I look forward to the sequel to Johnathan Strange and Mr Norrel though, mostly because the author is brilliant, she's taking her time, and the premise sounds good.
Its supposed to focus on Childermass and Vincules and the aftermath of the incidents in the first book years later.
Childermass is such an interesting character.
Eddy on
"and the morning stars I have seen
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
do you seriously not understand why there might be downsides to feeling the thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations of billions of other people?
Well, there would be no more war, conflict or strife of any kind I would imagine... The hungry would be fed, the sick cared for...
not necessarily true - if a hivemind sees everybody as equal parts to itself, it will let parts die in order to preserve resources and keep the healthy portions functioning correctly.
But feeling the cost in life and comfort, we'd be able to truly appreciate its value. No sacrifice would be meaningless, no suffering would be wrongfully ignored.
or we're just as expendable because we are gears in a machine. tell me, do you have a stronger emotional connection to one of your internal organs over another?
do you seriously not understand why there might be downsides to feeling the thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations of billions of other people?
Well, there would be no more war, conflict or strife of any kind I would imagine... The hungry would be fed, the sick cared for...
not necessarily true - if a hivemind sees everybody as equal parts to itself, it will let parts die in order to preserve resources and keep the healthy portions functioning correctly.
if your hand is hurt, you aim to heal it
if it gets gangrene you cut it off to survive
the hand doesn't suffer, you do.
and still there would be no war, conflict or strife of any kind imaginable
Being the Borg / Zerg / Human Ant Colony would be pretty awesome in terms of pure efficiency
As long as our goal as a society is to just....function. Never making anything original, never progressing.
Well, yeah, that's why I said in terms of pure efficiency. The thought does conflict a lot with intrinsic human needs (the need for self-actualization, primarily)
Eddy on
"and the morning stars I have seen
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
I was reading about baby names and Isabella has been one of the most popular girl names for the past couple of years.
I think it might be number one.
People are naming their children after Twilight.
Just thought I'd let y'all know.
It's pretty common for childrens names to be related to horrible bits of media.
Also consider the correlation less than adequate education has with consuming poor media and believing things like "if he comes while the girl is on top you can't get pregnant" or "two condoms is always better than one" and it's really not a far stretch.
yeah man i hear some dudes think the earth is 6000 years old or some shit
Dracula on
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I've never seen more than a little of MSNBC, but I'm pretty sure it does not fudge details, manipulate facts, or misinform viewers to the degree that Fox does
Okay
MSNBC has a prime time block of shows that are very liberal leaning and do present the republicans in a very bad light. depending on your philosophy, this is either earned or it isn't.
These shows do not fabricate facts to rail on the pubs though; they are using the material that is very real, and present.
Meanwhile, Fox not only has a very conservative block of shows in their primetime, they constantly message for the pubs throughout the day, Call Republicans democrats when they fuck up, and purposefully lie to their watchers.
Being the Borg / Zerg / Human Ant Colony would be pretty awesome in terms of pure efficiency
pure efficiency would have a certain novelty aspect to it when it comes to witnessing it, but all in all it's a boring and pointless concept with regard to sentient life
pure efficiency on a very small scale, however, is pretty awe-inspiring
do you seriously not understand why there might be downsides to feeling the thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations of billions of other people?
Well, there would be no more war, conflict or strife of any kind I would imagine... The hungry would be fed, the sick cared for...
not necessarily true - if a hivemind sees everybody as equal parts to itself, it will let parts die in order to preserve resources and keep the healthy portions functioning correctly.
But feeling the cost in life and comfort, we'd be able to truly appreciate its value. No sacrifice would be meaningless, no suffering would be wrongfully ignored.
or we're just as expendable because we are gears in a machine. tell me, do you have a stronger emotional connection to one of your internal organs over another?
do you seriously not understand why there might be downsides to feeling the thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations of billions of other people?
Well, there would be no more war, conflict or strife of any kind I would imagine... The hungry would be fed, the sick cared for...
not necessarily true - if a hivemind sees everybody as equal parts to itself, it will let parts die in order to preserve resources and keep the healthy portions functioning correctly.
if your hand is hurt, you aim to heal it
if it gets gangrene you cut it off to survive
the hand doesn't suffer, you do.
and still there would be no war, conflict or strife of any kind imaginable
We'd only potentially be at odds with the world around us, and I suspect we'd find that sustainability is in our best interests. It wouldn't be a perfect world, but it would be a more meaningful one.
