🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 14:59:54 UTC No. 16486421
Give me your best arguments against Uncle Ted
B00T at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 15:01:15 UTC No. 16486423
" We needed you to fart, THEN, Ted "
" When you were over our moufs "
There
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 15:05:40 UTC No. 16486428
>>16486421
Bombs people, gets no results done.
I could say cult leaders have been more influential than him, if he had such high IQ he would have known how to get popular opinion to favor his views.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 15:08:37 UTC No. 16486435
>>16486428
His goal was to spread the message, in which he succeeded.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 16:45:33 UTC No. 16486560
>>16486435
A message for what? To rant? What a fucking manchild.
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 16:58:52 UTC No. 16486577
>>16486560
the truth. what a fucking jew
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:17:54 UTC No. 16486592
>>16486577
Okay and? Did he get well armed militia groups to fight for his ideas or carve up a political sphere to influence the masses? Words alone mean nothing, you need power to backup your claims or ideas.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:18:57 UTC No. 16486594
>>16486421
Literally just kill all real estate (((speculators))) and stop pushing kids straight into college and his arguments go away
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:35:42 UTC No. 16486610
>>16486560
That growth and technology aren’t inherently good and there is a solution (that being violent revolution against technology)
>>16486594
I think you misunderstand his arguments. To simplify they are
>industrial society is inherently less satisfactory than pre-industrial society (lack of the power process)
>Industrial society (and civilization in general) are inherently limiting in your freedoms and dignity, and there is no way redeem or change industrial society without sacrificing individual dignity and autonomy
>You can’t just “ignore” technology because you will always essentially be forced upon you (perfect example is the automobile)
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:40:30 UTC No. 16486619
>>16486421
bombs are technology
he stopped living his creed
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:44:12 UTC No. 16486626
>>16486619
Assuming you aren’t just taking the piss
1 Ted fully acknowledged you have to use technology to destroy technology
2 there’s nothing wrong with technology that doesn’t hamper an individual’s autonomy, dignity, and power process
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:52:02 UTC No. 16486638
>>16486421
Ted was a niggerfaggot that larped as a primitivist but lived in a small cabin on the periphery of civilization, regularly stealing tools and other fruits of technology so that he could make his primitive larp more bearable. What a faggot
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:56:50 UTC No. 16486643
>>16486626
Ted could've acknowledged that you can use technology to become independent of technology
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:00:43 UTC No. 16486648
>>16486421
Just another terrorist schizo jew.
B00T at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:01:40 UTC No. 16486651
>>16486648
Covert Jewry detected
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:03:05 UTC No. 16486653
>>16486643
You are putting blind trust in technology that it will magically make everything better. The past 200 years industrial technology has only made things largely worse for the common man while scientists keep spouting “30 more years and technology will make the world a utopia!”
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:12:47 UTC No. 16486663
>>16486653
You misunderstand, i hate tech, especially transhumanism that leaves alot of humans behind (and the idea of humanity). The shabaka stone deserves to be a millstone. Im only here out of a misplaced sense of altruism and peer pressure
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:13:47 UTC No. 16486665
>>16486653
I have no idea how you can believe this, so many things in the modern world make life easy
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:25:32 UTC No. 16486680
>>16486610
You told me his message, now what?
I can disagree with him very simply, by saying
>Violence bad
Now what? How is he going to convince me implying that's what he wants, put a bomb to make me see that violence is indeed bad and make me dismiss the rest of his message?
And if his intention was not to convince me, then it's a rant. Why didn't he rant to a tree or a dog or a random hobo in the street if that would suffice?
He has been judged correctly by society. He's a schizo fuck. He's not intelligent, he's a dumbass who dreamed of bullshit and accordingly couldn't imagine a plan to make his wishful thinking a reality.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:59:40 UTC No. 16486741
>>16486663
Ah I see, carry on then.
>>16486665
We have many amenities yes, but there is good evidence to suggest we live far less fulfilling lives than hunter gatherers or substance farmers. Those people undoubtedly live harder lives but are content with those lives
>>16486680
Just because he hasn’t convinced YOU doesn’t mean he hasn’t convinced many other people. Ted knew that this viewpoint would never get the majority of people to follow it. All it needs is a small group of committed intellectuals. Industrial society is extremely fragile and has to be kept up by numerous interconnected systems. It takes much longer to reconnect a power line than to say, chop it down with axe. Have you actually read the manifesto?
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 19:09:14 UTC No. 16486754
>>16486435
>his goal
It was the FBI's goal. They mk ultra'd him. He wasn't in control of his actions.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 19:13:13 UTC No. 16486760
>>16486754
Do basic research before posting, his role in the MK ultra program was as follows
>professor invites student into room to debate a certain subject
>professor was instructed to lambast, mock, and deride the student to see if the student would back down or change their view
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 19:21:27 UTC No. 16486777
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 19:22:05 UTC No. 16486779
>>16486741
>Just because he hasn't convinced YOU doesn't mean he hasn't convinced many other people.
So? Where are the results? Where is the change? Name the neoludite primitivist party and how many votes they got in the most recent election in ANY shithole country.
There is none, because all he did was rant. He couldn't cook up a plan, he isn't a leader, he is a schizo who killed people for a fucking rant and deserves nothing short of what he got.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 19:36:48 UTC No. 16486811
>>16486779
One terrorist organization inspired by Ted is individuals tending toward the wild/individuals tending towards savagery. To say he hasn’t inspired any groups is wrong.
It’s clear you haven’t read a single word of Ted’s because he clearly states that the Revolution must happen at a time of critical weakness of the techno-industrial world order (such as major war, global disease outbreak, etc) and in the meantime the revolutionaries must either lie lower and consolidate resources or do small scale attacks.
Unfortunately you are right about one thing, many of Ted’s followers believe that industrial society will fall in about 15-20 years. And have largely just built homesteads
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 19:38:52 UTC No. 16486819
>>16486421
I like playing vidya. Suck it. Singularity eventually.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 19:40:35 UTC No. 16486824
>>16486653
>he past 200 years industrial technology has only made things largely worse for the common man
Thats a fucking wild take.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 20:51:39 UTC No. 16486952
>>16486824
it's true, substance farmers, hunter-gatherers, and pastoralists have all been shown to live happier lives than modern industrial "civilized" people. The beginning of the Industrial Revolution was especially terrible, work 6 days a week in 12-hour shifts in a dark, dank factory and had a get risk of an amputation while working the machinery. All this to be paid a pittance just enough to buy some stale bread. True that industrial society slowly became more bearable but it's still leagues worse than actual ways of living.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 22:00:34 UTC No. 16487051
>>16486811
>Individuals tending toward the wild
Literally who? Never heard of them. You just made that up didn't you?
