Sunday, May 16, 2010

Why the future doesn't need us & other stupid statements.

"Given the incredible power of these new technologies, shouldn't we be asking how we can best coexist with them? And if our own extinction is a likely, or even possible, outcome of our technological development, shouldn't we proceed with great caution?" -Billy Joy, founder of Sun Microsystems. I remember when this piece first came out, but wasn't compelled to comment on it or share it for some reason. I think i was over-futured out at that point, but here i am again. I popped this up because Feral House has released a collection Ted Theodore Kaczynski's writings called "Technological Slavery". I'm not a fan of Kaczynski, never have been, but i think it's a good move on Feral House's part to publish his work, no matter my opinion on how poisonous & mentally ill it is. They also published a big Trojan Horse of a book supposedly about Black Metal & the satanic aspects of Rock & Roll music, but inside was an absurd amount of information on Black Metal's own Louis Farrakhan: Varg Vikernes. This isn't a criticism, i quite enjoyed the book & the content by Varg & the shaping of Black Metal as a mystic racial concept was pretty interesting. I'm just emphasizing that it fits in with Feral House's general ISM. Anyhow, my point, pure & simple is that the idea of technology overtaking humanity & this somehow being rationalized (not unlike Battlestar Galactica) is bloody stupid, self-hating humans are mentally ill & should be treated as such, technology is part of what we do as a species & complicates things sure, we're not just fucking chimpanzees eating bananas all day, & that's a damn good thing. Anti-civilization theory is a mistake, it might bring up some interesting angles, but ultimately it's a pathetic, loser mentality for cowards that don't have the balls to pick up the torch that was handed off to us. You don't drop the torch, waving your hands around as the flame lightly scorches your arm hair, you hold the torch out & RUN WITH IT.

2 comments:

ULAND said...

I think there are three courses; one is the laissez faire approach, where we just kind of let technology take us where it will. It's the 8 year old kid with an iphone type scenario. Second, is to take the futurist, "post-human" route, where we prod along all these advances to their "logical" outcomes. You know that script.
Third is a form of protectionism, where you guard against certain advances for fear that they will lead us toward degeneracy; nerds hooked into machines can't plow fields. Kids who're online all the time will have a hard time focusing for any extended period of time.
Forced to choose, I'd go with #3. I have a pretty distinct idea of what I value, and can see that being infringed upon, or threatened. It's not perfect, but I'll stick with the devil I know..

SEAN ÄABERG said...

What about option four, grab our creation by the throat & direct it where we want it to go?