Jump to content
IGNORED

New Luddism


sheatheman

Recommended Posts

 

I have come to the point where I am convinced that a new luddism is necessary. There needs to be a louder voice questioning what the drive towards technological development is costing us as a species.

 

fast forward 2 years and content is worse than ever and i am more addicted than ever to the worst content ever. sad stuff. having a kid and raising him these past 18-19 months has made me realize just how hard it is to resist our species dark trend toward technological automation.

 

we really are caught in an ocean. we can say we are woke but in reality we are just clinging to the plastic flotilla.

 

i mean, where can we actually go? because physically we can't live without it. you give an indian slum family $$$ and the first thing they will do is wire themselves up for internet.

 

back before i had this job in contracting (project manager), and back before my son was born, i thought i had a better handle on it. i walked everywhere and ate minimally and had a pretty clear head for a long time.

 

now i just watch gordon ramsay clips passively with my eyes throbbing, and i drive 120 miles a day.

 

you....you embody it, you live it, and you are aware of it. I give you "thanks" for your sacrifice.

 

edit:

 

I'm gonna make a better post about this topic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order for the individual mind to survive the coming decades, it will be necessary to dis-integrate oneself from technology. You're either hurdling towards the hive mind, or retreating into the forests.

 

I am serious about this. I think we will see a growing movement of anti-digital, anti-content types. New luddism, post internet, whatever you want to call it.

 

Are you pro hive or pro forest?

 

Or maybe technologies will enable us to behave in a more traditionally tribal way

 

I imagine in the future, once we achieve some technological utopia - if we did - well my idea of a utopia would be a reversion to simple living quite frankly.  And maybe that will finally be enabled through technological advancement and efficiency gains for society.  A full loop back to the beginning, except this time we're stable and not fighting to survive, with that lifestyle being a necessity.  Now it's an option and that makes it nice

 

Maybe I'm being naive.  It will most likely be dystopic.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The internet is pretty scary.  We're kind of creating this big distributed brain we all connect to, and we use it to arrange our behavior now, quite literally, through for instance Google maps.  Similar to the brain orchestrating the behavior of organ systems and the organ systems orchestrating the behavior of individual cells, I believe we are creating for ourselves a social brain, except it's something bigger than us that we don't understand.  We are accidentally creating technologies whose emergent combined behavior is above the capabilities of any individual, and letting it control us through subtle social manipulation techniques

 

I don't mean this in "the internet has a mind of its own and is going to take us over" I just mean that it's a natural emergent process.  Bacteria, through cooperation, accidentally form multi-cellular organisms.  Similar, societies of intelligent organisms may inadvertently form social hyper-organismic structures by creating coordinating systems analogous to the brain - in our case the internet and artificial intelligence

 

I think the case is quite cut and dry on this now that I think about it and I don't know whether to like it or hate it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's say that my above post is true, and to me it seems true.  It seems a reasonable explanation.  So what should our reaction be?  Disgust?  Fear?  Should we turn back and avoid it?  I don't know whether I can say with certainty that we necessarily should.  What if the bacteria did that and all refused to cooperate in a way that formed multicellular organisms?  We wouldn't even be here to contemplate that decision.  Similarly what if we refuse to cooperate, since this cooperation is merely the result of the globalism of any economic or political system.  If we refuse we may be refusing to give birth to a higher order form of life, the social organism, but this time a more literal type.  Okay I'm rambling now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the main thing technology does is increase the profits of capitalism.

 

feel like technology today makes human race adapt to it like a virus

 

when really the only way to be is like an oak tree.

 

maybe technology aint bad. but what is bad is instant gratification. and all tech companies are doing now is pandering to everyone's laziness and selfishness.

 

there's a whole real world out there but i feel like we are approaching a moment where the real world, the one people want to live in, is the world of social media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the main thing technology does is increase the profits of capitalism.

 

feel like technology today makes human race adapt to it like a virus

 

when really the only way to be is like an oak tree.

 

maybe technology aint bad. but what is bad is instant gratification. and all tech companies are doing now is pandering to everyone's laziness and selfishness.

 

there's a whole real world out there but i feel like we are approaching a moment where the real world, the one people want to live in, is the world of social media.

 

Yeah, sustainable energy solutions and new surgical techniques are just for increasing the profits of capitalism /s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the main thing technology does is increase the profits of capitalism.

 

feel like technology today makes human race adapt to it like a virus

 

when really the only way to be is like an oak tree.