>LE REVOLUTION must happen at a major war or global disease outbreak
Like Covid-19? What major fucking war, there's always war and after every war the first thing people think of is rebuilding, afterwards someone of the strongest ideological current of the time takes the power vacuum and prolongs himself with, guess what, technology. The fact that this nigger is only heard of in alt-right memes and schizo boards proves he achieved nothing. He didn't start a movement, he didn't leave a plan because he had none. Fucking Marx retarded as he is left a fucking plan, people followed him not long after he wrote shit, took over a country and stood for 70 years. Ted is a fucking joke.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 22:29:48 UTC No. 16487107
>>16487051
Discussing this with you is worthless because it’s clear you have no intention of actually reading the text or his following writings. You are debating something you know nothing about, here I’ll link it to you
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-s
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Nov 2024 22:49:03 UTC No. 16487143
>>16486421
That his plan to solve the problem didn't seem viable, and moreover that he failed to really sell his alternative over what we already have, flawed as that is.
His diagnosis of the problems of 'industrial society' are genuinely excellent. Derivative of Ellul, but efficiently expressed and substantially added to with his own life experiences, perspectives, and impressively prescient predictions. In spite of all that, I was not sold that living innawoods would be personally preferable to the industrial society. A vast effort of swimming against the tide for the sake of trading the new iniquities for archaic ones. Perhaps it speaks to a weakness in my own character, but the bread and circuses are things I quite enjoy, actually, and the charms of a rustic primitivism don't seem worth the squeeze of the billions that would need to be killed first.
Aside from that, I think it was already too late for his proposed global revolt against technology to be viable in even his own time of writing, let alone in ours if we read him now.
The System's Neatest Trick was him at his best, a really incisive analysis of a particular bit of the way society works. Also the whole thing with the bombs was pretty funny. I fully respect his marketing and largely respect him as a man. I think more people should read his work, but his program just isn't for me, and I think it probably isn't for most other people either. He is correct about the problems, but I think we need better solutions than what he offered.
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 09:12:43 UTC No. 16487666
>>16486421
>technology make our lives shitty and will destroy us
>so let's go back to the shit people ran from by developing technology (but it's totally a better life, trust me dude!) and wait for an asteroid to destroy us instead
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 10:26:24 UTC No. 16487701
>>16486421
>Give me your best arguments against Uncle Ted
He's poor-man's Marx. Of course, Marx was tragically wrong about the solution, but at least he correctly identified the problem.
Also, he is exactly like the soi tech-worshippers he criticizes: he treats technology as some sort of metaphysical entity endowed with its own agency that acts indipendent of human will, like a God or a force of nature (which admittedly might one day become a reality once AI become advanced enough, but thankfully we're not there yet).
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 10:51:26 UTC No. 16487725
>>16486421
>Ted fails to mention jews in his political critiques. Anybody who tries to discuss post-WW2 American politics without discussing jewish influence can safely be ignored.
>Ted blames the entirety of industrial society for his personal feelings of social alienation, when the real culprit was that he was neglected as a child by his shitty parents. Ted basically believed that we all needed to return to monke because he was a social outcast.
>Ted's rage at industrial society ultimately stems from his inability to get a gf - he was actually on the verge of trooning out at one point in his life.
TL;DR Ted Kaczynski was the original incel. He should be mocked, not revered. Also, as others have pointed out, his bombing campaign was kinda lame. All that effort, and who did he kill? An ad executive and a lobbyist. Talk about a nothingburger.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 11:11:16 UTC No. 16487728
I wouldn't make good money sitting on my ass with a keyboard in front of me were it not for technology.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 11:18:21 UTC No. 16487733
>>16486421
That he's not going far enough. The true mistake was the Agricultural Revolution, the amount of pathogens and parasites that we amassed since then is truly mind-boggling compared to our closest relatives.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 11:54:39 UTC No. 16487754
>>16486421
Killing CEOs has minimal impact, you need to kill politicians.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 13:21:37 UTC No. 16487820
>>16486421
He was absolutely correct in diagnosing the problem, but he had no realistic solution
this might be it though: >>>/x/39270304
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 13:31:10 UTC No. 16487826
Most people only read ISAIF aka his manifesto. His later works are far more refined, cool headed, and meaningful. Best idea he had imo is the nature of self propogating systems and their relationship with resource usage.
Essentially, in the short term, "greedy" algorithms are more successful, that is systems that utilize a strategy of grabbing and using any and all resources with no constraints will tend to out perform more conservative ones in the short term. In the long run such strategies tend to be unsustainable, but the conservative systems will be absorbed into or destroyed by the more destructive/liberal ones.
I would hope you can see the implications of this dynamic to humanity in the near future
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 14:10:43 UTC No. 16487862
>>16486421
My best argument is that if we give up technology, we'll be conquered by other people with technology.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 14:33:58 UTC No. 16487877
>>16486421
Ted was right
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:01:20 UTC No. 16487912
>>16486421
He was an animal that killed innocent people for the thrill of killing.
Really based people prepare Lshaped ambushed and then lure glowies in it and follow an actual goal.
Real heroes like the killdozer guy or timothy mcveigh
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:02:20 UTC No. 16487913
>>16487701
>but at least he correctly identified the problem.
Retard, marx was a jew that wrote the jew supremacist ideology that communism is and all leading commues were jews
Read 200 years together
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:03:21 UTC No. 16487914
>>16487754
*jews
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:04:21 UTC No. 16487916
>>16487666
that's not a good counterargument. humans generally don't know what they want or what is in their best interest. They will also optimize the fun or fulfillment out of every activity in the name of efficiency (this is a well-known phenomenon game devs have to solve). Also, most people who became agricultural did so because they were forced to, agricultural societies could easily outnumber hunter-gatherer societies 10:1.
>>16487701
All organized dependent technology inherently restricts individual freedom and dignity, there is no getting around this.
>>16487725
Calling out Jews would only distract from the main movement, which is the destruction of the techno-industrial system. He only called out leftists because he wanted to make it clear that leftism could not be allowed in the revolution.
>>16487733
He mentions in his letters and later writings that civilization also has the same problems as industrial society, just that industrial society makes it 10x worse. But he also states that trying to get rid of industrial society AND agriculture is a mistake. He saw no reasonable way to get rid of agriculture and civilization
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:08:36 UTC No. 16487921
>>16487916
>what is in their best interest.
obligatory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoF
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 19:03:17 UTC No. 16488178
>>16486421
Killing billions of people because hes scared of technology is retarded.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 19:14:44 UTC No. 16488191
It's evident that most people replying to this thread haven't even read the manifesto let alone his other works
the post above me is a perfect example
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 19:28:53 UTC No. 16488206
>>16486421
He wanted to be a tranny, pussied out, then got angry at his therapist and fantasized about murdering them.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 19:48:02 UTC No. 16488221
Did he get suicided?
