4 ms·

A key component of Brave New World, that this article barely touches on, is genetic engineering. In BNW people do not 'breed' naturally but are created en-masse

A key component of Brave New World, that this article barely touches on, is genetic engineering. In BNW people do not 'breed' naturally but are created en-masse in genetic factories. This creates the in-book caste system of alphas, betas, gammas etc. Low skill workers are deliberately bred to have low intelligence and conditioned to like their allotted jobs. There is a memorable scene in the book where a class of infants is conditioned by loud scary noises to not like bright flowers or natural scenes. They are being conditioned to be happy with grey drabness. So the reason 1984 is mentioned a lot more at the moment compared to BNW is that we aren't really in the BNW zone yet. But perhaps there will be a time when BNW is even more relevant. Things somewhat like Gattacca and BNW might still come to pass.

inetknght 8y ago
You don't think we're being conditioned to be passive against each other and, by proxy, our government? You don't think we're being conditioned to value the abstinence of violence for whatever reason regardless of claims of justification? You don't think we're being conditioned to ignore the reasons people blow up and instead ask how they had the means to be able to do so? You don't think we're being conditioned to complain about the way things are without thinking about the way things could, or even should, be? The book should be taken at face value indeed.
- shawn 8y ago
  Careful you don’t cut yourself on that edge. Actually I have a lot of respect for this comment. I think I’ll reference it. It’s the type of independent thinking that I miss, back before we had to be PC just to not be banned.
  - dang 8y ago
    If you keep posting abusive comments, we are not going to unban you after 3 months. You know how to post good comments and you know what the difference is.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - shawn 8y ago
      I am aware you feel these comments are abusive. But you are acting so cartoonishly evil in this instance – banning a 12-year member of HN for 3 months solely for asking why he was rate limited – that someone needs to stand up to you. It’s true that I demanded an answer from you. But that was because your original decision to issue a rate limit was an overreaction. My comments in that thread were not significantly different from the various other discussions that people have on a daily basis about social issues. You feel that it’s abusive to highlight this decision and continue to call attention to it. I feel it’s the only recourse left. I have tried for a very, very long time to come to some kind of understanding with you. But the reason I’m doing this isn’t personal. It’s because I care about this community and am afraid of what you’re forcing it to become. From the recent “What do you hate about HN?” thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18184914 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18184914): I’ve been here for awhile (just about eight years), and the single biggest change I’ve noticed is the increasing presence of what I’ll call a “bourgeois tech monoculture.” This place used to be weirder, with more obscure links and discussions filled with academics and hackers. If you search the older archives, there are some really incredible conversations. Now it mostly seems to be nytimes articles commented on by upper-middle class engineers. Here’s another: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18185456 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18185456 I miss Michael O. Church. Not that I always agreed with him, but he was really interesting, and his comments consistently made me think about my own biases and opinions in ways few others ever have. I noticed when you referred pejoratively to yummyfajitas as “Socrates”. I didn’t know him, but I respected his writing. And he didn’t leave until you personally made him feel unwelcome. In fact, he left immediately after: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=yummyfajitas https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=yummyfajitas You’ve become what pg calls a suit: image over substance; authority over reason. But your actions