 

maybe technology aint bad. but what is bad is instant gratification. and all tech companies are doing now is pandering to everyone's laziness and selfishness.

 

there's a whole real world out there but i feel like we are approaching a moment where the real world, the one people want to live in, is the world of social media.

I don't think it's as dramatic as all that, if you spend too much time on the internet, make it a focused project of switching off all your devices and spend a good block of time doing something entirely different. Take up an outdoor hobby, do some woodcraft, something purposefully old fashioned that takes time, something very tangible that trains your motor skills and gets your mind into another gear, counterbalance the convenience and speed of computers/internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

the main thing technology does is increase the profits of capitalism.

 

feel like technology today makes human race adapt to it like a virus

 

when really the only way to be is like an oak tree.

 

maybe technology aint bad. but what is bad is instant gratification. and all tech companies are doing now is pandering to everyone's laziness and selfishness.

 

there's a whole real world out there but i feel like we are approaching a moment where the real world, the one people want to live in, is the world of social media.

 

Yeah, sustainable energy solutions and new surgical techniques are just for increasing the profits of capitalism /s

Surgery equals Keep people (consumer) alive longer.

 

Sustainable energy equals deliver goods more effectively.

Edited by sheathe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

the main thing technology does is increase the profits of capitalism.

 

feel like technology today makes human race adapt to it like a virus.

 

maybe technology aint bad. but what is bad is instant gratification. and all tech companies are doing now is pandering to everyone's laziness and selfishness.

 

there's a whole real world out there but i feel like we are approaching a moment where the real world, the one people want to live in, is the world of social media.

I don't think it's as dramatic as all that

 

I think it is as dramatic as that, probably even more so. Often the leading concept informing the development of each new superfluous social media app or feature is making something compulsive, addictive, and retaining users. The culture of silicon valley is messianic and utopian— these companies really believe they are uplifting humanity — they want to be seen as a benevolent rogue technocracy, fresh blood doing things better and faster and more efficiently — the underdog rising up and beating governments at their own game. But they are still controlled by a bottom line. They are for-profit companies and ultimately not responsible for the duties of government.

 

What I object to and think the most dangerous is their monopoly on shaping culture and the social world around us. One might say that everyone has the choice to opt-out, but that isn't true. Their "positive disruption" inevitably forces the institutions they compete with to resign to obsolescence and dissolution. That pattern is thusly applied to people — opt in or resign yourself to obsolescence. They call it progress but it's actually a process of consolidating all competition. And what is so insidious to me is that this "world" of social media by necessity needs to appeal to people. It depends on people enjoying (or at least thinking they enjoy) using social media. It uses the psychology of social inclusion to ensure that there is no alternative world. Outside of their "world" only lies social exclusion, which is a proven link to discrimination and mental illness. For the people who have grown up with social media, there is only one world and that world is provided by private companies — Facebook and Google and Instagram and Steam and so on and so forth. They maintain no distinction and at this point a distinction would be arbitrary anyhow.

 

Why is this all so awful? Tune in next post for more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't have to use Facebook and you aren't missing out on much.  I don't even have a Facebook account.  

 

Some technologies are inherently superior to others for a given purpose.  The printing press squeezes out hand-printing, but you can always choose to go and hand-transcribe a book if you want.  You don't want to though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also you can feel free to join the world of software development and you will realize it's a deep, borderless culture based on abstract thinking and discrimination-less meritocracy.  To claim this is all exclusionary is a bit insincere.  


Also I don't know if this has been posted in here, but this thread seems very related to the Unabomber's manifesto which I've still not fully read yet but need to.  I don't mean that in a bad way, I mean literally this is the exact topic it's about and it has merit despite the horrendous way he chose to spread his ideas.  As long as you ignore the racist bullshit he wrote in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

the main thing technology does is increase the profits of capitalism.

 

feel like technology today makes human race adapt to it like a virus.

 

maybe technology aint bad. but what is bad is instant gratification. and all tech companies are doing now is pandering to everyone's laziness and selfishness.

 

there's a whole real world out there but i feel like we are approaching a moment where the real world, the one people want to live in, is the world of social media.