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 19:55:28 UTC No. 16488229
>>16487916
>the guy who got attention by murdering people with letter bombs didn't want to mention the jewish problem in his manifesto because optics
lmao
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 20:02:33 UTC No. 16488239
>>16488191
>It's evident that most people replying to this thread haven't even read the manifesto let alone his other works
If he had anything more important to say he should have included it in his manifesto. I only read the manifesto, and I'm making my judgments based on what he wrote there; I'm not obligated to read his entire body of work. If you think he makes some compelling argument for primitivism that's not in his manifesto then go ahead and spill it.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 20:04:58 UTC No. 16488244
>>16488239
Name what you disagree with him on the manifesto and I will address it
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 20:57:32 UTC No. 16488325
>>16488244
We can't escape the technological industrial system by giving up technology because if we give up technology, we'll be conquered or wiped out by other people with superior technology.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 21:22:46 UTC No. 16488349
>>16488325
Ted Acknowledges this and states that this is why the revolution HAS to be worldwide, furthermore as the technological-industrial society advances it becomes more and more interconnected and fragile.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 21:23:47 UTC No. 16488350
>>16488325
>>16488349
>209. The reason why technology has seemed always to progress is that, until perhaps a century or two before the Industrial Revolution, most technology was small-scale technology. But most of the technology developed since the Industrial Revolution is organization-dependent technology. Take the refrigerator for example. Without factory-made parts or the facilities of a post-industrial machine shop it would be virtually impossible for a handful of local craftsmen to build a refrigerator. If by some miracle they did succeed in building one it would be useless to them without a reliable source of electric power. So they would have to dam a stream and build a generator. Generators require large amounts of copper wire. Imagine trying to make that wire without modern machinery. And where would they get a gas suitable for refrigeration? It would be much easier to build an icehouse or preserve food by drying or picking, as was done before the invention of the refrigerator.
>210. So it is clear that if the industrial system were once thoroughly broken down, refrigeration technology would quickly be lost. The same is true of other organization-dependent technology. And once this technology had been lost for a generation or so it would take centuries to rebuild it, just as it took centuries to build it the first time around. Surviving technical books would be few and scattered. An industrial society, if built from scratch without outside help, can only be built in a series of stages: You need tools to make tools to make tools to make tools ... . A long process of economic development and progress in social organization is required. And, even in the absence of an ideology opposed to technology, there is no reason to believe that anyone would be interested in rebuilding industrial society. The enthusiasm for “progress” is a phenomenon peculiar to the modern form of society, and it seems not to have existed prior to the 17th century or thereabouts.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 21:41:17 UTC No. 16488373
>>16488350
this is retarded because the knowledge of how to industrialize these processes has already been widely disseminated. you can't put the genie back in the bottle.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 22:03:03 UTC No. 16488385
>>16488373
does the average person know how to do this? How quickly can you get the information to build them WITHOUT the internet? Most people don't have or care to have technical books. If industrial society collapses, can the people who memorize/know how to build new machines even survive?
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 22:34:26 UTC No. 16488425
>>16486421
Bombing random people does not further one's cause.
I agree with some of his philosophical points, but terrorism just turns everyone against you.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Nov 2024 22:40:44 UTC No. 16488431
>>16488349
And how exactly does he intend to achieve a worldwide, simultaneous collapse of civilization?
>Surviving technical books would be few and scattered.
Even if everyone stopped going to work and went to live in the woods, this wouldn't happen. What kind of cataclysm was he envisioning?
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:36:08 UTC No. 16488582
Primitivism is cucked and goes against observation. You are literally doing nothing. Even if you "save" the environment, the world is still slowly becoming uninhabitable and so the only known example of life is going extinct. This despite observing a whole universe out there full of unknowns. It's un/sci/entific because you're not exploring every possible avenue in pursuit of knowledge of the universe. With an expansionist technological civilization, you can atleast have hope that as you expand, you can figure out more stuff. It means not giving up.
The same criticism goes for degrowth. I actually don't understand why, other than biological urges, leftist types like that won't might as well immediately kill themselves, because their way offers no hope for the future of life.
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:46:02 UTC No. 16488592
>>16486421
Genetic decline caused by civilization is the problem, not civilization itself.
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:46:26 UTC No. 16488593
>>16488385
it has nothing to do with what the average person knows how to do, but everything to do with people who generate wealth from industrial processes. there is no way to prevent industrialization.
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:52:16 UTC No. 16488597
>>16488385
>If industrial society collapses
It's fucking funny how this routinely happens after a major earthquake, flood or hurricane and no matter where it took place, the "hole" in society is fixed in a matter of months or years at most.
Nobody has their home wrecked by a natural event and says, "Hey, you know what? I think I'll just leave it this way!"
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 01:06:26 UTC No. 16488612
>>16488592
This image is hilarious because it bungles history, biology and sociology all at once.
>there was no such thing as the "Dark Ages"...navigation, metallurgy, architecture, etc. continued to advance
>"deleterious" genes can be valuable depending on circumstances (psychopaths can be highly competent surgeons, for instance)
>lamenting the fall of Rome was lamenting the temporary demise of an inefficient centralized government in favor of localized kingdoms better adapted to organize their citizens
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 02:54:37 UTC No. 16488715
>>16488612
>there was no such thing as the "Dark Ages"...navigation, metallurgy, architecture, etc. continued to advance
Dark ages = low civilizational complexity. You can't be serious and suggest the societies of europe around in 800AD were as complex as the ones in 200AD.
>"deleterious" genes can be valuable depending on circumstances (psychopaths can be highly competent surgeons, for instance)
Bizarre statement. You've outed yourself as an obfuscating leftist. "But what is a GOOD trait HMMM???"
Intelligence, impulse control, conscientiousness, high health, etc are all objectively good, if you want to live in a civilization with running water and internet. You're almost as bad as the morons who claim there's no genetic link to intelligence.
>lamenting the fall of Rome was lamenting the temporary demise of an inefficient centralized government in favor of localized kingdoms better adapted to organize their citizens
Lamenting the massive reduction in civilizational complexity and reduction in population by famine and disease resulting from dysgenics.
Watch this man
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOq
https://www.youtube.com/@TheJollyHe
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 03:38:58 UTC No. 16488771
>>16488715
>civilizational complexity
= "bureaucracy"
>Intelligence, impulse control, conscientiousness, high health
Intelligence is relative to environmental circumstances...a gifted writer or philosopher might be useless on a mountaineering expedition. Impulse control creates pussies afraid to take chances or even ask a girl out. Conscientiousness is worthless to a military. And "high health" is irrelevant to the conversation because barbarians don't march to the gates on crutches.