Being the Borg / Zerg / Human Ant Colony would be pretty awesome in terms of pure efficiency
As long as our goal as a society is to just....function. Never making anything original, never progressing.
This is just silly.
Leave a man completely alone and he'll make plenty of original stuff and progress all the time. You don't need other people to be able to think.
Progress is also one of those things that would get bloody efficient.
Abdhyius on
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
edited December 2010
How could god be the source of ethics? All he can do is punish or reward you; how is that any different from an especially domineering parents? Domineering parents might punish you for marrying outside the race or joining the freedom riders, but they cannot make it wrong for you to do so.
Sure you can say: god is perfectly good, so of course doing what he tells you is perfectly good. But that's a tight little definitional circle. What about god is it that makes him perfectly good, aside from just your saying so?
I look forward to the sequel to Johnathan Strange and Mr Norrel though, mostly because the author is brilliant, she's taking her time, and the premise sounds good.
Its supposed to focus on Childermass and Vincules and the aftermath of the incidents in the first book years later.
Childermass is such an interesting character.
He was. It was the little things that made that book great.
Like Norrel and Strange's "confrontation" at the end
Or Wellington shrugging off Strange's madness
Or Drawlight encountering Strange in Vienna
How could god be the source of ethics? All he can do is punish or reward you; how is that any different from an especially domineering parents? Domineering parents might punish you for marrying outside the race or joining the freedom riders, but they cannot make it wrong for you to do so.
Sure you can say: god is perfectly good, so of course doing what he tells you is perfectly good. But that's a tight little definitional circle. What about god is it that makes him perfectly good, aside from just your saying so?
do you seriously not understand why there might be downsides to feeling the thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations of billions of other people?
Well, there would be no more war, conflict or strife of any kind I would imagine... The hungry would be fed, the sick cared for...
not necessarily true - if a hivemind sees everybody as equal parts to itself, it will let parts die in order to preserve resources and keep the healthy portions functioning correctly.
But feeling the cost in life and comfort, we'd be able to truly appreciate its value. No sacrifice would be meaningless, no suffering would be wrongfully ignored.
or we're just as expendable because we are gears in a machine. tell me, do you have a stronger emotional connection to one of your internal organs over another?
No, I don't share empathy with my physical body.
So why would the hive mind?
I don't think it would necessarily create empathy (though that would be awesome) but I know I don't give away or damage my own organs lightly. I don't need to cry over them or love one more than the other to preserve them. Shit hurts.
How could god be the source of ethics? All he can do is punish or reward you; how is that any different from an especially domineering parents? Domineering parents might punish you for marrying outside the race or joining the freedom riders, but they cannot make it wrong for you to do so.
Sure you can say: god is perfectly good, so of course doing what he tells you is perfectly good. But that's a tight little definitional circle. What about god is it that makes him perfectly good, aside from just your saying so?
Well, if I define God as the greatest conceivable being; then it follows that this being must be good (for a being that is great and good is greater than a being that is great but not good); therefore the greatest conceivable being must also be of the greatest good.
Edit: This is in no way a serious post.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
fox news isn't even a news network, I mean they don't even vet their sources. Where else did we get a carrier group being deployed to india? It is smart though, if you make up crazy accustions the crazy will get more attention than the rational explanation.
also I adored jonathan strange. It was very dense but with a good directorbit could make a fine movie
How could god be the source of ethics? All he can do is punish or reward you; how is that any different from an especially domineering parents? Domineering parents might punish you for marrying outside the race or joining the freedom riders, but they cannot make it wrong for you to do so.
Sure you can say: god is perfectly good, so of course doing what he tells you is perfectly good. But that's a tight little definitional circle. What about god is it that makes him perfectly good, aside from just your saying so?
Well, if I define God as the greatest conceivable being; then it follows that this being must be good (for a being that is great and good is greater than a being that is great but not good); therefore the greatest conceivable being must also be of the greatest good.
Edit: This is in no way a serious post.
