There's an analog magazine called IN FORMATION that has a witty yet chilling tagline: "Every day, computers are making people easier to use." That just about sums it up. Too many people are willing to trade the family cow for a handful of magic beans.
Yes, revived by the original editors, plus a new team of writers and designers. Fingers crossed it can be financially viable with everything stacked against it.
I just order a copy. Thanks for your info. Given the background of those involved - and the cost of the thing - I think they’ll be alright in the short term. Of course, magazine publishing has always been a good way to lose money.
I feel like this is probably an inversion of an early tech companies tag line - "every day, people are making computers easier to use" - but I can't place it. Insight??
It reminds me of tech in those early days, the race for what it might look like to have a PC in every household. My dad built operating systems before Windows won the race, my mom helped Bill Gates buy his first suit... So we had computers in our home long before the internet, which seemed to be when the push for global consumer PC use really made the climb.
By the time it happened in earnest, tho, most of us kids were just thrilled to play Mah Jong and Oregon Trail...
I was there, too. As a brand designer, I paid a lot of attention to taglines. I don't remember any quite like that. But there were scores of variations on "Inventing tomorrow today." Now the tagline du jour is "Changing the world one _______ at a time" (insert product here).
I've lived so long I've experienced the ebb and flow of conformity vs nonconformity (personhood vs hive mind)--Early 1960s, born into cookie-cutter suburbs of families with look-alike lifestyles/1967, Summer of Love's counterculture inspired my parents to leave the boxed-in life to travel the world in a trailer/1970s, conformists and nonconformists clashed, but the rebellious young adults seemed to be leading the way/1980s, conformity gained power again as the have-it-all campaigns (money, sex, power) swayed the masses into a haze of cocaine and gold glitter.
Early 2000s, as an early blogger, the internet felt wild and free. Search for almost anything and the the most unique content could be found.
Now? Corporations are on the top searches. Internet influencers speak in packaged word-phrases. Conformity means you are tapped in to the latest trend. With the speed of the internet, trends can change in months, weeks, days... If a Gen Z influencer mocks a Millenial for something, that mockable thing is a mark of shame, catapulting the "ick" in the speed of a ChatGPT click.
To paraphrase Orwell's words, "Slavery is freedom,"... "Sameness is Identity" to be unique is to be shamed.
In my suburban-toddler-turned-hippie-kid childhood, I embraced the nonconformist life--veering away in my 1980s teen years, in a pathetic quest to fit in with a vapor of chemical sprays and mousses clouding my brain grooves.
Now? I see where the crowd goes and head in the opposite direction. That's why my next book title is, "How To Stay Broke and Influence Nobody--in my search for joy."
on a side note, it may not seem like a lot in the scheme of all this, but you can nix the AI results in your google search results by clicking on the "Web" tab near the top of the page (in a row with other tabs such as "Images" and "Videos" or, if it isn't showing, the arrow alongside the "More" tab).
Yeah I do that. I've started kind of blurring my gaze so I consciously skip over the AI results without getting sucked into their sucky vortex and then clicking on the real results that I get to peruse, digest, and form my own opinion on.
Following the death of David Bowie the satirical UK magazine Private Eye ran a report poking fun at the outpouring of grief on social media - ‘David made us all feel so individual, says everyone.’
It's funny that you didn't mention the positive side to the oneness as portrayed in this show. I've always been a sucker for the collective--the Borg, Asimov's Gaia, etc. Every time we watch an episode of Pluribus, my husband and I delight in our debate. There is an upside, as far as we know so far anyway, and I have had to stop myself from doubling down into my self-assured need for "mine own SELF" when my husband extols the virtues of this weird collective.
I have had to admit that, if someone were able to join us all together--that there would be no more poverty, war; that we would be able to solve global problems--the shortage of energy, the environment; so many things would be better AND everyone would be happy?----well I have had to admit that I might just say "no," because....well.....I have a lot of status.
Can it be that simple? I am just so, so comfortable? Does this mean on some level that I actually VALUE the suffering of others? That I am so numb to that ever-present reality that I would rather keep things the way they are than be open to a change for the better?
I think all this during the show, and after my husband has argued for the merits of this new collective idea (rather like the old body snatchers, I think), and all during my days lately.