>Watch this man
>wearing a mask from some kiddie cartoon show
Fuck no.
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 07:48:32 UTC No. 16488935
>>16486421
He bombed random civilians that didn't matter instead of politicians. He didn't have any principles or agenda, he was just an angry child stomping his leg.
Also, "technology" includes what we now consider primitive, such stone tools and ground fires. These used to be state of the art tech when we still lived in caves. Drawing a line in the sand to say "x tech good, >x tech bad!" is both arbitrary and unenforceable.
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 07:55:22 UTC No. 16488937
>>16486610
>>industrial society is inherently less satisfactory than pre-industrial society
I am pretty happy not having to worry about access to water, food and shelter. I also greatly enjoy not dying from preventable causes. Sounds like a skill issue.
>(lack of the power process)
Any human in a 1st world country is perfectly capable of fullfilling goals through their own effort. I became a doctor through my own effort and enjoying the benefits now. Again, skill issue.
>>Industrial society (and civilization in general) are inherently limiting in your freedoms and dignity, and there is no way redeem or change industrial society without sacrificing individual dignity and autonomy
Already covered.
Do you think you'd have more power to achieve your goals as a in serfdom, with zero education or knowledge about anything outside of your farm?
>>You can’t just “ignore” technology because you will always essentially be forced upon you (perfect example is the automobile)
I haven't driven a car in 10 years. Again, skill issue.
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 08:00:25 UTC No. 16488938
>>16486663
>i hate tech
>which is why i'm spending my free time using state of the art tech to communicate with other retards on a zimbabwean basket weaving website and posting funny tech-made pictures i meticulously collect in my tech-made reaction folder
Curious
>inb4 nooo you don't get it I HAVE to sit in front of a computer in my free time, society forces to me
ok dude, whatever makes you avoid facing yoir own hypocrisy
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 08:02:43 UTC No. 16488939
>>16486811
>many of Ted’s followers believe that industrial society will fall in about 15-20 years. And have largely just built homesteads
And they build them using zero power tools, right?
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 08:02:53 UTC No. 16488940
>>16486760
>he thinks thats all they did to him
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 08:23:11 UTC No. 16488946
What is the primitivist's answer to Earth eventually getting swallowed by the Sun? Without technological progress, we will never figure out a way to leave this planet before its inevitable destruction. Should humanity just sit with a thumb up its collective ass and go extinct because you don't like responding to work e-mails?
>but it's 7.59 billion years away lmao who cares
It seems to me like primitivists have very poor foresight. I wonder how many primitivists are 80 year olds that would gladly give up all the comforts and healthcare that make life at such and old age enjoyable or even possible to lead a "more satisfying life", or die because apparently that's just better. I'd also like to know how many younger primtivists would refuse modern surgery if they were diagnosed with appendicitis or chemo/rad in case of cancer. It's all fun and games until you realize your own mortality.
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Nov 2024 21:50:03 UTC No. 16489685
>>16487916
>All organized dependent technology inherently restricts individual freedom and dignity, there is no getting around this.
EVERY type of organization that goes above that of a literal Ramapithecus inherently restricts individual freedom.
And no, very little part of the modern restrictions are "inherently" caused by technology itself.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 00:20:32 UTC No. 16489955
>>16488938
>curious
Read the end of the post
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 00:23:10 UTC No. 16489960
>>16488946
>Without technological progress, we will
Define
"We"
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 00:47:46 UTC No. 16489994
>>16486638
Actually read his criticisms of Industrial Society and you'd realize he outright acknowledges it's impossible for a human to be truly divorced from IS, retarded skim-reading zoomer.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 00:50:30 UTC No. 16490001
>>16488946
Everything will die and be reborn again no matter what you do. In reality you're an abrahamoid sissy that sees everything having a beginning and an end, but its not that simple. It's best to live in relative harmony and mindful of the present rather than being endlessly restless and anxious for the future.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 00:54:23 UTC No. 16490005
>>16486421
Even if everything he said is 100% true it doesn't matter because there's no way to stop technological advancement. There's just too much incentive. He's basically like a monk in that he couldn't accept the world for what it is.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 01:00:16 UTC No. 16490014
>>16488715
>Lamenting the massive reduction in civilizational complexity and reduction in population by famine and disease resulting from dysgenics.
Shit nutrition IS dysgenic, though.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 01:09:17 UTC No. 16490024
>>16488935
>These used to be state of the art tech when we still lived in caves. Drawing a line in the sand to say "x tech good, >x tech bad!" is both arbitrary and unenforceable.
He clearly lays out the distinction between individual-made technologies and technology that leads to systemization, faggot. No one here reads.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 01:13:54 UTC No. 16490028
>>16488582
Moronic premises and utter cope filled quixotic delusions.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 01:15:01 UTC No. 16490031
>>16486421
The ultimate outcome of industrial society is to replace natural evolution with man-made evolution.
>/thread
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 10:12:07 UTC No. 16490305
>>16486610
Yes it do be like that. If you are rich you could go and live on the island of Sark or another such place, peradventure.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 10:13:09 UTC No. 16490307
>>16487877
wow
that's retarded
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 10:56:06 UTC No. 16490324
>>16489955
>Im only here out of a misplaced sense of altruism and peer pressure
This changes nothing though. You wouldn't be here in your free time if you hated it. But I understand that facing hypocrisy is hard and uncomfortable.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 10:57:17 UTC No. 16490325
>>16489960
Humanity, of course.
>I don't care about the future of humanity
They why are you even concerned about how technology affects it?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 11:02:09 UTC No. 16490329
>>16490001
>Everything will die and be reborn again no matter what you do
Yes, and? Are you trying to imply this means it doesn't matter that humanity will go extinct and we shouldn't prevent it? Would you apply the same reasoning to your own individual life if it was in danger of ending prematurely, but could be extended via technology? I will repeat the question i already asked - would you refuse life saving surgery or cancer treatments? Be honest now.
>In reality you're an abrahamoid sissy that sees everything having a beginning and an end, but its not that simple
What a constructive non-statement.
>It's best to live in relative harmony and mindful of the present rather than being endlessly restless and anxious for the future.
As i said, critical lack of foresight, though I don't think it's even genuine. Why don't you get a huge loan you will never be able to pay off then? You could improve your present circumstances immensely, and it's not like you should worry about the not being able to pay it off in the future, right?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 14:15:14 UTC No. 16490450
>>16486648
Fuck you, fuck Hobbes, and fuck Hegel; hail Proudhon and Bakunin.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 14:46:54 UTC No. 16490466
>>16490329
>>16490325
I care very deeply about the future of humanity, and so did Ted I think until he lost his marbles (or had them stolen by monarch cultists) . The pyramids indicate very clearly that this is not the first time lasers have littered the landscape. The technological progress seems 'braided in' to trans-humanism. I'm stuck on the connotation of this suffix. what are we, humanity, crossing over humanity into?
