home tags events about login

sl rss

this is an experimental installation of ted unangst’s honk. wip, things may be broken.

sl replied 23 Sep 2021 17:48 -0400
in reply to: https://letsalllovela.in/objects/1c1ba007-c386-466f-b112-b0adb7af3fa6

@xj9 thanks. i definitely agree rationality is aspirational. unfortunately the information space is very polluted, it’s increasingly difficult to talk about ideas without tripping over thoughtstops. i try not to get too bogged down in terminology and instead aim for shared understanding, however illusory. i think our motivations are similar, though in the back of my mind i do notice the ripples on the pond in spite of myself.

sl re-posted 23 Sep 2021 17:24 -0400
original: sl@mirror.notreally.info

@xj9@letsalllovela.in thanks for this. yeah, i’m not speaking to motivation at all, but purely practical matters of scale. the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. at some point, as rational beings, we do become (i think) responsible for the implications of what we advocate. so, i ask, if we declare that we should understand the machines we operate at every level, then what about the people, the vast majority, who will never be able to understand complex ideas? put another way, whatever you believe, whatever it is, does it only apply to people who can fully understand and agree with it, or does your benevolence extend to all humanity, regardless of their faults? or somewhere in-between?

sl replied 23 Sep 2021 17:24 -0400
in reply to: https://letsalllovela.in/objects/3720d89f-9a36-4130-8666-7a4d9c32f357

@xj9 thanks for this. yeah, i’m not speaking to motivation at all, but purely practical matters of scale. the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. at some point, as rational beings, we do become (i think) responsible for the implications of what we advocate. so, i ask, if we declare that we should understand the machines we operate at every level, then what about the people, the vast majority, who will never be able to understand complex ideas? put another way, whatever you believe, whatever it is, does it only apply to people who can fully understand and agree with it, or does your benevolence extend to all humanity, regardless of their faults? or somewhere in-between?

sl replied 23 Sep 2021 17:18 -0400
in reply to: https://merveilles.town/users/eris/statuses/106982937023797264

@eris i think you’re reading too much into these terms. yes, there are people who can never learn to program, for example, no matter how hard they try. it falls on the competent (people who can learn to program) to provide programs. does providing programs imply a certain responsibility towards the programs’ users? now expand this same idea to human activity in general. are the competent (farmers, builders, healers) inherently responsible to task their competence to others? how is this administered? i’m not leading to a conclusion, i was curious if/what the participants in this thread thought about the question. maybe it’s intuitive and not a dilemma on a personal scale, but how do we fit the ramifications of that (any) conclusion to the current state of the world? i’m not a randian, fwiw.

sl replied 23 Sep 2021 17:12 -0400
in reply to: https://merveilles.town/users/eris/statuses/106982933382170261

@eris i’m sorry i come off that way. from my pov it seems like you have immediately assigned such authority to me and are now complaining about the predicament. i tend to distill things into very few words (especially in this format), which is obviously not working to foster understanding. for the record: i believe every human owns themselves, and i don’t place qualifications on what it means to be human.

sl replied 23 Sep 2021 15:03 -0400
in reply to: https://merveilles.town/users/neauoire/statuses/106982451975061745

@neauoire my point is that we (humanity) comprise a huge population reliant on existing dumbed down support systems fostered by capital, governments, social constructs (technology replaces competency, capital in its guises effectively farms humanity). freedom is a two-edged sword (parsons). strip away the support structure and most of us have no way to survive. we transfer responsibility for the dependent class from capital to the competent. what do the competent do with the ones incapable of learning, or succeeding, or surviving? i’m not saying, “let them die,” i’m asking if you’ve considered the problem. and again, sorry, i’ve trolled myself, this is indeed the wrong medium.

sl replied 23 Sep 2021 14:42 -0400
in reply to: https://merveilles.town/users/neauoire/statuses/106982295664413612

@neauoire i’m feeling out your perspective on these questions, not saying i think people should be made to do things. i think we have to face such questions directly, if only to be honest with ourselves about how our choices for ourselves intersect with spheres of influence we can’t control simply by gluing a name on them. for clarity: i’d self-identify as anarchist as well. i’d agree this is a poor forum for explication, sorry if this came off as glib.

sl replied 23 Sep 2021 13:57 -0400
in reply to: https://merveilles.town/users/neauoire/statuses/106982216137108503

@neauoire earth has a relatively large human population now because technology frees individuals from having to be competent to survive. if we redesign society to favor competence we’re necessarily going to come to a point where we have to deal with the majority who are incompetent. what do we do with them when they can’t be made competent?

sl posted 20 Sep 2021 23:37 -0400

wyse terminal still works, but sun ultra5 nvram is toast.

sl posted 20 Sep 2021 16:44 -0400

but is your mind traveling.