7 ms·

What the author describes is humans living in captivity. There is a cadre of people who argue, "really? you wouldn't survive a day outside this so-called capti

What the author describes is humans living in captivity. There is a cadre of people who argue, "really? you wouldn't survive a day outside this so-called captivity, tough guy" and then go on to justify how their various compromises are somehow moral. To me that whole line of argument is just indoors cats lecturing outdoors cats about how to manage the shame of dependency, which outdoors cats just don't have. If we do not learn to limit the power of people who wield tech, we will become their captives. This was the whole reason to be a hacker, to act as a check on having humanity dominated by our own tech.

xapata 6y ago
> living in captivity That's a big leap, and you've given no explanation for it. Perhaps we have different understandings of what captivity means, so it'd be helpful if you define your terms. To me, captivity is a location (or metaphorical location, so a situation) you want to leave, but can't. In the article, the narrator does not indicate a desire to leave, or any difficulty doing so if they wished. The bit about being recorded hints at it, but we'd have to assume there are no other cities in the world, or some other unstated bit about a police state.
- godelski 6y ago
  My cat almost never wants to go outside. She also isn't allowed outside. So is she captive or not? What if I let her out? She's still my pet and while I love her, she's captive. I'm not sure it would be different if she was an outdoor cat except her life expectancy would drop. Would you not define my cat (a pet) as captive?
  - xapata 6y ago
    For most pet cats, no. In my own experience with a pet cat, if he really wanted to run away, he could have. The opposite would happen. He'd sneak out when we weren't paying attention and then we'd accidentally lock him outside. We'd eventually hear the meowing and let him back in.
    - godelski 6y ago
      I find this odd, because despite my cat wanting to live inside, I find it very clear that she is a pet living in captivity. The fact she wants to live inside seems something more akin to stockholm syndrome or apathy. I think the difference is when it is humans we consider this kind of thing to be more Hukley-esk. My cat doesn't really have free will if I make her think she can go outside but I just give her that impression when she doesn't want to (good tactic to keep them from running out all the time btw. But why it is a good tactic is kinda the heart of this discussion).
      - xapata 6y ago
        I have a dog right now. He enjoys my company. I don't think he's a captive. I love him, he loves me. I let him off leash and he generally stays nearby. Am I a captive of my wife? I don't think so. Are children captives of their parents? I wouldn't use that word to describe the relationship.
        godelski 6y ago
        I think it is fuzzy. How do we define this line? Cults will often confine people to a location until they have been sufficiently brainwashed. At which point they will let them loose, often used to gain more followers. Are these people captive? But maybe using captive in only a pejorative sense is the problem. I don't think my cat hates me (quite the opposite!), rather she follows me around like a puppy dog and is clearly excited when I get home. But it is difficult for me to conclude that she is free. I really think the term is fuzzy and the boundaries are not clearly defined. If that is true, then hyperbole can be useful for us to question and refine that boundary. Questioning if we ourselves are captive when we don't realize it. After all, that's what Huxley portrayed. I don't think people in his story would consider themselves captive, but outsiders would. We could say the same about cults or certain followings. To one faith may be shackles and to another it may be liberating. The boundary isn't clear.
        xapata 6y ago
bccdee 6y ago
I have plenty of problems with this article, but I think it's a bit odd to consider dependency upon the institutions of - grocery stores - transportation - electricity - various repair-people such as electricians and plumbers - an employer - a well-regulated economy as "being a independent outdoor cat," but then suddenly once you're renting your clothes instead of buying them that's a bridge too far, and you're "captive."
- cle 6y ago
  We can't control most of those things, since they are already established and institutionalized and very difficult to change. However during the transition from buying to renting clothes, we do have an opportunity to influence the outcome. You're right that the terminology of "freedom" and "captivity" is weird...I've always thought it's strange because historically it's been so relative. But I think quibbling over where to draw the line is missing the point, and basically has the same problem as what you're decrying. When we have the power to influence the outcome of something, we shouldn't resign in despair because we can't cleanly classify it...we can still make informed decisions under that uncertainty.
- tengbretson 6y ago
  No matter where you stand on a number line it is always possible to look to the left and say "that direction is negative."
  - xapata 6y ago
    You've constructed a false linearity here. The concepts of freedom and captivity aren't well-suited to a linear continuum.
    - winston_smith 6y ago
      You've constructed a false irreducibility here. Freedom and captivity are opposed, and it's important to be able to say "this would be less free than that", even if that distinction isn't always clear cut.
- 6y ago
pmiller2 6y ago
I don't know. Except for the whole "my living room gets used for business meetings when I'm not there," thing and the bit about no privacy, I think this sounds wonderful, and we can do these things without sacrificing all of our privacy: > It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much. I guess maybe I'm an indoor cat?
helen___keller 6y ago
> What the author describes is humans living in captivity. > There is a cadre of people who argue, "really? you wouldn't survive a day outside this so-called captivity, tough guy" I don't understand, this piece is fiction so by definition we're all surviving outside that 'captivity', unless you're trying to extend it to say that all of modern society is also captivity
friendlybus 6y ago
You cant limit the power of billionaire tech heads, its pointless to try. The trick is in making people en masse disengage with the metaphysical powers that drag everyone back to the tech head's heels. Destroy the ontology, identity and neccesity of tech and you will have your material world back under the rule of a weapon, as it has been. Do you want that?