The philosophers say before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water, after enlightenment, chop wood carry water. Ted pointed out many times that technology demands more technology to solve technologies problems. In the end, it seems earth is already a highly optimised system, almost so comically so that it demands inspecting the superluminism of the DNA helix.
I dream of a 5g grid that turns your mitochondria, fertilising a desert with a phosphate x-wave, tricking mycorrizal fungi networks to mine bitcoin, personal anti-inertial snowboards that can drift any cliff face, and automated homesteads for everyone.
I think the reality is though that the tablets disseminating such knowledge are better put to grinding wheat into flour.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 15:24:59 UTC No. 16490502
>>16490014
>Shit nutrition IS dysgenic, though.
Nutrition doesn't change your genetics to a significant degree.
The effects of breeding on the populations genetics is far stronger.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 15:26:39 UTC No. 16490503
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 15:29:03 UTC No. 16490505
>>16488771
>civilizational complexity = "bureaucracy"
You're a moron. Show me the vast network of stone aqueducts german tribes built.
>Intelligence is relative to environmental circumstances
You can't debate seriously that intelligence, impulse control, conscientiousness, high health etc are not vital for a complex civilization. I'm not going to listen to your leftist obfuscating.
>Watch this man Fuck no.
Remain in ignorance. That said you probably can't understand.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 15:35:21 UTC No. 16490507
>>16490503
bot
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 17:26:25 UTC No. 16490584
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 19:16:22 UTC No. 16490729
>>16490329
I don't care if humans go extinct.
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 20:17:34 UTC No. 16490809
>>16490329
Technology will not make your lifespan longer.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 20:23:33 UTC No. 16490813
>>16490329
You will literally stop caring about death by the time you're 40 lol.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 20:35:15 UTC No. 16490819
>>16486592
>Did he get well armed militia groups to fight for his ideas or carve up a political sphere to influence the masses?
Be the change you want to see in the world, anon.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 20:58:35 UTC No. 16490836
>>16486421
Killing people is wrong.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 21:28:10 UTC No. 16490871
>>16490466
You haven't said anything of substance.
>>16490729
Then why do you care that tech makes their lives somehow worse?
>>16490813
Same question as above, really.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 00:11:40 UTC No. 16491034
>>16486643
that Nox episode was truly a masterpiece
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 00:48:02 UTC No. 16491075
>>16490871
>Then why do you care that tech makes their lives somehow worse?
Not him but I love humanity, but I despise the ways that most humans are forced to live.
bodhi at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 00:57:30 UTC No. 16491086
it's all cyclical, we are just flesh bots acting out God's design, not our own. We can agree or disagree, fight for things or just watch everyone else fight over it, none of it effects the outcome.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 09:55:46 UTC No. 16491450
>>16487725
>>16488229
>>16487916
He was sufficiently intelligent and critical in his investigations to dismiss narcissistic scapegoating and delusions of persecution (i.e. antisemitism)
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:57:33 UTC No. 16491796
>>16486421
I don't buy his argument that people were simply happier in pre-industrial societies. His argument is that back then, people had to genuinely struggle to survive whereas people make up fake struggles in modern society. However, this is a claim made without evidence, and struggling to survive is inherently stressful. This claim would be better answered by a systematic sampling of psychological health and life satisfaction of industrial and pre-industrial societies. Don't neglect to count all the dead kids in societies with bad healthcare too.
He also claimed that ideally, society should stabilize at a preindustrial level, and cited non-European civilizations such as China and India for remaining at this stage longer than the West. However, preindustrial societies get their asses kicked in any contact with more technologically advanced societies. American natives got genocided and enslaved, China got opium forced on them, and India was conquered. That's a huge disincentive to not advance technologically, and a huge reason why China threw everything into modernization in the past few decades.
Finally, he places a huge amounts of blame on leftists for the industrial system, and gave a one sentence rebuke of conservatives. Such distribution of blame would be extremely tone-deaf nowadays, listen to any conservative US politician speak and they will love to rant about the left is stifling free market innovations and entrepreneurship, the very engines of technological growth and industrialization. Sure, go ahead and blame the left, but don't pretend that historically and presently, the right had frequently championed and made use of these things.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:06:41 UTC No. 16491812
>>16486421
The difference between what's natural human activity and surrogate human activity is a mere cultural (temporal and local) interpretation. I assert that it's natural for a human being to keep developing science, technology and culture and doing so humanity will keep redefining itself. The problem with technological development is its corruption: technology is presented as in the interest of the masses a way to decrease inequality, but time and time again it's used as a way to increase inequality by exploiting the masses. So technology itself is not the problem but the way it amplifies the hierarchical tendencies of the last couple of thousands of years.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:37:46 UTC No. 16491852
>>16491796
>He also claimed that ideally, society should stabilize at a preindustrial level
Where does he ever claim this? From his letters and later writings, he makes it clear that civilization itself is also a problem and that if he could he would make all human populations hunter-gatherers again.
>Finally, he places a huge amounts of blame on leftists for the industrial system, and gave a one sentence rebuke of conservatives. Such distribution of blame would be extremely tone-deaf nowadays, listen to any conservative US politician speak and they will love to rant about the left is stifling free market innovations and entrepreneurship, the very engines of technological growth and industrialization. Sure, go ahead and blame the left, but don't pretend that historically and presently, the right had frequently championed and made use of these things.
He doesn't put the blame on leftists though, he simply points them out as a prime example of over-socialization. He also wanted to make it 100% clear that the revolution can NOT have any trace of "leftism". Regarding conservatives, keep in mind that he had spent much of his youth in college and university, which primarily consisted of leftists, so he had more to say about them.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:39:58 UTC No. 16491853
>>16486421
David Pearce > Ted
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:41:06 UTC No. 16491854
>>16486421
https://www.overcomingbias.com/p/ka
>Why must everything collapse? Because, he says, natural-selection-like competition only works when competing entities have scales of transport and talk that are much less than the scale of the entire system within which they compete. That is, things can work fine when bacteria who each move and talk across only meters compete across an entire planet. The failure of one bacteria doesn’t then threaten the planet. But when competing systems become complex and coupled on global scales, then there are always only a few such systems that matter, and breakdowns often have global scopes.