I don't know when I've been so repelled by oneness, I, who have always thought it would be such a wonderful thing, if we could ever achieve it. And perhaps that is the problem with the Pluribus union. It was not achieved over millions of years. It was thrust upon people. They had no say in it.
Thanks so much for this post. Now I have even more to discuss!
I’m thinking that the collective need not be the sameness. After all, in the world away from humans, diversity is vitality and evolution is not evenly distributed.
This is great and I love the conventional ideas of personhood and selfhood being critiqued. But it should be pointed out that Buddhists have been doing this for 2,500 years. The great Indian philospher Nagarjuna did this by attacking the notion of a self that existed inherently. In fact he attacked the very idea that anything existed by means of their own nature -- to show that they do in fact exist, but interdependently. That is, we can say we have selves, identities, personhood etc, but that they arise in interdependently, through countless changing causes and conditions. There is no findable permanent core/nature/essence to anyone or anything; and yet things still exist in functional ways.
This is not to criticize Ted's post. Just want to support what he's saying from another perspective. Plus, if you can really see that interdependence is our only reality, you can begin to appreciate that all our actions have an ethical importance -- which in my mind makes the tech lords even more reprehensible.
It actually isn’t really American. It was developed by people who were forced to live and work here against their will. To a great degree, Jazz is a reaction to this inhumanity. Maybe it’s splitting hairs, but I don’t feel America itself has a claim on Jazz. The Black community does.
Oh contraire. I'm white man and not a musician, but consider: Benny Goodman, Gene Krupa, Teddy Wilson. Louis Armstrong, Arvell Shaw, Trummy Young (Have Satchmo's autograph from 1957 in Montana). Duke Ellington, Barney Bigard, Cat Anderson, Louie Bellson. And a long-time favorite of the French and myself, Sidney Bechet. Stop locking people in tribes then shifting focus to oppressor/oppressed. Enjoy the creativity of those who play JAZZ, for God's sake!
African Americans fought long and hard, in some senses are still fighting, to be full citizens of this country. Somehow I don't think denying the Americanness of Jazz is furthering their citizenship.
Maybe. Full disclosure, I like old jazz, bee bop, New Orleans, 1930s40s swing, and some modern. I'm not big on the real avant garde stuff. Some jazz from the early 2000s sounds like elevator music. I like Big Band jazz, especially Stan Kenton's later stuff. I like guitar--Wes Montgomery, George Benson, John McLaughlin. Miles Davis is great, especially Kind of Blue. My favorite is his 'Jack Johnson' album. Also love the jazz organists, Jimmy Smith.
I was born an outsider even in the bosom of the British upper middle class of the early fifties. Since then, I’ve moved further and further towards total outsider status, ironically helped along by the several mass youth countercultures of the times. I remember the first flush of enthusiasm for digital media and culture in the late eighties to mid-nineties. Was, in fact, a fairly energetic participant. Who knew where it would go or how it would get perverted? However, at some point I realized I simply could not give a fuck about screen resolution when there was visual reality to look at. Further, once I understood the technical underpinnings of the internet, I knew it was going to be nothing other than a surveillance tool of whatever interests could grab ahold of it, although the precise outcomes remain uncertain. And, hell, let’s face it, try and get along without it these days. Neither you nor I can manage that little trick. But, I intend to die still an outsider to the best of my inclinations.
Couple of side points. AI stands for Absolute Imbecility among other things, none of which involve the word “intelligence.” My mantra these days is “Turn off, tune out, drop in.” Drop into reality such as it is if you’re wondering.
I think you underestimate our opponent. And i think you overestimate "the people". I say that bc i really honestly never wouldve thought we'd get to *here* with this shit. But here we are. Its like you said(or whoever said it first), the people are about as smart as 12 year olds.
None(or little at least) of this needs to be the way it is right now. If people would only *choose* not to do the things theyve got everyone so addicted to, a lot of this shit would get better almost immediately. You think these people are going to stand up and *force* changes for the better? Maybe 15 years ago. But not these people now. Besides, that just pushes the moment further down the road. And thats what everybody wants, to not have to do the hard shit now. When *these* things happen, *then* we'll be better(read that both ways, better off and better people). But for now i guess we'll just have to keep doing what we're doing. But when it happens ill be there!