go far deeper than most people know, or understand. People still do not understand that you personally flag (and therefore instantly kill) many comments per day. They believe users do this, not you acting alone. And anyone who dares disagree with you is silenced, one way or another. I don’t know if you’ve been hunting trolls for so long that all you see are trolls, everywhere you look. All I know is that people are starting to notice. Most attempts to stand up to authority fail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_peasant_revolts#Chronological_list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_peasant_revolts#Chrono... I regret that mine might too. But my personal desire to participate in the site is overruled by the greater desire to see this community protected from your purge of unpopular opinion. If you truly believe this is abusive, we’ll have to agree to disagree. History’s judgement will last longer than yours.
- adrianN 8y ago
  Some people call it conditioning, others call it education. Societies seem to work better when people don't bash each others heads in all the time, so we try to teach our children that violence is not okay. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
  - inetknght 8y ago
    It seems pretty reasonable to me too. Indeed, education is supposed to enlighten you to see others viewpoints. Why do we continue to have problems meeting eye to eye with others' ideas then?
  - NeedMoreTea 8y ago
    Education is as much to create willing and accepting members of a society, however unjust that happens to be, as to educate. What else is a pledge of allegiance? If you condition/educate away the social acceptance of demonstrations or even riot then one of the checks and balances of a society is removed. When the reaction comes it's likely to be a more extreme one, or if enough checks and balances are removed, straight to civil war or coup.
  - bluntfang 8y ago
    >Societies seem to work better when people don't bash each others heads in all the time What society exists today that proves this?
- LUmBULtERA 8y ago
  No.
kbutler 8y ago
Huxley got the mechanism wrong, but we are currently conditioning the children to be more interested in digital screens than in outdoor/natural activities. This isn't new - TV as a babysitter has moved to mobile device as a babysitter. It seems to be working quite well.
- cimmanom 8y ago
  My understanding is that this doesn't require conditioning -- the brightness of screens, their changing contents, and the dopamine hits one gets from interacting with them makes them grab and hold attention regardless of previous exposure.
netcan 8y ago
Also... Orwell's writing was a lot more closely linked to stuff Orwell observed. He was a journalist and colonial by trade. Huxley put more abstract ideas about humans and science into his world. Human engineering, happiness pills and genetic predispositions (like Douglas Adams' cow that wants to be eaten). This makes it feel more like a parable, a world that exists to play with ideas, like discworld. Orwell's grim world was just a lot closer to stuff that existed, and still exists. In a recent vice documentary about Assad's Syria, a policeman confesses "I am Winston Smith" after taking a journalist on a tour of Orwellian lies. It's not a coincidence, Assad's regime is built on ideas from Nazism and Stalinism, the regimes 1984 was parodying.
- corpMaverick 8y ago
  > colonial by trade Honest question. What is a "colonial" ?
  - pjc50 8y ago
    One of the members of the British upper class who inserted themselves into ruling positions in the colonies. Orwell was born in Bihar, India. His father worked in the Opium Department of the civil service, overseeing its export to China. He grew up in the English "public" (upperclass) schools. At 19 he went to be a policeman in Burma.
  - netcan 8y ago
    Orwell (Blaine) was a policeman in Burma during the 20s. More generally, colonial(ist) usually refers to employees (especially European ones) of the colonial state(s).
- baud147258 8y ago
  > Assad's regime is built on ideas from Nazism and Stalinism I understood that this regime had taken more of its idea from Pan-Arabism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Arabism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Arabism
  - netcan 8y ago