>Kaczynski dismisses the possibility that world-spanning competitors might anticipate the possibility of large correlated disasters, and work to reduce their frequency and mitigate their harms. He says that competitors can’t afford to pay any cost to prepare for infrequent problems, as such costs hurt them in the short run. This seems crazy to me, as most of the large competing systems we know of do in fact pay a lot to prepare for rare disasters. Very few correlated disasters are big enough to threaten to completely destroy the whole world. The world has had global scale correlation for centuries, with the world economy growing enormously over that time. And yet we’ve never even seen a factor of two decline, while at least thirty factors of two would be required for a total collapse. And while it should be easy to test Kaczynski’s claim in small complex systems of competitors, I know of no supporting tests.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 20:24:44 UTC No. 16491907
>>16491852
>civilization itself is also a problem and that if he could he would make all human populations hunter-gatherers again.
That's even dumber. You know what any civilization has done to small hunter gatherer groups when it wants their land, or just regards them as a nuisance? It either exterminates those tribes or assimilates them. It's not pretty but in a way it's survival of the fittest, systems that allow big societies to cooperate will quash systems of small tribes.
>He doesn't put the blame on leftists though
You say whatever you want, but he rants endlessly about leftists. It makes the beginning of his manifesto a chore to read. He understandably dislikes them, but it doesn't take a genius to see how rightists also have no problem using advanced military power to project power.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 20:28:12 UTC No. 16491912
>>16491907
>That's even dumber. You know what any civilization has done to small hunter gatherer groups when it wants their land, or just regards them as a nuisance? It either exterminates those tribes or assimilates them. It's not pretty but in a way it's survival of the fittest, systems that allow big societies to cooperate will quash systems of small tribes.
I'm not sure what you are getting at here, just because A group and destroy B group doesn't mean A group lives more fulfilling lives. Ted's argument is that industrial society is at odds with human nature. Not whatever system is the strongest.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 20:28:14 UTC No. 16491913
>>16491852
Also:
>In the late Middle Ages there were four main civilizations that were about equally “advanced”: Europe, the Islamic world, India, and the Far East (China, Japan, Korea). Three of those civilizations remained more or less stable, and only Europe became dynamic. No one knows why Europe became dynamic at that time; historians have their theories but these are only speculation. At any rate, it is clear that rapid development toward a technological form of society occurs only under special conditions. So there is no reason to assume that a long-lasting technological regression cannot be brought about.
Maybe my wording was technically incorrect, but he did at least speculate about society going back into pre-industrial levels and staying there.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 20:30:57 UTC No. 16491918
>>16491912
>>16491913
to make it clear, Ted thought it was impossible for humanity to revert civilization/agriculture and that it was here to stay forever, his main concern was the destruction of the techno-industrial system
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 20:31:44 UTC No. 16491920
>>16491912
"My tribe dominates your tribe" is a huge aspect of human nature, and in that respect high tech societies conquering and even destroying low tech societies is very much consistent with human nature.
Nature isn't about fulfillment and happiness, it's about surviving to reproduce, and humans have always acted in accordance.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 20:33:27 UTC No. 16491922
>>16491912
>industrial society is at odds with human nature
"My tribe dominates your tribe" is a huge aspect of human nature, and in that respect high tech societies conquering and even destroying low tech societies is very much consistent with human nature.
Nature isn't about fulfillment and happiness, it's about surviving to reproduce, and humans have always acted in accordance.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 00:35:29 UTC No. 16492167
>>16486428
This.
You need to convince enough people to collaborate on this, errr, project of his and it's very doubtful you'd ever reach a critical mass.
What's more is how susceptible people are to his propaganda will inevitably vary regionally based on cultural and, yes, racial differences.
So say you successfully indoctrinate yuropoors, hurray! But China doesn't play ball and so necessarily China quickly out competes your technologically inferior society.
>just do a heckin' terrorism but everywhere
Exact same problem. Lots of variation between population with regards to susceptibility to his propaganda, more/fewer terror cells, regional differences in how well the state handles the trouble makers, same result. Infected countries outcompeted by ideologically healthy countries with strong immune systems.
The solution and action plan presented by tedheads intellectuals is to sneer very arrogantly at you for acknowledging the existence of tribalism. This means you are a tribal/racist yourself and therefore not an intellectual.
The only credible ways to reach the outcome he desired would be for a handful of competent and ideologically loyal ted cultists to cause a catastrophic event like a nuclear war. This would undeniably be a worst outcome than anything industrial society has caused so far so you just have faith in him and believe the alternative would eventually become worse.
That, or entropy catching up to industrial society is just the natural outcome of those systems. In any case, none of you faggots are ever gonna make either of these things happen to you can stop engaging in daydreaming. Surrogate activity for actually making something of yourselves IRL.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 00:55:43 UTC No. 16492196
>>16488191
>the post above me is a perfect example
newsflash retard: You're not getting rid of technological society without killing billions. It's completely impossible.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 01:11:48 UTC No. 16492220
>>16492196
>You're not getting rid of technological society without killing billions.
Yes and? I fail to see the issue
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 03:53:30 UTC No. 16492392
>>16486421
the only people who take him seriously are, ironically, terminally on the internet
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 04:35:58 UTC No. 16492450
>>16492392
Not a good argument. Maybe those people are best equipped to see the dangers of technology Just like how a drug addict may be the best person to tell you about the dangers of drugs.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 04:49:06 UTC No. 16492461
>>16486421
He was wrong in that the industrial revolution was the problem. The bad shit started with agriculture and civilization. That surplus of crops essentially enabled kings and their large scale wars.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 04:53:11 UTC No. 16492463
>>16486952
https://www.freep.com/story/news/lo
Employee's arm amputated after getting stuck in machine
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 05:33:44 UTC No. 16492488
>>16492461
Again, he makes it clear that civilization in general has the exact same problems as industrial society just much less prominent. But he didn't think that agriculture or civilization could ever be reversed.
It's strange just how many people think Ted was just a luddit and not an anprim. This info isn't hard to find
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 05:36:44 UTC No. 16492490
>>16492463
Grim, I worked in a factory once and a guy lost his hand after dropping his phone in the machine and reaching to grab it. Completely crushed it, no hope for reattachment
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 07:35:51 UTC No. 16492572
>>16486421
Nihilism is bad for your health, especially your mental health.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 09:39:31 UTC No. 16492632
>>16492450
then it's projection in its purest form. if they cannot stop watching toktok or whatever, it's their problem, they should do something about it. they don't need to turn it into some new hip fix-the-world ideology, we have enough of those already
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 09:57:22 UTC No. 16492645
>>16486421
Human progress can't be halted and no one wants to be perpetually Amish
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 12:18:35 UTC No. 16492712
>>16486421
>commit terrorism
>make his ideas toxic by this
why he like this
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 12:55:07 UTC No. 16492741
>>16492488
>he didn't think that agriculture or civilization could ever be reversed
All it takes is a well aimed meteorite, a polar shift, or some extreme vulcanism.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 17:52:42 UTC No. 16493059
>>16492632
This post is projection.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 17:54:16 UTC No. 16493062
>>16491853
>Andrés Gómez Emilsson
This guy is so freaking high all the time, what is he on?
