3 ms·

I was confused by this too. I thought the GSVs were pretty neat, and the world of The Culture was generally better for the median person than our world is. By f

I was confused by this too. I thought the GSVs were pretty neat, and the world of The Culture was generally better for the median person than our world is. By far, probably. I'm aware that those books were originally intended to be a sort of parody of Star Trek's techno-utopianism, but I'll be honest, I'd trade either of those imaginary worlds for ours. Maybe Stross would say I'm credulous.

ceejayoz 3y ago
Stross would point out Banks was an avowed socialist writing about space commies who change gender at will as the good guys, with Musk-style megabillionaires like Veppers as the bad guys.
- throwaway4aday 3y ago
  In that case the irony is strongly in Musks favour with the failure of socialism to produce anything useful and the runaway success of a megabillionair in increasing access to space.
  - kmeisthax 3y ago
    >failure of socialism to produce anything useful The Soviets were kicking America's ass in the space race up until Kennedy said "Fuck everything, we're doing five blades[0]" and shot for the literal moon. They absolutely could produce useful things, the problem was that those useful things were produced at the expense of other, possibly more useful things. Eventually the US was able to exploit this by electing a crazy person to spook the Soviets into overspending on their military, which is why we survived with merely a huge deficit spending problem rather than extreme rationing and starvation. However, the gross misallocation of resources done under Soviet communism is not unique to Soviet communism. Capitalists do it all the time, the only difference is that free markets usually punish them for it quicker. But they don't always punish. People like Musk can still spend loads of other people's money on useless bullshit, like Twitter, or sending people to Mars[1]. [0] https://www.theonion.com/fuck-everything-were-doing-five-blades-1819584036 https://www.theonion.com/fuck-everything-were-doing-five-bla... [1] Mars is a dead rock covered in poison constantly being blasted with radiation. It wants to kill you in more ways than regular ol' space wants to kill you, and making it not kill you is likely impossible given our current technological capability. Anyone going to Mars today will be condemning themselves to living the rest of their lives out in a very small bubble of rad-shielded underground bunker.
    - throwaway4aday 3y ago
      "other people's money" The whole universe is trying to kill us so I'm generally in favour of finding new ways to fight against that pernicious form of lazy entropy. If a socialist strategy involves taking other people's food from out their mouths in order to build rockets that's a much worse plan than convincing them to give you their discretionary income in order to fund ventures that they can also pay for and benefit from. Central planning is a fool's errand that harms everyone in the long run.
- gary_0 3y ago
  > Stross would point out In fact, he has: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38221741 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38221741
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  Stross is employing his skill as a professional fiction writer to bend facts and ideas so hard they loop on themselves, just to shit at the favorite tech industry punching bags, whether it makes sense or not. It's both clever and depressing.
- karaterobot 3y ago
  I'm genuinely not sure how that changes anything. You can appreciate something while disagreeing with the politics of it—or of the author, which are often separate. You can especially like certain aspects of something without liking the politics of the entire thing. I assume that's what happened here.
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    Nah. We have Musk’s own words to go on here. He just… missed the point. “If you must know, I am a utopian anarchist of the kind best described by Iain Banks” https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1008120904759402501 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1008120904759402501 “Iain certainly wasn’t pro-union in the Culture books. At all. And wouldn’t be in the case of Tesla. Banks was about freedom through & through.” https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1008389798740963329 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1008389798740963329
    - cmrdporcupine 3y ago
      Musk clearly has no idea what Banks stood for, because he has deluded himself that his brand of libertarian capitalism is somehow liberatory and progressive when it's just papered-over elitist free market absolutist hogwash, from someone who read too much Ayn Rand as a teenager and never grew out of it. Just like a lot of folks on this group. Bring on the downvotes! I know you got 'em! ... And because he has the usual North American biases about what socialism -- let alone communism (small c) -- is he can't even recognize a self-avowed communist when he's standing right in front of his face. Special Circumstances would likely... take care... of someone like Musk.
    - sangnoir 3y ago
      > Iain certainly wasn’t pro-union in the Culture books. At all. WTF does this even mean? Does Musk think the people and minds of the Culture were gainfully employed?! You can't be pro-union when there are no employers/employees - that's not even wrong.

