Post AjamYPgEmEe9IpvCtM by sqrtminusone@emacs.ch
(DIR) More posts by sqrtminusone@emacs.ch
(DIR) Post #AjajBO7Q7Jmjw8xuxk by interfluidity@zirk.us
2024-07-04T15:43:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
“For the first time since the dawn of the Renaissance, innovation is now feared by the vast majority of people. And the tech leaders, once admired and emulated, now rank among the least trustworthy people in the world.” #TedGioia https://www.honest-broker.com/p/how-did-silicon-valley-turn-into
(DIR) Post #AjakBOzYyD8EbDrR2G by admitsWrongIfProven@qoto.org
2024-07-04T15:53:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@interfluidity Hmm... how about "there are no tech leaders anymore because those that would be get drowned out by grifters"? The part about being scared of innovation is completely correct, though. After all, who does not see the grifters for what they are thinks what they do is innovation and thus fears scams under a false name.
(DIR) Post #AjamYPgEmEe9IpvCtM by sqrtminusone@emacs.ch
2024-07-04T16:20:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@interfluidity I'm not sure I'm following the argument... The author says that tech entrepreneurs have lost their way, misunderstood philosophy, and started making bad products? Fair enough, short their stocks then, I guess...But then he says that these same people, who are so stupid as to plan to live for 100 years and die from cancer well before, can actually deliver the Apocalypse? And not go bankrupt the very next market downturn?I've actually opened the article to get the context for the quote. I'm not sure if there ever was a time when a "vast majority of the people" weren't afraid of change. Hadn't the British government dispatched the military to suppress the Luddites, back in the Industrial Revolution? Was there ever a moment when there were fewer NIMBYs than YIMBYs?So I'd bet that "vast majority" is a projection of himself and his change of mind over the years.
(DIR) Post #Ajann5y0S9bUScnWbo by interfluidity@zirk.us
2024-07-04T16:34:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sqrtminusone "smart" is not unidimensional. people can be canny businesspeople and idiotic in philosophy or historiography. (people can make bad products and still be canny businesspeople. lots more than product quality determines business success.) it's a bad idea to short bitcoin. that doesn't imply that bitcoin is in any nontautological sense a high-quality product (or a token representing anything else of high quality). 1/
(DIR) Post #Ajao7wW2mqVxEKex2O by interfluidity@zirk.us
2024-07-04T16:38:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sqrtminusone re fear of change, i think it's fair to say that from the postwar period until very recently, technology and innovation have had very positive, almost utopian connotations, and recently that is shifting, inverting even towards quite dystopian expectations. i think you are right that "dawn of the Renaissance" is projecting ex-post hagiography of the Renaissance backwards too loosely. 2/
(DIR) Post #AjaoSpOiRn7REcBsuG by interfluidity@zirk.us
2024-07-04T16:42:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sqrtminusone nevertheless, if we change dawn of the renaissance to (a bit ironically!) dawn of the Atomic Age, i think the proposition holds pretty well. science fiction used to predominantly describe the contours, conundra, and paradoxes of world we could recognize as "more advanced" even if we could entertain questions of what was lost along with what was gained. 1984-style dystopias, cyberpunk, were smaller subgenres, minority reports if you will. 3/
(DIR) Post #AjaoeaWNaDPMZUNnYu by interfluidity@zirk.us
2024-07-04T16:44:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sqrtminusone i think that relationship has now inverted. at least measured by prominence and popularity, contemporary science fiction is predominantly dystopian, with "solar punk" or "star trek"-type fantasies, or more neutral space operas or Asimov's Three Laws speculations now the minority. something has changed, in literature and in life, very quickly i think. /fin
(DIR) Post #AjasxERMIsPvPJBDxA by LouisIngenthron@qoto.org
2024-07-04T17:32:40Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@interfluidity I hate that people still associate Silicon Valley with tech innovation.It's not. It's where VCs go to die.The rest of us around the world are the ones actually innovating.
(DIR) Post #Ajb5Kk6RwmSbiZNRxI by sqrtminusone@emacs.ch
2024-07-04T19:51:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@interfluidity As for "smart": I agree, look no further than Mr. Musk for an example of this. Still, I don't see how these two sentences are compatible:- Ray Kurzweil has consistently been wrong in his very area of expertise;- The likes of Ray Kurzweil can bring about the Apocalypse by cultish reckless innovation.I don't disagree with the latter, but then one has to grant the likes of Ray Kurzweil some kind of engineering competence. And even disregarding that, a tech-Apocalypse is a very different thing from Jim Jones taking over the world... I'd be more afraid of us discovering some civilization-destroying knowledge, for instance. Or a technology for stable totalitarianism. Which, what a surprise, is also a concern for Mr. Kurzweil, and totally distinct from cult dynamics, the keynote of this piece.For me, that part feels like "we haven't done it, look what the US had done, they deserved it anyway" from the Cold War. I.e., multiple incompatible statements that didn't feel as such for Soviet diplomats because of the general anti-US self-justifying vibe and the diplomats' lack of critical thinking. How does one even argue with that, right?And on fear of change: I might agree on the post-Atomic trend. I do feel like something you've mentioned is now lost.I've just seen counterexamples, e.g. people resisting the spread of Internet. The Chinese say "may you live in the times of change" as a curse, for what it's worth.So I'm uncomfortable assuming any such grand narrative, pro- or anti-progress. They usually become unfalsifiable when they become too abstract (see: the silent majority is with us!). And what feels like sampling the Zeitgeist becomes sampling of yourself, and using that to further your arguments without doing the homework. Which, I still think, happened with in piece.