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 18:53:00 UTC No. 16493116
>>16492741
>three events that have a next to zero percent chance of happening in the next 500 years
so yes, there is no foreseeable end to agriculture and civilization in the near future
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 19:15:57 UTC No. 16493129
>>16486421
The only argument I have is that he was dumb enough to go after academics. Why not blow up a power substation and take down the grid in the area? I don’t understand why you had to kill people that are totally unrelated to what he was trying to accomplish.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 22:23:07 UTC No. 16493384
>>16490324
Nah you dont know shit about what it means to be human- about self sacrifice, communal responsibility and showing mercy unto the Lorde Jesus Christ
You have no idea the life i gave up to do the shit i do botscum
You have know idea that even then too i just wanted a lean too and a hunting rifle
Do i hate it, ask the faggots artificially keeping me alive
Assholes like you are exactly why i hope pic related loses his appeal
I wont need to hear or see english or use these bitch ass 'real numbers' again in my life
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 22:27:28 UTC No. 16493392
>>16493384
The news you want is the news you get, however, they have been punished 1000* over and any intervention ruins the pacification, thus, you are under order to accept the hell I have given them as their final punishment and not to act there. You will be paid again and again for your good service and you're now to focus on your own future
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 22:45:56 UTC No. 16493422
>>16493392
Fine by me.
I can teach youth programming skills along the river if you really need code out of me.
I dont want and trouble like lemp or maloney juzlst by virtue of having my PAL and something that can chamber a 308 winchester
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 22:50:13 UTC No. 16493426
>>16493422
You'll be happy he seeks the highest form and sweetest form of revenge against our species for 1000s of years punishment and continued punishment but cannot get that revenge and doesn't even know where to start. Just accept it. You got more than that already. You got it with the most intelligent mind with better tools and hell then you. done properly. enemy pacified.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 22:51:23 UTC No. 16493427
>>16493422
The way you feel is much less than he feels. HE actually went to the harshest hell and you were in a temp hell moving in that direction. If eating his words is what you desire. That's more than done.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 22:55:00 UTC No. 16493430
>>16493427
They would enjoy if you turned up on regard of your face. With all due respect, leave this one.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 23:01:21 UTC No. 16493437
>>16493430
There's a methodology behind why you pacify the enemy species after hell. There are other methods such as annihilation. The pacification is like a lock, perhaps they would know where to start but it's such a great task, and all they have is a compass. They are minds after all. Minds ought be dealt with properly. Not something for he who wants to get his face to the enemy. That's a sloppy way to exert power. You do this when you're lazy and in pain. I'd even stoop to this level if I was pained.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 23:02:37 UTC No. 16493439
>>16493437
End of story.
Look forward to what's coming to you. Trust in my punishment. You gain continued respect for your service/pain.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 23:21:37 UTC No. 16493453
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 03:35:07 UTC No. 16493656
>>16493453
Absolutely terrible argument, this is placing blind faith in technology that it will make everything better this time guyz! Ignore everything else technology makes worse!
the past 200 years the Industrial Revolution has only made life worse, I doubt magically technology will suddenly will reverse this trend.
>grain farming
lol, lnao even. The early agricultural period was terrible, poor verity in plants and livestock wasn’t fully domesticated so lifespans were generally shorter. Nobody actually enjoyed it, they mainly did it because the population got so big to where they had to. Multiple civilizations embraced agriculture and reverted back to hunter gathering when it failed
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 03:40:02 UTC No. 16493661
>>16487826
Where can one read this self propagating systems idea he wrote about?
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 04:04:45 UTC No. 16493694
>>16493661
Here you go anon
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/lib
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 04:09:17 UTC No. 16493701
>>16493656
You need a brain chip to make you feel better about technology.
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 05:14:09 UTC No. 16493750
>>16486421
Ted's thesis hinged on an extrapolation of technological advancement and its consequences into the future based on its previous effects. He assumed that since conditions for human life have only gotten worse since the industrial revolution, they would continue getting worse. But he didn't account for the possibility that there's a nonlinear relationship between technology and conditions which I think is actually more likely as technology improves.
For example, consider nutrition. For millennia humans ate a pretty good diet completely by accident just because they were eating what they evolved to eat, and stayed in shape completely by accident because they had to exercise to work and live. Then we started to supplant the natural diet with increasingly unnatural foods to increasingly negative effects. Immediately post industrial revolution we started all getting fucked up teeth because nobody realized that eating all these soft foods prevents your jaw from growing correctly. Then we started getting massive disease outbreaks because nobody realized how to safely store and transport giga quantities of perishable food and water to a largely urbanized nation. Then food got even more artificial and we started getting obese, diabetic, and trans because nobody realized that sugar and PUFAs and chemical preservatives and weed killers were bad for you, etc. But today these things are already starting to change course, and it's conceivable that we could live to see a day when people in first world nations actually eat better and are healthier than our ancient ancestors. We are now starting to figure out how to really have a healthy diet and people are conscious about avoiding the false recommendations of 20th century sĂłyence. We have the technology to fix people's teeth and have them be straight without having to chew on tough stems for 10 hours a day. We have the knowledge to avoid disease outbreaks and the powerful government to enforce clean food handling laws.
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 05:19:19 UTC No. 16493756
>>16493750
And you could really make the same case for any area which technology initially made worse. We are increasingly realizing the importance of things like exercise, social interaction, sleep hygiene, environmental stewardship, religion and cultural mythology, living a short distance from where you work, the ergonomics of the office environment, a healthy suspicion of minorities, and the list goes on. It seems like overall we are through humanity's lowest point and we are already coming back up.
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 05:42:00 UTC No. 16493767
Another thing we could discuss is what the technological singularity will mean for human conditions. Whether it will be good or bad, one thing we know for sure is that it isn't possible to predict the outcome just based on extrapolating the consequences of technology from the past. Ted didn't predict artificial superintelligence at all so that's a clear limitation of his philosophy.
It's entirely plausible that superintelligent AI will be able to do things that completely upend traditional wisdom and experience. For example, given enough control and sufficient processing power, an AI could theoretically run a command economy more efficiently than a free market. It could take over all jobs and allow humans to sit back and relax and never need to work again. It could enact perfect governance that encourages humans to behave and interact in healthy ways. It could read everyone's mind and preemptively imprison or kill individuals who are about to break laws. And so on
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 06:04:41 UTC No. 16493776
>"you can’t eat your cake and have it too"
the only reason he ever got caught is because he was so autistic about a common English phrase didn't make sense in the way people have come to say it, and made a point to correct people every time.
then, when doing revolutionary terror, and writing his manifesto, he did the exact same thing, instead of trying to write in a voice and style that couldn't be identified with him.
that is not a real life rugged individualist hero that is a plot they'd do on big bang of Sheldon cooper. Timothy McVeigh or Christopher Dorner actually had virtues they internalized that drove them crazy when they were impossible to live in society, Uncle Ted was the kid smashing his playstation controller after losing Fortnite
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 06:24:56 UTC No. 16493791
>>16493767
>It could take over all jobs and allow humans to sit back and relax and never need to work again.