No, thats not how we change.
I like that youre being more blunt with your decrying, but we havent even felt the boot on our necks yet. By the time people realize how serious this shit is, that boots gonna be pretty damn heavy.
People still flock to the latest cool thing, like substack now. Got the better form of heroin. The better form is always worse though. "And the hive mind is available to all of them via Chat GPT".. and social media, scrolling platforms, *here*.. all the same shit man. Maybe this is the highbrow place to come get your daily dose of thoughts, but that still is what it is. By all means, get paid while you can, but the revolution will not be restacked
So much of this erosion of personhood and autonomy has been happening for 20 years, and while it might be more noticeable for some, those of us in the world of privacy have been witness to this for a long time.
People have been more than happy to sacrifice their autonomy, identity, and event their right to be free from intrusion/surveillance happily for a few baubles, some convenience and entertainment, and the completely misguided notion that surveillance is safety and security.
So yeah, it's definitely becoming more noticeable in the mainstream, but we've been doing this to ourselves willingly for decades.
Prediction #1: "Critics of runaway tech will get much angrier and more vocal."
=> This will accelerate to mass revolt when data centers trigger brownouts and utility inflation that breaks the budgets of households where incomes are downsized by AI
The problem is that AI is usually wrong. You can browbeat it to say whatever you want, with exception. AI disregards a genocide in Palestine. Just don't say the truth about who is committing it. People can either be slaves to technology, OR, speak the truth.
So glad there are folks like Ted that can verbalize what I am always thinking, but unable to articulate. Pluribus is excellent, and so clearly a statement about A.I. We are all being lobotomized by the Tech Titans. Read Paul Kingsnorth's new book 'Against the Machine' for a polemic on the march of "progress" , it's a good read.
can verbalize what I am always thinking, but unable to articulate.
Thats not by accident. Its how they keep you coming back for more. But if one puts in a little effort, one can think articulately for ones self. But *this*, this does the opposite. It makes it harder for one to think
This is at best a very simplistic take on Hume's and Parfit's views on personal identity. Hume thought that knowledge was based on matters of fact, which come to us via the senses and give rise to "ideas", and relations between ideas (math, logic) He was concerned with debunking what he considered to be the conspiracy theories of his time, in particular religious and metaphysical ideas grounded in faith rather than observation or reason.
Personal identity, however, provided a particular challenge, because although the mind could be viewed as a bundle of ideas, there was nothing to differentiate one bundle of ideas (your mind) from another (my mind). He famously grappled with this in a very honest way in the appendix to the Treatise on Human Nature, and (Hume scholars may correct me) he more or less gave up, leaving this out of the more popular follow-up, Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. So it would be much fairer to say that Hume took pure empiricism -- in which the physical world was not assumed but inferred from experience -- to its limit. Hume did not discard the notion of an autonomous self -- Liberty and Necessity was all about how free will can coexist with determinism -- but he conceded that he had no empirical grounding for the self either.
I have not seen either of these Apple TV productions, but would like to. The problem is subscribing to another streaming service, since I have Netflix and Amazon already. I am a retired musician now writing my fourth book, which is my first fiction novel. I would love for you to review it. The main character is a musician getting his first gig 100 years in the future! I do not have a release date yet, but I should in the next few months after I hire an editor for a final edit. As to the theme of Pluribus, I think it is a comment on how social media guides people into bubbles using algorithms, so they no longer use critical thinking. Algorithms are the virus! Anyone outside the bubble is ostracized. Anyone who doubts and challenges the propaganda inside the bubble is threatened. Now AI is going to be used to further bubblize people to believe whatever non-truths are spouted in their bubbles. In other words, Pluribus describes a world where everyone believes the same thing, and the few people who do not are ostracized. Sound familiar?!
They do luckily make it easy to stop/pause subscriptions. Our household tends to cycle through subscriptions and only has one at a time. I don't spend enough time watching, nor do good shows come out often enough, to need multiple at the same time.
(Except YouTube premium, which has become the most valuable due to its wealth of niche topics. Small creators are incredible now)
People sure love that youtube crack! Ive watched youtube wither away the lives of many good people, and they always hold up the *content* as a shining justification. Its ok bc im watching (whatever subject is thought to be worthy) videos, not that shitty crap the kids watch.
