to eat from disposable paper plates and then not recycle them. Environmentalism is a luxury, and only those who already have a sense of economic security will buy in to it. But as long as I have an "at will" job and no more attachment to the land than a one-year lease, I'm not going to feel all that motivated.

by arcanus 10y ago

rjzzleep 10y ago

You know, everyone blames the mega rich. I blame everyone else. If you're completely honest and you assume that shits going to hit the fan, would you care more about the happiness of 1 billion random people you've never met or the happiness of 100 that you know? On paper you'll say 1 billion, but in reality if someone shoots your mother you cry, if someone shoots someone in Syria you most likely won't ever notice. But here's a list of things partly responsible: 1. The mere idea that justice is something that will be served at some point is ludicrous. There's no universal concept of morality to begin with. The more money you have, the less like you are to be indicted or pay penalties for virtually anything. Why would you give that might away? 2. That disgusting cult of happiness that is more prevalent in San Francisco than anywhere else in the world is the very foundation of forcing people to be happy with what they have. Institutions like Landmark Forum that are actually requirements for certain management positions make sure that people don't actually critique or change things that are messed up. 3. Everyone knows that we're eating up our resources and dump the rest into the seas all the while doing so. The result is that a lot of things available today will be luxury super rich items in the not too distant future. Tuna and Cocoa amongst them(just wait and see). If I had money I'd invest in huge warehouses to make money with those things in 20-30 years. That's exactly what superwealthy do. There have been more than one buyouts in bankrupt countries in the last couple of years. Buying resources while everyone is hoping for the utopia where we can create something from nothing. 4. The only way this stuff could possibly change we pull the handbreak right now. But it's absurd to think that that's a possibility. Nobody even so much dares to talk about the consequences of a full stop change. If you do, you're the pessimist. People don't want a change of course, they want the illusion of change so that can stay happy until they crash in the cement wall at 200mp/h. At the very least I have enough Schadenfreude in me to always enjoy these arguably predictable changes like the refugee "crisis" in europe

hga 10y ago
Everyone knows that we're eating up our resources and dump the rest into the seas all the while doing so. The result is that a lot of things available today will be luxury super rich items in the not too distant future. Not sure how old you are, i.e. did you live through the '70s "Limits to Growth" Zeitgeist era? If not try, say, watching the 1973 movie Soylent Green, where the two protagonists just marvel at a jar of strawberry preserves they found in the dwelling of a rich person, and then go to your favorite grocery store's jams and jellies section.... Maybe someday we'll see that future you envision, but having already lived through at least one cycle of this, not to mention the ongoing global cooling -> global warming -> climate change one, I don't worry quite so much (and by now have a lot more than just these surface level observations to base that on). ADDED: And this was a major theme of Heinlein in his '50s juveniles, most directly his 4th, published in 1950, Farmer in the Sky, but also see his last really good book, The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress in 1966, where it was plot significant that the moon colony (or was it colonies?) grew wheat and shot it back to the Earth using a mass driver.
- chronic6l 10y ago
  I'm probably one of the people you hate. Global warming is real and is accelerated by humans. I still don't give a damn. I will throw all my waste in the trash and drive gasoline vehicles. I'll let someone else fix it.
  - logfromblammo 10y ago
    I'll care about the Earth when I can feel like I can actually own a piece of it. I have no skin in the game, really, other than some vague dread of total environmental collapse. Ted Turner, now, he has a great reason to be an environmentalist. Let the burden of environmental protection fall primarily on those who claim the most ownership of it. If Ted wants me to separate my recyclables and watch TBS on a TV constructed from recycled material and powered solely by renewables, he can damn well pay me something to do all that. You don't ask the team that loses by 50 points every game to start playing with their shoelaces tied together. And you don't ask the poor to sacrifice for the benefit of the rich. Developing nations are going to burn coal, and non-rich people are going to eat from disposable paper plates and then not recycle them. Environmentalism is a luxury, and only those who already have a sense of economic security will buy in to it. But as long as I have an "at will" job and no more attachment to the land than a one-year lease, I'm not going to feel all that motivated.