5 ms·
“As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth’s final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose l
by N_Lens 4mo ago
“As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth’s final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.”
- Commissioner Pravin Lal, Datalinks
Alpha Centauri pertinent as ever.
- godwinson__4-8 4mo agoGet off my land, you peacekeeping son-of-a-bitch! Best 4x game of all time. The 2060 that game envisioned seems closer everyday.
- Pxtl 4mo agoThe "information wants to be free" discourse of just under 30 years ago feels so charmingly naive now that we've seen how lies are also information and can travel even better using the same flow.
- _def 4mo agoTruly something we still have to figure out. Attention budget is real and things can get buried. The really big problem of our time.
- LudwigNagasena 4mo agoWhat exactly is this "information wants to be free" discourse? The arguments for and against freedom of speech as a foundational social principle span at least 300 continuous years.
- latexr 4mo ago> What exactly is this "information wants to be free" discourse? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_wants_to_be_free https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_wants_to_be_free > The arguments for and against freedom of speech It’s not about freedom of speech but about access to information.
- LudwigNagasena 4mo agoThe discussions about intellectual property rights are quite recent, but the idea that "lies are also information and can travel even better using the same flow" was well-explored over 300 years of discussions about freedom of speech (and not only discussions, but also jailings, executions, witch hunts, etc).
- latexr 4mo agoI think it should be pretty obvious that dissemination of information and lies today—when you can’t even know if the person on the other side is real or from your own country—is much different than 300 years ago. The “information wants to be free” motivation is much closer to the world of today than the one in your distant past. More importantly, I don’t understand why you’re so hung up on that. What difference does it make? If you agree with the conclusion, why are the dates of when the idea started so important? It doesn’t matter to the discussion, it’s only distracting from the point.
- LudwigNagasena 4mo ago> I think it should be pretty obvious that dissemination of information and lies today much different than 300 years ago. Of course, so what? If your implication is that none of the arguments made over 300 years are relevant today, I would say it is pretty obviously completely wrong. > when you can’t even know if the person on the other side is real or from your own country Did people in England and France use to know the authors of seditious pamphlets that were produced in the Dutch Republic and smuggled into those countries? Most of them were anonymous. Not only they didn't know the authors, the authors 100% were enabled by foreign actors. > it’s only distracting from the point The point: we've seen recently how damaging the fast spread of lies is therefore only naive fools would be against information control. My rebuttal: we've seen how damaging lies are for 300 years, yet it is a deep ongoing debate that many great thinkers contributed to, therefore it is not just a matter of fools believing into something. Or do you see "the point" to be something different?
- 4mo ago
- CalRobert 4mo agopopular refrain around the "Free Kevin" era ca. 1999 or so. See also "Boycott RIAA" etc. I shared its optimism and naivete :-(
- pibaker 4mo agoAnd who shall we appoint at the supreme arbitrator of what is lie and what is knowledge? Some of us remember when they assured us that the novel virus in china was not to be afraid of.
- chadgpt3 4mo agoSome of us remember when they assured us ivermectin could cure it.
- Pxtl 4mo agoAnd hydroxychloroquine before that.
- Cthulhu_ 4mo agoAnd it wasn't, until it was. Before Covid-19 we had SARS and MERS, both of which were also watched closely but those didn't develop into a pandemic.
- Pxtl 4mo ago> And who shall we appoint at the supreme arbitrator of what is lie and what is knowledge? Ask the parents of the Sandy Hook children, they'll tell you.
- akimbostrawman 4mo agoWhy do you assuming only true information is information. Information can be anything not to mention that the definition of truths and lies can change with time and location.
- Pxtl 4mo agoMy point is that in the late '90s that was the prevailing assumption about the growth of the internet. We have learned that this assumption was wrong. > the definition of truths and lies can change with time and location This is moral relativism.
- akimbostrawman 4mo ago>We have learned that this assumption was wrong. I don't see how the existence of wrong or disinformation somehow makes that assumption wrong. Considering the amounts of (true) information you can freely access with the internet right now that is being otherwise suppressed. >This is moral relativism. There exists change of truths outside of moral ones, science for example.
- iberator 4mo agoGREATEST strategy and philosophical game I have witnessed in the past 30 years... Peak of complexity and maturism in games...
- chaostheory 4mo agoI wish they would release a remastered version of the game with updated graphics and movies, with nothing else changed. The game mechanics were great. Beyond Earth was not good in comparison.
- StefanBatory 4mo agoBE was so bland. Both in design and in terms of gameplay. Terrain affected like nothing. I found the strat to go was to spam Scouts for resources, then get that upgrade that gave you Science per deal and spam every cheap deal as soon as you can.
- a056e15e 4mo ago[dead]
- Am4TIfIsER0ppos 4mo agoAs a child I never liked the AI's strategy to plop cities down right next to each other. I should see if I can understand that as an adult. If I was designing a remake/remaster it wouldn't even have updated graphics just change the AI.
- iberator 4mo agoI think that there are actually mods for this game chaning the AI. Actually you can create your own custom faction using just config files and notepad - all out of the box:)
- chaostheory 4mo ago"Already we have turned all of our critical industries... over to these... things... these lumps of silver and paste we call nanorobots. And now we propose to teach them intelligence? What, pray tell, will we do when these little homunculi awaken one day and announce that they have no further need of us?" Sister Miriam Godwinson, We Must Dissent This game and its ideas are so timeless.
- rootlocus 4mo agoWe have abundant free flow of information today and yet I see a rise of tyranny. "This is how democracy dies, with thunderous applause." feels more grounded in reality.
- fedeb95 4mo agoNot entirely true. Many science is gatekeeped, as well as other types of information. May books require illegal services to be obtained, or money (when available). Information about facts is buried in a lot of misinformation. Free flow is very hard to obtain!
- wongarsu 4mo agoPeak free information flow was in 2010. When "social" media had its big break through, and nobody had learned how to control it yet. That time gave us the occupy movement, the Arab spring, and lots of hacktivism for the social good (mostly under the Anonymous umbrella). Then the counter movement happened. And let's just say by 2016 social media was firmly under control and became a force against the people
- pjc50 4mo agoYeah. I was saying "twitter gives you a revolution whether you need one or not". It's not automatic that the revolution will be progressive. And in the case of the Arab Spring, a liberal revolution gave rise to elections which brought in a much less liberal government, which is why the whole thing collapsed in short order. But social media is also uniquely good at developing "negative polarization". Some of the counter movement was organic simply because people hated the progressive wins they saw.
- prox 4mo agoI believe we are in crisis. The distance between what is said and what is known to be true has become an abyss. Of all the things at risk, the loss of an objective reality is perhaps the most dangerous. The death of truth is the ultimate victory of evil. When truth leaves us, when we let it slip away, when it is ripped from our hands, we become vulnerable to the appetite of whatever screams at us the loudest. (from S2 Andor) The loss of objectivity is one of the greatest losses. People who are online to want their trench to “win” are advocates for loss. People who abuse their position to only proclaim their side is the best, the all-knowing, the superior, or whatever the flavor is of the day, are advocates for loss. And as we have seen, we are losing a lot by losing objectivity.
- ninalanyon 4mo agoIs it really a safeguard?
- akurtzhs 4mo ago"We are no longer particularly in the business of writing software to perform specific tasks. We now teach the software how to learn, and in the primary bonding process it molds itself around the task to be performed. The feedback loop never really ends, so a tenth year polysentience can be a priceless jewel or a psychotic wreck, but it is the primary bonding process--the childhood, if you will--that has the most far-reaching repercussions." - Bad'l Ron, Wakener, Morgan Polysoft