But the results are the same. More videos, more screen time, less life.
Its kinda sad the way they cling to it. The way they want to tell you about what they watched, how much they want that experience to have value, like they did something, how they want *you* to value it and show interest in it. Bc its such a big part of their lives, but its actually nothing. They wont even remember what they watched a month later. It was a nothing experience, like masturbating. Just masturbating with really good content, but pleasuring the brain all the same.
Nah its totally different than what rock music did to people. Ofc older generations have always decried new whatevers that they felt were corrupting their youth. But this aint that. This gets young and old alike. Its not a form of rebellion from parents and societal norms. This fucks with peoples heads, fucks with how their brains work.
But you dont have to take my word for it. If you use youtube daily and havent noticed how its changed you, then you havent been paying attention(another sacrifice to the digital gods). Pay attention and youll see for yourself.
Lol no i dont care for those posts. But again, it has nothing to do with the content. It has to do with how he bemoans what technology is doing to our culture and then promotes one of the worst offenders. He thinks he can fix youtube, but youtube isnt broken. Its working exactly how its intended to. Like another commenter said, algorithms are the virus.
There's an analog magazine called IN FORMATION that has a witty yet chilling tagline: "Every day, computers are making people easier to use." That just about sums it up. Too many people are willing to trade the family cow for a handful of magic beans.
Is that a current magazine? I have a copy of a magazine with that title from the early ‘80s, but I’ve never seen or heard of another issue.
The same, first issue published in 1998, second and last in 2000; now resurrected.
For its 2025 revival, see https://informationmagazine.com/.
Same people? But very supercool to know that someone’s keeping at it.
Yes, revived by the original editors, plus a new team of writers and designers. Fingers crossed it can be financially viable with everything stacked against it.
I just order a copy. Thanks for your info. Given the background of those involved - and the cost of the thing - I think they’ll be alright in the short term. Of course, magazine publishing has always been a good way to lose money.
I feel like this is probably an inversion of an early tech companies tag line - "every day, people are making computers easier to use" - but I can't place it. Insight??
It reminds me of tech in those early days, the race for what it might look like to have a PC in every household. My dad built operating systems before Windows won the race, my mom helped Bill Gates buy his first suit... So we had computers in our home long before the internet, which seemed to be when the push for global consumer PC use really made the climb.
By the time it happened in earnest, tho, most of us kids were just thrilled to play Mah Jong and Oregon Trail...
I was there, too. As a brand designer, I paid a lot of attention to taglines. I don't remember any quite like that. But there were scores of variations on "Inventing tomorrow today." Now the tagline du jour is "Changing the world one _______ at a time" (insert product here).
Not to mention Scarab of Ra (early Mac).
Thanks for the IN FORMATION recommendation.
I've lived so long I've experienced the ebb and flow of conformity vs nonconformity (personhood vs hive mind)--Early 1960s, born into cookie-cutter suburbs of families with look-alike lifestyles/1967, Summer of Love's counterculture inspired my parents to leave the boxed-in life to travel the world in a trailer/1970s, conformists and nonconformists clashed, but the rebellious young adults seemed to be leading the way/1980s, conformity gained power again as the have-it-all campaigns (money, sex, power) swayed the masses into a haze of cocaine and gold glitter.
Early 2000s, as an early blogger, the internet felt wild and free. Search for almost anything and the the most unique content could be found.
Now? Corporations are on the top searches. Internet influencers speak in packaged word-phrases. Conformity means you are tapped in to the latest trend. With the speed of the internet, trends can change in months, weeks, days... If a Gen Z influencer mocks a Millenial for something, that mockable thing is a mark of shame, catapulting the "ick" in the speed of a ChatGPT click.
To paraphrase Orwell's words, "Slavery is freedom,"... "Sameness is Identity" to be unique is to be shamed.
In my suburban-toddler-turned-hippie-kid childhood, I embraced the nonconformist life--veering away in my 1980s teen years, in a pathetic quest to fit in with a vapor of chemical sprays and mousses clouding my brain grooves.
Now? I see where the crowd goes and head in the opposite direction. That's why my next book title is, "How To Stay Broke and Influence Nobody--in my search for joy."