I don't think it's as dramatic as all that

 

I think it is as dramatic as that, probably even more so. Often the leading concept informing the development of each new superfluous social media app or feature is making something compulsive, addictive, and retaining users. The culture of silicon valley is messianic and utopian— these companies really believe they are uplifting humanity — they want to be seen as a benevolent rogue technocracy, fresh blood doing things better and faster and more efficiently — the underdog rising up and beating governments at their own game. But they are still controlled by a bottom line. They are for-profit companies and ultimately not responsible for the duties of government.

 

What I object to and think the most dangerous is their monopoly on shaping culture and the social world around us. One might say that everyone has the choice to opt-out, but that isn't true. Their "positive disruption" inevitably forces the institutions they compete with to resign to obsolescence and dissolution. That pattern is thusly applied to people — opt in or resign yourself to obsolescence. They call it progress but it's actually a process of consolidating all competition. And what is so insidious to me is that this "world" of social media by necessity needs to appeal to people. It depends on people enjoying (or at least thinking they enjoy) using social media. It uses the psychology of social inclusion to ensure that there is no alternative world. Outside of their "world" only lies social exclusion, which is a proven link to discrimination and mental illness. For the people who have grown up with social media, there is only one world and that world is provided by private companies — Facebook and Google and Instagram and Steam and so on and so forth. They maintain no distinction and at this point a distinction would be arbitrary anyhow.

 

Why is this all so awful? Tune in next post for more.

 

 

do you live in the Black Mirror episode '15 million Merits'? It's a dystopian view you have there, you make it sound like the internet is some world in an of itself, I see it as basically a huge library, communications platform and global games console.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you see it that way. Tell me, is your subjective experience the basis for any far-reaching conslusions? Maybe it is, I don't know. The internet may contain libraries of all sorts. I think you misread me. I explicitly stated that for people who have grown up with social media (and therefore the internet), there is no distinction —social media world is the only world.

 

In this society, there is no relevant offline world.

Edited by Salvatorin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe we will all be long dead and in the boundless infinity of the universe it won't matter. neither will it matter what the individual or society does or doesn't..

 

 

now back to furious masturbation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

more seriously tho, with this perspective in mind.. I believe nothing is inherently bad, or good. the internet has been there first as a means of communication and it simply has evolved according to what people desire and what is most profitable. social media, games, entertainment are a reflection of what each individual wants... to share their thoughts, be entertained with others etc.

 

so our human nature and desires are the same but the way in which we express them is changing.. and I foresee it will keep changing maybe to the point where society is unrecognizable from what it is now... is that bad? iunno

 

I don't have a point here, just trying to spark discussion.. this is a very interesting topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you see it that way. Tell me, is your subjective experience the basis for any far-reaching conslusions? Maybe it is, I don't know. The internet may contain libraries of all sorts. I think you misread me. I explicitly stated that for people who have grown up with social media (and therefore the internet), there is no distinction —social media world is the only world.

 

In this society, there is no relevant offline world.

 

Are you joking now? How did you manage to reach such a conclusion

 

 

more seriously tho, with this perspective in mind.. I believe nothing is inherently bad, or good. the internet has been there first as a means of communication and it simply has evolved according to what people desire and what is most profitable. social media, games, entertainment are a reflection of what each individual wants... to share their thoughts, be entertained with others etc.

 

so our human nature and desires are the same but the way in which we express them is changing.. and I foresee it will keep changing maybe to the point where society is unrecognizable from what it is now... is that bad? iunno

 

I don't have a point here, just trying to spark discussion.. this is a very interesting topic.

 

Totally agreed on this, and I'm not even particularly pro technology. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

re balking at "there is no relevant offline world"...

 

yall need to come visit the ole US (visit salv in nyc) and walk a few miles in the streets. go into a public library an hour before close and you will see borderline homeless people huddled near power outlets charging their phone, scrolling, scrolling scrolling, their belongings in a plastic grocery bag.
 
i would say, there is an inverse relationship between one's income level and one's freedom to "take up woodcrafting to achieve balance," although there is a colony of homeless people near the library that makes palm leaf crosses...

 

yeah, i'd say the top minds in silicon valley are ultimately preying on the most vulnerable, re: mental health.

 

i love most of all the pros of technology that yall love, but ditch the utopia bullshit. if there is a technology oasis, it's in the middle of a planet-sized wasteland.

Edited by sheathe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i love most of all the pros of technology that yall love, but ditch the utopia bullshit. if there is a technology oasis, it's in the middle of a planet-sized wasteland.

id say ditch the notion of utopia entierly, I see no way of humanity getting there.. but hell what do I know

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.