Yeah that edit stopped me from calling out some circular logic all up ins!
Eddy on
"and the morning stars I have seen
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
do you seriously not understand why there might be downsides to feeling the thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations of billions of other people?
Well, there would be no more war, conflict or strife of any kind I would imagine... The hungry would be fed, the sick cared for...
not necessarily true - if a hivemind sees everybody as equal parts to itself, it will let parts die in order to preserve resources and keep the healthy portions functioning correctly.
But feeling the cost in life and comfort, we'd be able to truly appreciate its value. No sacrifice would be meaningless, no suffering would be wrongfully ignored.
or we're just as expendable because we are gears in a machine. tell me, do you have a stronger emotional connection to one of your internal organs over another?
No, I don't share empathy with my physical body.
So why would the hive mind?
I don't think it would necessarily create empathy (though that would be awesome) but I know I don't give away or damage my own organs lightly. I don't need to cry over them or love one more than the other to preserve them. Shit hurts.
So life would not be appreciated, because there is no emotional connection to it. Just as skin cells on your body die all the time and you feel nothing, a hive mind would not feel anything for the deaths of people, either.
Zombiemambo on
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
How could god be the source of ethics? All he can do is punish or reward you; how is that any different from an especially domineering parents? Domineering parents might punish you for marrying outside the race or joining the freedom riders, but they cannot make it wrong for you to do so.
Sure you can say: god is perfectly good, so of course doing what he tells you is perfectly good. But that's a tight little definitional circle. What about god is it that makes him perfectly good, aside from just your saying so?
Nothing.
Boo@divine command theory.
Also, depending on what you mean by "hive mind" it is simply impossible for any of us to be "in one," just the same way it's impossible for any of us to be someone else (if we were someone else, we would not any longer be us).
do you seriously not understand why there might be downsides to feeling the thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations of billions of other people?
Well, there would be no more war, conflict or strife of any kind I would imagine... The hungry would be fed, the sick cared for...
not necessarily true - if a hivemind sees everybody as equal parts to itself, it will let parts die in order to preserve resources and keep the healthy portions functioning correctly.
But feeling the cost in life and comfort, we'd be able to truly appreciate its value. No sacrifice would be meaningless, no suffering would be wrongfully ignored.
or we're just as expendable because we are gears in a machine. tell me, do you have a stronger emotional connection to one of your internal organs over another?
No, I don't share empathy with my physical body.
So why would the hive mind?
I don't think it would necessarily create empathy (though that would be awesome) but I know I don't give away or damage my own organs lightly. I don't need to cry over them or love one more than the other to preserve them. Shit hurts.
So life would not be appreciated, because there is no emotional connection to it. Just as skin cells on your body die all the time and you feel nothing, a hive mind would not feel anything for the deaths of people, either.
Life of the hive mind would be appreciated.
Or are you saying it's a bad thing that we don't feel anything for our skin cells?
do you seriously not understand why there might be downsides to feeling the thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations of billions of other people?
Well, there would be no more war, conflict or strife of any kind I would imagine... The hungry would be fed, the sick cared for...
not necessarily true - if a hivemind sees everybody as equal parts to itself, it will let parts die in order to preserve resources and keep the healthy portions functioning correctly.
But feeling the cost in life and comfort, we'd be able to truly appreciate its value. No sacrifice would be meaningless, no suffering would be wrongfully ignored.
or we're just as expendable because we are gears in a machine. tell me, do you have a stronger emotional connection to one of your internal organs over another?
No, I don't share empathy with my physical body.
So why would the hive mind?
I don't think it would necessarily create empathy (though that would be awesome) but I know I don't give away or damage my own organs lightly. I don't need to cry over them or love one more than the other to preserve them. Shit hurts.
So life would not be appreciated, because there is no emotional connection to it. Just as skin cells on your body die all the time and you feel nothing, a hive mind would not feel anything for the deaths of people, either.
Posts
Childermass is such an interesting character.
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
I just had this song stuck in my head about 6 hours ago.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
No, I don't share empathy with my physical body.
