[HN Gopher] Elon Musk Just Doesn't Understand the Sci-Fi Visions...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Elon Musk Just Doesn't Understand the Sci-Fi Visions of Iain M.
       Banks
        
       Author : mitchbob
       Score  : 35 points
       Date   : 2025-04-30 17:50 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (lithub.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (lithub.com)
        
       | theothertimcook wrote:
       | "If you must know, I am a utopian anarchist of the kind best
       | described by Iain Banks,"
        
         | aloisdg wrote:
         | I guest Musk cant difference between anarchism and
         | libertarianism
        
           | krapp wrote:
           | To be fair, I've always considered libertarians to be, for
           | the most part, anarchists who won't commit.
        
             | euroderf wrote:
             | This seems fair+true. "Libertarian anarchists" is like
             | "jumbo olives".. they want to build their castles in the
             | sky in a free-floating environment that is only free in the
             | particular way that they want; violators will be
             | persecuted.
             | 
             | Anarchosyndicalism or GTFO. YMMV.
        
           | jbu wrote:
           | "That's libertarians for you -- anarchists who want police
           | protection from their slaves." - Kim Stanley Robinson
        
       | 0_gravitas wrote:
       | I've said before that Musk must have read Surface Detail and
       | assumed Veppers was some kind of 'tragic hero'.
       | 
       | It is remarkable because Banks, as much as I love his writing, is
       | __rarely subtle__ about his beliefs and who the "good guys" are.
       | 
       | (Yes there is a lot of exploration of the grey areas and
       | inhumanities, and thereby legitimately critical questions of the
       | titular society- but Bank's himself has said that he would very
       | much like to live in the Culture, even considering all the uglier
       | parts.)
        
         | alabastervlog wrote:
         | > It is remarkable because Banks, as much as I love his
         | writing, is __rarely subtle__ about his beliefs and who the
         | "good guys" are.
         | 
         | My wife writes some fiction, and one thing I've learned from
         | observing her interaction with test readers is that no matter
         | how heavy-handed the writing, a fair proportion of readers will
         | still misunderstand it. It's practically impossible to make
         | anything so explicit that nobody will get it wrong, even with a
         | bunch of repetition.
         | 
         | Though, most egregious misreading activity does seem to be
         | confined to the same set of readers, across discussion of her
         | test-reads, other writers she knows' test reads by the same
         | readers, and just general conversation about other published
         | fiction--that is, certain readers struggle to follow seemingly
         | _every_ damn thing they read, while others almost never make
         | these kinds of errors. I find it hard to relate to wanting to
         | continue reading books while being so constantly confused by
         | their content, but they do it anyway. Completely alien to me,
         | their experience of reading must be rather _impressionistic_
         | and seems unpleasant, but to each their own.
        
         | kelseyfrog wrote:
         | There was a large section of The Boys viewership that didn't
         | understand that Homelander was a bad guy until season four, or
         | that Walter White was Breaking Bad's biggest villain.
         | 
         | Time after time, an astonishingly large number of readers and
         | watchers assume that main characters are good and are unable to
         | fathom that a main character can be bad. Luckily for the rest
         | of us, this is emotional shibboleth that once identified serves
         | as a high-accuracy litmus test for personal engagement.
        
       | jiggawatts wrote:
       | Ironically the author of this article missed the _key theme_ that
       | runs throughout the Culture novels: Humans are mere pets in a
       | world where superhuman artificial intelligence exists.
       | 
       | Anyone that wants _this_ future for humanity, wants to be a pet,
       | simple as that.
        
         | 0_gravitas wrote:
         | Calling it _the_ key theme is stretching it quite a bit imo
        
           | euroderf wrote:
           | Agreed. The Minds keep us as pets if you want to view it that
           | way, but they have their own "Society of Minds" to keep each
           | other amused and engaged, and it takes very little of their
           | bandwidth to maintain human concentrations and the general
           | regional-galactical operating environment.
        
           | jiggawatts wrote:
           | Unlike everything else like the sex changing, it's in every
           | book and is a plot element instead of mere "background
           | colour".
           | 
           | All of the big decisions are made by the Minds, and every
           | time a human thinks they're doing something of their own
           | accord, it is implied (or explicitly stated) that they're
           | being manipulated by a Mind.
           | 
           | Several of the novels state this outright, including
           | mentioning that Marain, the language of the culture, was
           | explicitly designed to "guide" the thoughts of its human
           | speakers in the "right way" as decided by the Minds that
           | worked on its design. Handcuffs for the human mind so
           | integrated that nobody even realises they're shackled.
           | 
           | The humans aren't prisoners, they're pets allowed to roam
           | "outside", but they're not the agents of their future in any
           | real sense.
           | 
           | PS: Horrific betrayal by a highly trusted character in a
           | position of father-like authority is a running theme in
           | Banks' works. The more utopian and idealistic the scenario,
           | the greater the horror the reader can experience when that is
           | shattered by the realisation that it was all a manipulation.
           | The Wasp Factory, one of his earlier works, makes this the
           | most explicit with the betrayal of the protagonist's sexual
           | identity by their own father, but since that book Banks has
           | learned to make this theme less explicit and more implicit,
           | waiting for the reader to discover it on their own and have
           | the "Oh. _Ohhhh!_ Oh God." moment. Clearly many people missed
           | it in the later Culture books...
        
       | simpaticoder wrote:
       | I'm not so sure about the author's thesis. One quote alone
       | explains it, "it increasingly appears that humanity is a
       | biological bootloader for digital superintelligence." If indeed
       | Musk believes this, then his actions now matter not at all,
       | except insofar as it either helps or harms the birth of "digital
       | superintelligence". This is a similar "ends justify the means"
       | argument to the "effective altruists" and the general idea to
       | "not miss the forest for the trees", the forest being long-term
       | viability of humanity, the trees being individual well-being.
       | 
       | During peacetime, making such an argument justifies the selfish
       | and destructive action they wanted to take anyway. The framing of
       | the assertion is impossible to make an objective assessment of
       | the success of an action, since such an assessment may take a
       | hundred, or a thousand, years. So really there is no way for
       | anyone to judge whether an act is good or bad in this framework,
       | leaving it only as a matter of judgement of the actor. In this
       | sense, Musk's invocation of Banks is simple megalomania with more
       | steps.
        
         | hsshhshshjk wrote:
         | > it increasingly appears that humanity is a biological
         | bootloader for digital superintelligence.
         | 
         | Isn't this just a restatement of Christianity? Created by an
         | unknowable, all powerful deity with the goal of becoming one
         | with that deity during the rapture?
         | 
         | Ironically, many of the alien species in Banks's novels have
         | "sublimation" as their goal. Their idea is to transcend space
         | and time. https://theculture.fandom.com/wiki/The_Sublimed
         | 
         | So I guess it's just super intelligent turtles all the way
         | down?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-04-30 23:02 UTC)