There’s a saying in the uk that a Conservative is a Liberal with a spouse and 2 children
I’m waiting to read your book as well as +and-‘s, mentioned a few comments earlier. Or, if you’re looking for a co-author . . .
From 4 moptops in grey suits to 4 solo artists in ragged jeans -- diptych of the 1st cycle of this repeating ebb and flow
love the title!
Thank you.
agree on all points with ted.
on a side note, it may not seem like a lot in the scheme of all this, but you can nix the AI results in your google search results by clicking on the "Web" tab near the top of the page (in a row with other tabs such as "Images" and "Videos" or, if it isn't showing, the arrow alongside the "More" tab).
Yeah I do that. I've started kind of blurring my gaze so I consciously skip over the AI results without getting sucked into their sucky vortex and then clicking on the real results that I get to peruse, digest, and form my own opinion on.
I use startpage.com for searches and don’t get AI responses at all.
yeah i use duck duck go to search and you can turn off their ai results which is great.
Great tip. Thank you.
Following the death of David Bowie the satirical UK magazine Private Eye ran a report poking fun at the outpouring of grief on social media - ‘David made us all feel so individual, says everyone.’
It's funny that you didn't mention the positive side to the oneness as portrayed in this show. I've always been a sucker for the collective--the Borg, Asimov's Gaia, etc. Every time we watch an episode of Pluribus, my husband and I delight in our debate. There is an upside, as far as we know so far anyway, and I have had to stop myself from doubling down into my self-assured need for "mine own SELF" when my husband extols the virtues of this weird collective.
I have had to admit that, if someone were able to join us all together--that there would be no more poverty, war; that we would be able to solve global problems--the shortage of energy, the environment; so many things would be better AND everyone would be happy?----well I have had to admit that I might just say "no," because....well.....I have a lot of status.
Can it be that simple? I am just so, so comfortable? Does this mean on some level that I actually VALUE the suffering of others? That I am so numb to that ever-present reality that I would rather keep things the way they are than be open to a change for the better?
I think all this during the show, and after my husband has argued for the merits of this new collective idea (rather like the old body snatchers, I think), and all during my days lately.
I don't know when I've been so repelled by oneness, I, who have always thought it would be such a wonderful thing, if we could ever achieve it. And perhaps that is the problem with the Pluribus union. It was not achieved over millions of years. It was thrust upon people. They had no say in it.
Thanks so much for this post. Now I have even more to discuss!
I’m thinking that the collective need not be the sameness. After all, in the world away from humans, diversity is vitality and evolution is not evenly distributed.
Indeed. I’m very happy that my partner comes from a very different culture and our oneness is constantly challenged :)
Oh THANK you! I had not yet thought of that.
This is great and I love the conventional ideas of personhood and selfhood being critiqued. But it should be pointed out that Buddhists have been doing this for 2,500 years. The great Indian philospher Nagarjuna did this by attacking the notion of a self that existed inherently. In fact he attacked the very idea that anything existed by means of their own nature -- to show that they do in fact exist, but interdependently. That is, we can say we have selves, identities, personhood etc, but that they arise in interdependently, through countless changing causes and conditions. There is no findable permanent core/nature/essence to anyone or anything; and yet things still exist in functional ways.
This is not to criticize Ted's post. Just want to support what he's saying from another perspective. Plus, if you can really see that interdependence is our only reality, you can begin to appreciate that all our actions have an ethical importance -- which in my mind makes the tech lords even more reprehensible.
This is the country that invented JAZZ, for God’s sake!
It actually isn’t really American. It was developed by people who were forced to live and work here against their will. To a great degree, Jazz is a reaction to this inhumanity. Maybe it’s splitting hairs, but I don’t feel America itself has a claim on Jazz. The Black community does.
Oh contraire. I'm white man and not a musician, but consider: Benny Goodman, Gene Krupa, Teddy Wilson. Louis Armstrong, Arvell Shaw, Trummy Young (Have Satchmo's autograph from 1957 in Montana). Duke Ellington, Barney Bigard, Cat Anderson, Louie Bellson. And a long-time favorite of the French and myself, Sidney Bechet. Stop locking people in tribes then shifting focus to oppressor/oppressed. Enjoy the creativity of those who play JAZZ, for God's sake!