Until you are found to be an inefficient component, sure.
if your hand is hurt, you aim to heal it
if it gets gangrene you cut it off to survive
the hand doesn't suffer, you do.
and still there would be no war, conflict or strife of any kind imaginable
Well, yeah, that's why I said in terms of pure efficiency. The thought does conflict a lot with intrinsic human needs (the need for self-actualization, primarily)
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
yeah man i hear some dudes think the earth is 6000 years old or some shit
MSNBC has a prime time block of shows that are very liberal leaning and do present the republicans in a very bad light. depending on your philosophy, this is either earned or it isn't.
These shows do not fabricate facts to rail on the pubs though; they are using the material that is very real, and present.
Meanwhile, Fox not only has a very conservative block of shows in their primetime, they constantly message for the pubs throughout the day, Call Republicans democrats when they fuck up, and purposefully lie to their watchers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXcU6ZvHtXg
I double dog dare you to find anything like that from MSNBC.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
pure efficiency would have a certain novelty aspect to it when it comes to witnessing it, but all in all it's a boring and pointless concept with regard to sentient life
pure efficiency on a very small scale, however, is pretty awe-inspiring
PSN/XBL: Zampanov -- Steam: Zampanov
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
!
So why would the hive mind?
We'd only potentially be at odds with the world around us, and I suspect we'd find that sustainability is in our best interests. It wouldn't be a perfect world, but it would be a more meaningful one.
What about all the orgasms you'd get to experience like... every second.
This is just silly.
Leave a man completely alone and he'll make plenty of original stuff and progress all the time. You don't need other people to be able to think.
Progress is also one of those things that would get bloody efficient.
Sure you can say: god is perfectly good, so of course doing what he tells you is perfectly good. But that's a tight little definitional circle. What about god is it that makes him perfectly good, aside from just your saying so?
He was. It was the little things that made that book great.
Or Wellington shrugging off Strange's madness
Or Drawlight encountering Strange in Vienna
fucking love that book.
Wouldn't that lead to the death of a lot of people, I mean if we all felt their pain we certainly as a group would want them removed?
pleasepaypreacher.net
Nothing.
I don't think it would necessarily create empathy (though that would be awesome) but I know I don't give away or damage my own organs lightly. I don't need to cry over them or love one more than the other to preserve them. Shit hurts.
I would think that, should we find ourselves part of a collective conscious, there are portions of the world we'd deem not worth saving.
Well, if I define God as the greatest conceivable being; then it follows that this being must be good (for a being that is great and good is greater than a being that is great but not good); therefore the greatest conceivable being must also be of the greatest good.
Edit: This is in no way a serious post.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
but that depends on your definition of God, of which there are so many definitions it's best to not broach the subject any further
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
Again it's like cutting off your hand
I don't mean hive mind in that we're just all reading eachother's minds all the time (mind hive?), I mean we're one mind
also I adored jonathan strange. It was very dense but with a good directorbit could make a fine movie
Right? Presumably survival would be in our perceived best interest, and wasteful death would not be desired.
Yeah that edit stopped me from calling out some circular logic all up ins!
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
So life would not be appreciated, because there is no emotional connection to it. Just as skin cells on your body die all the time and you feel nothing, a hive mind would not feel anything for the deaths of people, either.
Boo@divine command theory.
Also, depending on what you mean by "hive mind" it is simply impossible for any of us to be "in one," just the same way it's impossible for any of us to be someone else (if we were someone else, we would not any longer be us).
Or kill ourselves from too much stimuli.
I spent most of Sunday doing an old-school hip-hop routine to that.
Check baby check baby one two three four
Check baby check baby one two three
Check baby check baby one two
Check baby check baby one
Better version!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6fUp6U6wdI
exactly so we'd strive to make deaths not wasteful.
But the point is death wouldn't be a bad thing
it's like your cells dying and being replaced
that's not people dying, not how we define people
humanity would be one person
Twenty orgasms a second.
Thats not a fair example though. We're not talking about one guy on an island for a little while who learns how to build a better mouse trap.
We're talking about 6 billion humans learning and adapting to the seismic shifts that will occur in a society.
Life of the hive mind would be appreciated.
Or are you saying it's a bad thing that we don't feel anything for our skin cells?
So pretty much humanity just locks up.
God will fuck you up when he finds out you did it too.
Either god, or the office quarterback.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Well are we organs or are we skin cells?