ceejayoz 3y ago

Stross would point out Banks was an avowed socialist writing about space commies who change gender at will as the good guys, with Musk-style megabillionaires like Veppers as the bad guys.

throwaway4aday 3y ago
In that case the irony is strongly in Musks favour with the failure of socialism to produce anything useful and the runaway success of a megabillionair in increasing access to space.
- kmeisthax 3y ago
  >failure of socialism to produce anything useful The Soviets were kicking America's ass in the space race up until Kennedy said "Fuck everything, we're doing five blades[0]" and shot for the literal moon. They absolutely could produce useful things, the problem was that those useful things were produced at the expense of other, possibly more useful things. Eventually the US was able to exploit this by electing a crazy person to spook the Soviets into overspending on their military, which is why we survived with merely a huge deficit spending problem rather than extreme rationing and starvation. However, the gross misallocation of resources done under Soviet communism is not unique to Soviet communism. Capitalists do it all the time, the only difference is that free markets usually punish them for it quicker. But they don't always punish. People like Musk can still spend loads of other people's money on useless bullshit, like Twitter, or sending people to Mars[1]. [0] https://www.theonion.com/fuck-everything-were-doing-five-blades-1819584036 https://www.theonion.com/fuck-everything-were-doing-five-bla... [1] Mars is a dead rock covered in poison constantly being blasted with radiation. It wants to kill you in more ways than regular ol' space wants to kill you, and making it not kill you is likely impossible given our current technological capability. Anyone going to Mars today will be condemning themselves to living the rest of their lives out in a very small bubble of rad-shielded underground bunker.
  - throwaway4aday 3y ago
    "other people's money" The whole universe is trying to kill us so I'm generally in favour of finding new ways to fight against that pernicious form of lazy entropy. If a socialist strategy involves taking other people's food from out their mouths in order to build rockets that's a much worse plan than convincing them to give you their discretionary income in order to fund ventures that they can also pay for and benefit from. Central planning is a fool's errand that harms everyone in the long run.
gary_0 3y ago
> Stross would point out In fact, he has: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38221741 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38221741
TeMPOraL 3y ago
Stross is employing his skill as a professional fiction writer to bend facts and ideas so hard they loop on themselves, just to shit at the favorite tech industry punching bags, whether it makes sense or not. It's both clever and depressing.
karaterobot 3y ago
I'm genuinely not sure how that changes anything. You can appreciate something while disagreeing with the politics of it—or of the author, which are often separate. You can especially like certain aspects of something without liking the politics of the entire thing. I assume that's what happened here.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  Nah. We have Musk’s own words to go on here. He just… missed the point. “If you must know, I am a utopian anarchist of the kind best described by Iain Banks” https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1008120904759402501 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1008120904759402501 “Iain certainly wasn’t pro-union in the Culture books. At all. And wouldn’t be in the case of Tesla. Banks was about freedom through & through.” https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1008389798740963329 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1008389798740963329
  - cmrdporcupine 3y ago
    Musk clearly has no idea what Banks stood for, because he has deluded himself that his brand of libertarian capitalism is somehow liberatory and progressive when it's just papered-over elitist free market absolutist hogwash, from someone who read too much Ayn Rand as a teenager and never grew out of it. Just like a lot of folks on this group. Bring on the downvotes! I know you got 'em! ... And because he has the usual North American biases about what socialism -- let alone communism (small c) -- is he can't even recognize a self-avowed communist when he's standing right in front of his face. Special Circumstances would likely... take care... of someone like Musk.
  - sangnoir 3y ago
    > Iain certainly wasn’t pro-union in the Culture books. At all. WTF does this even mean? Does Musk think the people and minds of the Culture were gainfully employed?! You can't be pro-union when there are no employers/employees - that's not even wrong.