" Stop locking people in tribes then shifting focus to oppressor/oppressed. Enjoy the creativity of those who play JAZZ, for God's sake!"
Yes indeed
Read what Art Blakey said about jazz: https://www.azquotes.com/quote/29001
African Americans fought long and hard, in some senses are still fighting, to be full citizens of this country. Somehow I don't think denying the Americanness of Jazz is furthering their citizenship.
Yes, and how many young people know anything about Jazz?
Probably as many as always have - a small percentage (thank God)
Maybe. Full disclosure, I like old jazz, bee bop, New Orleans, 1930s40s swing, and some modern. I'm not big on the real avant garde stuff. Some jazz from the early 2000s sounds like elevator music. I like Big Band jazz, especially Stan Kenton's later stuff. I like guitar--Wes Montgomery, George Benson, John McLaughlin. Miles Davis is great, especially Kind of Blue. My favorite is his 'Jack Johnson' album. Also love the jazz organists, Jimmy Smith.
I was born an outsider even in the bosom of the British upper middle class of the early fifties. Since then, I’ve moved further and further towards total outsider status, ironically helped along by the several mass youth countercultures of the times. I remember the first flush of enthusiasm for digital media and culture in the late eighties to mid-nineties. Was, in fact, a fairly energetic participant. Who knew where it would go or how it would get perverted? However, at some point I realized I simply could not give a fuck about screen resolution when there was visual reality to look at. Further, once I understood the technical underpinnings of the internet, I knew it was going to be nothing other than a surveillance tool of whatever interests could grab ahold of it, although the precise outcomes remain uncertain. And, hell, let’s face it, try and get along without it these days. Neither you nor I can manage that little trick. But, I intend to die still an outsider to the best of my inclinations.
Couple of side points. AI stands for Absolute Imbecility among other things, none of which involve the word “intelligence.” My mantra these days is “Turn off, tune out, drop in.” Drop into reality such as it is if you’re wondering.
I think you underestimate our opponent. And i think you overestimate "the people". I say that bc i really honestly never wouldve thought we'd get to *here* with this shit. But here we are. Its like you said(or whoever said it first), the people are about as smart as 12 year olds.
None(or little at least) of this needs to be the way it is right now. If people would only *choose* not to do the things theyve got everyone so addicted to, a lot of this shit would get better almost immediately. You think these people are going to stand up and *force* changes for the better? Maybe 15 years ago. But not these people now. Besides, that just pushes the moment further down the road. And thats what everybody wants, to not have to do the hard shit now. When *these* things happen, *then* we'll be better(read that both ways, better off and better people). But for now i guess we'll just have to keep doing what we're doing. But when it happens ill be there!
No, thats not how we change.
I like that youre being more blunt with your decrying, but we havent even felt the boot on our necks yet. By the time people realize how serious this shit is, that boots gonna be pretty damn heavy.
People still flock to the latest cool thing, like substack now. Got the better form of heroin. The better form is always worse though. "And the hive mind is available to all of them via Chat GPT".. and social media, scrolling platforms, *here*.. all the same shit man. Maybe this is the highbrow place to come get your daily dose of thoughts, but that still is what it is. By all means, get paid while you can, but the revolution will not be restacked
So much of this erosion of personhood and autonomy has been happening for 20 years, and while it might be more noticeable for some, those of us in the world of privacy have been witness to this for a long time.
People have been more than happy to sacrifice their autonomy, identity, and event their right to be free from intrusion/surveillance happily for a few baubles, some convenience and entertainment, and the completely misguided notion that surveillance is safety and security.
So yeah, it's definitely becoming more noticeable in the mainstream, but we've been doing this to ourselves willingly for decades.
Hear hear!
Prediction #1: "Critics of runaway tech will get much angrier and more vocal."
