[ a / b / art / cy / lain / alt / o ] [ wired / meta ] [ home / information / affiliates / updates ] [ mebious ]

/b/ - Random

Changes over time.
Password (For file deletion.)

File: 1690588947825.jpg (165.87 KB, 1080x830, ad9caed144d64365baebac8477….jpg)



i heard of this for memes like pic related

i see a video about the unabomber´s manifiesto and think it for a while and the problems in the actual society, i make this thread because for talk about this topic, ¿do you agree whit the unabomber´s manifiesto? ¿what do you think about the topic? when i see the video i think the criticism of unabomber go more to the economics and politics more than the technology itself, It gives the impression that he talks more about how society works in conjunction with the economy and politics of recent years than about technology itself. Perhaps the problem is not technology itself, but how it is used, in the sense that it is used more to empower companies and governments instead of benefiting humanity, as happens, for example, with social media which, instead of being used to communicate with each other, are used for media manipulation, abusing our online privacy, etc.

is a opinion than have after see the video, if you agree or disagree whit me, talk abou, maybe I'm making a mistake and I'm even looking like a fool writing this


I can't really opine on his writings, as though I've been meaning to read them and have had them sitting in my documents folder for a while I've never gotten around to it. Though I've long had luddic and sympathies, and from what I've gathered through osmosis (unreliable) I probably agree with most of what he has to say. I'm really writing this to make a commitment to finally get around to reading them and then share my thoughts here once I do.


same, i dont really opine on his writings and dont know much of the topic, but, try to reformulate the thread, ¿think the tech is goof or bad for humanity? ¿we use tech for good or bad? ¿do you like to live without internet and tech like neolitics? in other word, what are your thoughts about this topic


File: 1691003794917.png (384.1 KB, 500x500, wise mystical tree.png)

there's an old saying that goes: "fire is a good servant but a bad master"
we shouldn't let technology be the master


File: 1691256350750.jpg (38.47 KB, 750x564, 1637302406018.jpg)

I'm not going to watch the video, but I have read ISAIF and I don't agree with it. While Kaczynski made a lot of really interesting points throughout and is generally logically sound, the biggest glaring contradiction through the whole thing is his insistence that things should be done about technology after having stated that trying to bring about massive changes in society rarely works, either fading away shortly after or having huge unintended side effects that change its usefulness. It just seems like Kaczynski hadn't yet experienced any serious cognitive dissonance between those two beliefs.
As for my beliefs on the topic, I do believe in a socially measured approach to technology. I think that tech has become too pervasive in our lives, particularly by exploiting our capabilities for addiction. I think most people are aware of this, even most of the people who find themselves constantly feeding their addictions, but feel powerless to stop the massive corporations that all but manage that part of their lives for them. If only there were some people out there who thought of a system where working class people had control of these things… If they did exist, surely Dr. Kaczynski wouldn't criticize them for the most nonsensical reason imaginable…
Regardless, I would like to leave you with an interesting letter TJK wrote from prison, one that isn't related to anything I've said today: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ted-kaczynski-ted-kaczynski-letter-to-an-anonymous-german

– Sent from my iPhone


File: 1691420907396-0.jpg (160.18 KB, 1080x1076, 2yr7ilgm47gb1.jpg)

File: 1691420907396-1.jpg (255.37 KB, 2047x2034, l1c2noch5k6b1.jpg)

I did not watch the video because I read the manifesto and youtube in general is pure cancer.
The problem with Uncle Ted, apart from his methods, is his romanticizing notion of life in pre-industrial societies, where he occasionally even imagines realities that may well fit Stone Age ways of life, but not pre-industrial ones in the true sense of the word. Technological progress began the day the first rudimentary instrument was invented, and even in medieval times mankind was already so far removed from nature that those who lived alone as hunter-gatherers were considered oddities, although it should be noted that those who made such a decision usually did so for religious reasons.
The problem is therefore generally not the progress itself, but the direction in which it moves, or the way in which it is applied. The reason for this is that, at the same time as the Industrial Revolution, an economic order based on private ownership of the means of production and on the exploitation of wage labor began to consolidate and still exists today. In order to prevent the alienation of man from nature and society and the moral decay that comes with it, one would not have to destroy the technology through which this development takes place, as Ted intended, but rather the economic system that is the reason for the alienation.


>t. Lainchan user


good answer, when i heart about this topic, i think was something wrong with uncle ted but i dont know how say the problem or what say say

>>one would not have to destroy the technology through which this development takes place

this sound likes solarpunk


I actually can opine on his writings as I have read them.
His manifesto is pretty wholesome, in the true meaning of the word, not in the emotional reddit-interpretation.
He not only lays out all of his arguments but also all counterarguments.
What he says about this "misuse" argument is something like this:
The conservatives blame the leftists for the retardation of society, when actually a society can never uphold its traditions and values when technological progress happens as it reshifts the whole way the society works.
Also he states (which fits really well to the "just dont misuse it" point):
When a technology gets invented, not only can it be misused, it will be misused. The reason is that the technology always has a use and that use always gives an advantage. No matter how many governments say, dont (mis)use this technology, the technology has been developed so for it the timeline is endless. And one day, someone (think off china f.e. to get an edge on US Gov) will change his opinion and use this tech. Then everyone else will have to follow to be able to compete and soon it will be a necessity to use it.
His example in this case I think was gen-tech.
When youre able to make a fetus more healthy, smart and strong then itll be immoral to do so. Until china or korea does so. And sooner or later if you dont do it, your child is literally retarded in comparisson to everyone else.
You as an individual may have the choice to use or not use some tech. But society as a whole hasnt. And every tech comes with an advantage and disadvantage. And it always gives some freedoms here and takes some there. It makes the system go more smooth and create more money, but itll always reshape the society into something a little less natural for a human. Until we live in a completely unnatural world and psych illness will spike (yes he predicted that and thats where we are now).


File: 1693851904775.png (114.31 KB, 1035x737, 09042023_142355.png)



I wrote it that way, because >>5581 wrote it that way, but the other way around.


tecnology bad because retards like you use it ok?


This is correct, only relatively few humans are compatible with the internet, many will fall astray and into the trappings of the wired while relegating meat space as secondary or even as non existing. Technology its a tool nothing more or less.

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ a / b / art / cy / lain / alt / o ] [ wired / meta ] [ home / information / affiliates / updates ] [ mebious ]