ozymandias3.bsky.social
117 posts
4 followers
16 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Yes, these problems of the 'information overload' age are difficult to solve for - freedom of speech, misinformation, disinformation, content moderation and censorship all dovetail in interesting ways that society will find hard to resolve/solve for
comment in response to
post
That's great to hear! I know what a big figure Berlusconi was for Italian politics (for good or ill). Do you think the EU is antiquated and isn't required any more? In your opinion, is it still an institution that has more pros than cons as of today?
comment in response to
post
How would you resolve it?
comment in response to
post
That's the toxic Tate everybody loves!
comment in response to
post
I'd like for a Mind to have a discernible personality (LLMs today seem to have something akin to that already) and for them to be able to fix issues with their hardware by themselves where possible. That would probably need Minds to be able to commandeer robots/drones to put them to work
comment in response to
post
It makes sense for them to take liberties while adapting. I guess I might revisit this closer to when S3 comes out
comment in response to
post
It's been long enough since I read the appendices that I'm sure I don't really know all the lore well any more so it would be difficult for me to be a stickler
comment in response to
post
Ah, that makes sense
comment in response to
post
Also, it was only the WoT fans that commented! Apparently Rings of Power either isn't great or not many that enjoyed it are on this platform
comment in response to
post
Haha, it did all sound suspiciously cult-like taken together
comment in response to
post
True! I look forward to seeing how they've done
comment in response to
post
Thanks for sharing! That's good to know
comment in response to
post
That definitely makes it more enticing! It's actually been a while since I read at least the first few books, so I might not notice some changes unless they are drastic
comment in response to
post
Ah, that seems to be the general opinion and I'll keep that in mind when I dive in
comment in response to
post
Good to know! And sounds like an interesting exercise in it's own right
comment in response to
post
I'll keep that in mind! Given the density of the books, the sheer number of characters and settings, and also the amount of foreshadowing and historical scenes woven in, that would stand to reason
comment in response to
post
Uh, no, I've absolutely read the books! That's why I tend to steer clear of familiar universes (at least post GoT) that tend to be just pale imitations of what they were on the page
comment in response to
post
Oh well, arms being folded beneath bosoms I can get behind! And maybe the grasp implied a tug. Even talking about the world makes me curious enough to try it soon-ish
comment in response to
post
Thanks for sharing! I might just dive into it sometime this year then
comment in response to
post
Thanks for sharing your take! But if Nynaeve doesn't repeatedly tug on her braid and there isn't enough sniffing generally going, then is it even set in the same world any more? :P
comment in response to
post
There is no reason to oppose the coming of post-scarcity - it would assuredly rid the world of most of its present day ills including hunger, the need for energy, water and all other resources. But these issues will definitely be replaced by higher order ones. It's likely still a worthy end goal
comment in response to
post
In a world where post-scarcity or abundance might be the desired end goal - akin to Banks' The Culture, how hard is it to imagine most denizens gladly giving up their ability to function, think and express themselves to just enjoy their lives. Or is that also just an expression of their freedom?
comment in response to
post
It would be akin to taking away a right that by then already existed. Sure, the people that opposed this could exist in separate communes but presumably the authorities that exist would do their best to cut off contact with such communes and restrict all interactions
comment in response to
post
However, opposition to the world posited by Huxley would require imposing restrictions on people's right to get dopamine and serotonin hits (among other things) whenever they'd like to. In such a world, oppositional forces would find it harder to wean people off their biological addictions
comment in response to
post
An Orwellian world would elicit reactions from both within and without because it restricts the freedoms of people that regard it as a right (at least today). As of right now it is still enshrined and treated as a holy grail in most of the western world
comment in response to
post
In general, it seems obvious to most liberal (not into the American leftist sense) folks that an absolute right to free expression would be paramount for liberty. Although it continues to come under attack and is actually absent in a lot of the wider world, it is still highly coveted as a right
comment in response to
post
But it seems to me that the world envisaged by Huxley is more attainable and possibly more stable even (as in, can attain and continue in a kind of equilibrium), simply because the incentives to change from it would be much higher than the ones faced by an Orwellian world
comment in response to
post
Sure, they'd need good hooks and some marketing to punch through all the other garbage floating around but could this seriously not be spun off into a venture that is even reasonably profitable? While also being interesting
comment in response to
post
That definitely seems like it should be a winning recipe to me. Has this entire genre been commodified and overdone at this point? Can the LLMs today just spin these yarns with too much ease? If so, I think they'd still be interesting enough to capture an audience
comment in response to
post
The template of a mystery/adventure set in far flung locations especially when partaken in with some mixture of cousins/siblings/family/friends seems like it should always prove interesting to a younger audience. Throw in more identifiable locales and lazy holidays together
comment in response to
post
Now, if there were many such species, what then? I suppose in most cases, evolution would ensure that only one would come out on top - as we sapiens did over the neanderthals. Genetics shows that the neanderthals did interbreed enough with our ancestors to continue existing through the gene pool
comment in response to
post
Or would that be frowned upon so much by the orthodoxy that it would never be allowed or too dangerous to proceed with? If interbreeding was actually impossible, would there still be a chance for peaceful coexistence? Or is that a necessary condition for it?
comment in response to
post
The factions are obviously more nuanced than just being the left and the right. Maybe it's the populists vs the traditional establishment or the nationalists vs the globalists. It's hard to draw distinct lines around these groupings but I just wanted to write it out a little to think through it
comment in response to
post
The (mainstream) left now regards Putin as evil and Ukraine as the poor nation that was stomped upon. Late night talk show hosts routinely berate the administration for colluding with Putin and Russia. Big parts of both parties hate US support for Russia and continue to support aid to Ukraine
comment in response to
post
It has caused each side to just double down on their corresponding positions. The (now ascendant portion of) the right won't even admit that Russia was the aggressor. It goes as far as calling Zelensky a dictator. And never comments on Russian or the nature of Putin as an autocrat
comment in response to
post
From then on, the left has become the side berating Russia and Putin while the right gets closer to them while espousing suspicion of the military industrial complex and the deep state. And that has continued through Russia's (so far) attempted invasion of Ukraine
comment in response to
post
The right started flipping the other way and Trump gave voice to it by uttering something along the lines of 'well, we have also interfered always'. This was a stunning role reversal especially since this has perennially been a leftist (or more isolationist) critique of American foreign policy