inetknght 8y ago

You don't think we're being conditioned to be passive against each other and, by proxy, our government? You don't think we're being conditioned to value the abstinence of violence for whatever reason regardless of claims of justification? You don't think we're being conditioned to ignore the reasons people blow up and instead ask how they had the means to be able to do so? You don't think we're being conditioned to complain about the way things are without thinking about the way things could, or even should, be? The book should be taken at face value indeed.

shawn 8y ago
Careful you don’t cut yourself on that edge. Actually I have a lot of respect for this comment. I think I’ll reference it. It’s the type of independent thinking that I miss, back before we had to be PC just to not be banned.
- dang 8y ago
  If you keep posting abusive comments, we are not going to unban you after 3 months. You know how to post good comments and you know what the difference is.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - shawn 8y ago
    I am aware you feel these comments are abusive. But you are acting so cartoonishly evil in this instance – banning a 12-year member of HN for 3 months solely for asking why he was rate limited – that someone needs to stand up to you. It’s true that I demanded an answer from you. But that was because your original decision to issue a rate limit was an overreaction. My comments in that thread were not significantly different from the various other discussions that people have on a daily basis about social issues. You feel that it’s abusive to highlight this decision and continue to call attention to it. I feel it’s the only recourse left. I have tried for a very, very long time to come to some kind of understanding with you. But the reason I’m doing this isn’t personal. It’s because I care about this community and am afraid of what you’re forcing it to become. From the recent “What do you hate about HN?” thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18184914 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18184914): I’ve been here for awhile (just about eight years), and the single biggest change I’ve noticed is the increasing presence of what I’ll call a “bourgeois tech monoculture.” This place used to be weirder, with more obscure links and discussions filled with academics and hackers. If you search the older archives, there are some really incredible conversations. Now it mostly seems to be nytimes articles commented on by upper-middle class engineers. Here’s another: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18185456 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18185456 I miss Michael O. Church. Not that I always agreed with him, but he was really interesting, and his comments consistently made me think about my own biases and opinions in ways few others ever have. I noticed when you referred pejoratively to yummyfajitas as “Socrates”. I didn’t know him, but I respected his writing. And he didn’t leave until you personally made him feel unwelcome. In fact, he left immediately after: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=yummyfajitas https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=yummyfajitas You’ve become what pg calls a suit: image over substance; authority over reason. But your actions go far deeper than most people know, or understand. People still do not understand that you personally flag (and therefore instantly kill) many comments per day. They believe users do this, not you acting alone. And anyone who dares disagree with you is silenced, one way or another. I don’t know if you’ve been hunting trolls for so long that all you see are trolls, everywhere you look. All I know is that people are starting to notice. Most attempts to stand up to authority fail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_peasant_revolts#Chronological_list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_peasant_revolts#Chrono... I regret that mine might too. But my personal desire to participate in the site is overruled by the greater desire to see this community protected from your purge of unpopular opinion. If you truly believe this is abusive, we’ll have to agree to disagree. History’s judgement will last longer than yours.
adrianN 8y ago
Some people call it conditioning, others call it education. Societies seem to work better when people don't bash each others heads in all the time, so we try to teach our children that violence is not okay. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
- inetknght 8y ago
  It seems pretty reasonable to me too. Indeed, education is supposed to enlighten you to see others viewpoints. Why do we continue to have problems meeting eye to eye with others' ideas then?
- NeedMoreTea 8y ago
  Education is as much to create willing and accepting members of a society, however unjust that happens to be, as to educate. What else is a pledge of allegiance? If you condition/educate away the social acceptance of demonstrations or even riot then one of the checks and balances of a society is removed. When the reaction comes it's likely to be a more extreme one, or if enough checks and balances are removed, straight to civil war or coup.
- bluntfang 8y ago
  >Societies seem to work better when people don't bash each others heads in all the time What society exists today that proves this?
LUmBULtERA 8y ago
No.

kbutler 8y ago

Huxley got the mechanism wrong, but we are currently conditioning the children to be more interested in digital screens than in outdoor/natural activities. This isn't new - TV as a babysitter has moved to mobile device as a babysitter. It seems to be working quite well.

cimmanom 8y ago
My understanding is that this doesn't require conditioning -- the brightness of screens, their changing contents, and the dopamine hits one gets from interacting with them makes them grab and hold attention regardless of previous exposure.

netcan 8y ago

Also... Orwell's writing was a lot more closely linked to stuff Orwell observed. He was a journalist and colonial by trade. Huxley put more abstract ideas about humans and science into his world. Human engineering, happiness pills and genetic predispositions (like Douglas Adams' cow that wants to be eaten). This makes it feel more like a parable, a world that exists to play with ideas, like discworld. Orwell's grim world was just a lot closer to stuff that existed, and still exists. In a recent vice documentary about Assad's Syria, a policeman confesses "I am Winston Smith" after taking a journalist on a tour of Orwellian lies. It's not a coincidence, Assad's regime is built on ideas from Nazism and Stalinism, the regimes 1984 was parodying.

corpMaverick 8y ago
> colonial by trade Honest question. What is a "colonial" ?
- pjc50 8y ago
  One of the members of the British upper class who inserted themselves into ruling positions in the colonies. Orwell was born in Bihar, India. His father worked in the Opium Department of the civil service, overseeing its export to China. He grew up in the English "public" (upperclass) schools. At 19 he went to be a policeman in Burma.
- netcan 8y ago
  Orwell (Blaine) was a policeman in Burma during the 20s. More generally, colonial(ist) usually refers to employees (especially European ones) of the colonial state(s).
baud147258 8y ago
> Assad's regime is built on ideas from Nazism and Stalinism I understood that this regime had taken more of its idea from Pan-Arabism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Arabism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Arabism
- netcan 8y ago