xapata 6y ago

> living in captivity That's a big leap, and you've given no explanation for it. Perhaps we have different understandings of what captivity means, so it'd be helpful if you define your terms. To me, captivity is a location (or metaphorical location, so a situation) you want to leave, but can't. In the article, the narrator does not indicate a desire to leave, or any difficulty doing so if they wished. The bit about being recorded hints at it, but we'd have to assume there are no other cities in the world, or some other unstated bit about a police state.

godelski 6y ago
My cat almost never wants to go outside. She also isn't allowed outside. So is she captive or not? What if I let her out? She's still my pet and while I love her, she's captive. I'm not sure it would be different if she was an outdoor cat except her life expectancy would drop. Would you not define my cat (a pet) as captive?
- xapata 6y ago
  For most pet cats, no. In my own experience with a pet cat, if he really wanted to run away, he could have. The opposite would happen. He'd sneak out when we weren't paying attention and then we'd accidentally lock him outside. We'd eventually hear the meowing and let him back in.
  - godelski 6y ago
    I find this odd, because despite my cat wanting to live inside, I find it very clear that she is a pet living in captivity. The fact she wants to live inside seems something more akin to stockholm syndrome or apathy. I think the difference is when it is humans we consider this kind of thing to be more Hukley-esk. My cat doesn't really have free will if I make her think she can go outside but I just give her that impression when she doesn't want to (good tactic to keep them from running out all the time btw. But why it is a good tactic is kinda the heart of this discussion).
    - xapata 6y ago
      I have a dog right now. He enjoys my company. I don't think he's a captive. I love him, he loves me. I let him off leash and he generally stays nearby. Am I a captive of my wife? I don't think so. Are children captives of their parents? I wouldn't use that word to describe the relationship.
      - godelski 6y ago
        I think it is fuzzy. How do we define this line? Cults will often confine people to a location until they have been sufficiently brainwashed. At which point they will let them loose, often used to gain more followers. Are these people captive? But maybe using captive in only a pejorative sense is the problem. I don't think my cat hates me (quite the opposite!), rather she follows me around like a puppy dog and is clearly excited when I get home. But it is difficult for me to conclude that she is free. I really think the term is fuzzy and the boundaries are not clearly defined. If that is true, then hyperbole can be useful for us to question and refine that boundary. Questioning if we ourselves are captive when we don't realize it. After all, that's what Huxley portrayed. I don't think people in his story would consider themselves captive, but outsiders would. We could say the same about cults or certain followings. To one faith may be shackles and to another it may be liberating. The boundary isn't clear.
        xapata 6y ago

bccdee 6y ago

I have plenty of problems with this article, but I think it's a bit odd to consider dependency upon the institutions of - grocery stores - transportation - electricity - various repair-people such as electricians and plumbers - an employer - a well-regulated economy as "being a independent outdoor cat," but then suddenly once you're renting your clothes instead of buying them that's a bridge too far, and you're "captive."

cle 6y ago
We can't control most of those things, since they are already established and institutionalized and very difficult to change. However during the transition from buying to renting clothes, we do have an opportunity to influence the outcome. You're right that the terminology of "freedom" and "captivity" is weird...I've always thought it's strange because historically it's been so relative. But I think quibbling over where to draw the line is missing the point, and basically has the same problem as what you're decrying. When we have the power to influence the outcome of something, we shouldn't resign in despair because we can't cleanly classify it...we can still make informed decisions under that uncertainty.
tengbretson 6y ago
No matter where you stand on a number line it is always possible to look to the left and say "that direction is negative."
- xapata 6y ago
  You've constructed a false linearity here. The concepts of freedom and captivity aren't well-suited to a linear continuum.
  - winston_smith 6y ago
    You've constructed a false irreducibility here. Freedom and captivity are opposed, and it's important to be able to say "this would be less free than that", even if that distinction isn't always clear cut.
6y ago

pmiller2 6y ago

I don't know. Except for the whole "my living room gets used for business meetings when I'm not there," thing and the bit about no privacy, I think this sounds wonderful, and we can do these things without sacrificing all of our privacy: > It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much. I guess maybe I'm an indoor cat?

helen___keller 6y ago

> What the author describes is humans living in captivity. > There is a cadre of people who argue, "really? you wouldn't survive a day outside this so-called captivity, tough guy" I don't understand, this piece is fiction so by definition we're all surviving outside that 'captivity', unless you're trying to extend it to say that all of modern society is also captivity

friendlybus 6y ago

You cant limit the power of billionaire tech heads, its pointless to try. The trick is in making people en masse disengage with the metaphysical powers that drag everyone back to the tech head's heels. Destroy the ontology, identity and neccesity of tech and you will have your material world back under the rule of a weapon, as it has been. Do you want that?