Ted predicted that future and is actively repulsed by it
>176. One can envision scenarios that incorporate aspects of more than one of the possibilities that we have just discussed. For instance, it may be that machines will take over most of the work that is of real, practical importance, but that human beings will be kept busy by being given relatively unimportant work. It has been suggested, for example, that a great development of the service industries might provide work for human beings. Thus people would spent their time shining each other’s shoes, driving each other around in taxicabs, making handicrafts for one another, waiting on each other’s tables, etc. This seems to us a thoroughly contemptible way for the human race to end up, and we doubt that many people would find fulfilling lives in such pointless busy-work. They would seek other, dangerous outlets (drugs, crime, “cults,” hate groups) unless they were biologically or psychologically engineered to adapt them to such a way of life.
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 06:49:17 UTC No. 16493811
>>16493776
Funny thing about Timmothy Mcveigh, him and Ted later became friends in prison and Ted wrote a paper defending him
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 09:12:59 UTC No. 16493891
>>16487826
>this thing happened by accident
kek. materialist are the biggest midwits in human history.
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 16:00:36 UTC No. 16494160
>>16493791
Driving people around in taxicabs is more entertaining and fulfilling than farming
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 16:04:05 UTC No. 16494164
>>16493891
Someone should have told Peter Griffin there that the number of planets in the universe is one to a number with infinite "noughts." Seriously, what a brainless post.
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 16:10:10 UTC No. 16494170
>>16494160
I completely disagree
>>16493891
Honestly I think something like religion only supports ludditism/primitivism. Atheists could argue that all the sacrifices were worth it to reach some singularity event, but if there is an afterlife then all of this progress was pointless.
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 16:46:39 UTC No. 16494211
>>16494170
Have you ever tried it? I was an Uber driver for a few years and it was the most fun job I ever had. You get to explore the area and meet people all day. The only reason I quit was because my area has a lot of blacks and I thought it was too dangerous. They would frequently try to fight me for various reasons, use me to drive them on drug dealing routes, drink Henny and smoke weed in the car and threaten me with violence if I said anything, etc. But if I lived in a white city it would be a perfect job.
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 16:52:56 UTC No. 16494216
the women get a lot uglier, do you really would like that?
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 16:54:45 UTC No. 16494220
>>16494211
>it was the most fun job I ever had.
>my area has a lot of blacks
>They would frequently try to fight me
>use me to drive them on drug dealing routes
>drink Henny and smoke weed in the car
>threaten me with violence
ngl that does sound like fun
Anonymous at Thu, 28 Nov 2024 19:52:54 UTC No. 16496482
>>16487820
Yes, I second this. this seems like it's the only way out of this mess.
Anonymous at Thu, 28 Nov 2024 19:57:49 UTC No. 16496485
>>16487820
This is the way
Anonymous at Thu, 28 Nov 2024 19:59:24 UTC No. 16496489
>>16487820
NIGGER
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 02:48:23 UTC No. 16496785
>>16486610
>industrial society is inherently less satisfactory than pre-industrial society (lack of the power process)
Yes, and that's why there are so many people from underdeveloped countries migrating over to Western countries.
>Industrial society (and civilization in general) are inherently limiting in your freedoms and dignity, and there is no way redeem or change industrial society without sacrificing individual dignity and autonomy
There will be hierarchies regardless if human civilization exists or not. You won't have any dignity after the alpha male of a primtive tribe beats you to a pulp and buck breaks you with a soggy stick.
>You can’t just “ignore” technology because you will always essentially be forced upon you (perfect example is the automobile)
Even if humans regress back to the stone age, people will still use whatever means necessary to gain an edge over others, leading to an arms race all over again. As a primitive human, you will be forced to live near water and food sources controlled by alpha males and have to suck the alpha males' dicks and lose your manhood and dignity fully destroyed, becoming their sissy bitch, in order to get access to food and water.
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 11:58:16 UTC No. 16497101
>>16487877
i need this
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 12:17:04 UTC No. 16497112
>>16487820
based
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 12:23:10 UTC No. 16497116
>>16487820
Yes, I completely agree. Identifying the issue is only part of the solution, and while his diagnosis was spot on, without a viable plan to address it, the problem remains unresolved. This new approach seems like it could be the key to finally making progress.
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 12:28:37 UTC No. 16497117
>>16487820
Alright, so he nailed the problem down, no doubt about that. But let's be real, just identifying the issue doesn't get us anywhere if you don't have a practical solution to back it up. Enter Computronium. This isn't just some pipe dream or abstract theory; it’s the kind of scalable, ultra-efficient processing power that could actually solve the real bottleneck. If we convert matter into a state that can compute on the level we need, then we’re talking about a whole new era of problem-solving. This could actually be the breakthrough we need, assuming we don’t burn ourselves out trying to make it work before we even get the tech off the ground.
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 12:32:14 UTC No. 16497118
>>16487820
Yeah, sure, sounds cool and all, but let’s be real for a sec. It's not just a matter of "hey, let’s convert some atoms and call it a day." The energy requirements alone would probably turn our planet into a second sun. Not to mention the whole 'how the hell do we even begin building this thing' problem. It's a cool idea, but it's like saying 'let’s just use magic'. great in theory, but good luck getting it to work in the real world. We need something a bit more... grounded, at least for now.
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 13:30:31 UTC No. 16497155
>>16491450
>Hurr durr antisemitism is bad and irrational.
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 13:32:31 UTC No. 16497157
>>16491796
>I don't buy his argument that people were simply happier in pre-industrial societies
And you shouldn't. It's nonsense peddled by kike anthropologists, and swallowed by unthinking morons.
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 16:12:09 UTC No. 16497242
>>16497157
People weren't happier, maybe in some ways.
the modern world gave us easier lives but also resulted in overpopulation which means there are more people suffering than ever.
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 16:19:14 UTC No. 16497253
>>16486421
>Time to bring down the technodystopian establishment!
>...
>Ima blow me up some random students, teachers, and storeowners!
Nobody crazy enough to blow people up is sane enough to target people who are actually worth targeting.
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 19:09:36 UTC No. 16497422
>>16497242
>Muh overpopulation
Another myth perpetuated by jews.
There aren't too many people.
However, there are too many niggers, Arabs and poojeets (i.e. subhumans).