=> This will accelerate to mass revolt when data centers trigger brownouts and utility inflation that breaks the budgets of households where incomes are downsized by AI
The problem is that AI is usually wrong. You can browbeat it to say whatever you want, with exception. AI disregards a genocide in Palestine. Just don't say the truth about who is committing it. People can either be slaves to technology, OR, speak the truth.
or be honest
So glad there are folks like Ted that can verbalize what I am always thinking, but unable to articulate. Pluribus is excellent, and so clearly a statement about A.I. We are all being lobotomized by the Tech Titans. Read Paul Kingsnorth's new book 'Against the Machine' for a polemic on the march of "progress" , it's a good read.
can verbalize what I am always thinking, but unable to articulate.
Thats not by accident. Its how they keep you coming back for more. But if one puts in a little effort, one can think articulately for ones self. But *this*, this does the opposite. It makes it harder for one to think
This is at best a very simplistic take on Hume's and Parfit's views on personal identity. Hume thought that knowledge was based on matters of fact, which come to us via the senses and give rise to "ideas", and relations between ideas (math, logic) He was concerned with debunking what he considered to be the conspiracy theories of his time, in particular religious and metaphysical ideas grounded in faith rather than observation or reason.
Personal identity, however, provided a particular challenge, because although the mind could be viewed as a bundle of ideas, there was nothing to differentiate one bundle of ideas (your mind) from another (my mind). He famously grappled with this in a very honest way in the appendix to the Treatise on Human Nature, and (Hume scholars may correct me) he more or less gave up, leaving this out of the more popular follow-up, Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. So it would be much fairer to say that Hume took pure empiricism -- in which the physical world was not assumed but inferred from experience -- to its limit. Hume did not discard the notion of an autonomous self -- Liberty and Necessity was all about how free will can coexist with determinism -- but he conceded that he had no empirical grounding for the self either.
I have not seen either of these Apple TV productions, but would like to. The problem is subscribing to another streaming service, since I have Netflix and Amazon already. I am a retired musician now writing my fourth book, which is my first fiction novel. I would love for you to review it. The main character is a musician getting his first gig 100 years in the future! I do not have a release date yet, but I should in the next few months after I hire an editor for a final edit. As to the theme of Pluribus, I think it is a comment on how social media guides people into bubbles using algorithms, so they no longer use critical thinking. Algorithms are the virus! Anyone outside the bubble is ostracized. Anyone who doubts and challenges the propaganda inside the bubble is threatened. Now AI is going to be used to further bubblize people to believe whatever non-truths are spouted in their bubbles. In other words, Pluribus describes a world where everyone believes the same thing, and the few people who do not are ostracized. Sound familiar?!
They do luckily make it easy to stop/pause subscriptions. Our household tends to cycle through subscriptions and only has one at a time. I don't spend enough time watching, nor do good shows come out often enough, to need multiple at the same time.
(Except YouTube premium, which has become the most valuable due to its wealth of niche topics. Small creators are incredible now)
People sure love that youtube crack! Ive watched youtube wither away the lives of many good people, and they always hold up the *content* as a shining justification. Its ok bc im watching (whatever subject is thought to be worthy) videos, not that shitty crap the kids watch.
But the results are the same. More videos, more screen time, less life.
Its kinda sad the way they cling to it. The way they want to tell you about what they watched, how much they want that experience to have value, like they did something, how they want *you* to value it and show interest in it. Bc its such a big part of their lives, but its actually nothing. They wont even remember what they watched a month later. It was a nothing experience, like masturbating. Just masturbating with really good content, but pleasuring the brain all the same.
That sounds like how my step-grandpa talked about rock music.
I take it you don't enjoy Ted's regular "Videos on YouTube" posts.
Nah its totally different than what rock music did to people. Ofc older generations have always decried new whatevers that they felt were corrupting their youth. But this aint that. This gets young and old alike. Its not a form of rebellion from parents and societal norms. This fucks with peoples heads, fucks with how their brains work.
But you dont have to take my word for it. If you use youtube daily and havent noticed how its changed you, then you havent been paying attention(another sacrifice to the digital gods). Pay attention and youll see for yourself.
Lol no i dont care for those posts. But again, it has nothing to do with the content. It has to do with how he bemoans what technology is doing to our culture and then promotes one of the worst offenders. He thinks he can fix youtube, but youtube isnt broken. Its working exactly how its intended to. Like another commenter said, algorithms are the virus.
I look forward to reading your book. Great idea.
... revealing our hidden fear, or holding up a mirror?
A black mirror.