Singularity or Revolution

Among the many non-sequiturs I force onto the people who happen to be near me, one of my questions is "Would you rather go through a revolution or give into the singularity?" The last chance I asked this I was at an anime convention and the answer from everyone was, unsurprisingly, "singularity". I still don't know why I was surprised that a bunch of adults still into cartoons and the "culture" surrounding them would be willing to take whatever the system foisted onto them as long as they got their Pablum. Media-brains are easy to talk to but usually pretty vapid. Ask the question I asked to everyone you consider a friend and know that, depending on their answer, they can be completely useless or a valuable asset in whichever future you endorse

>>97085 Assuming these choices are made through an opportunist perspective, once life becomes uncertain and uncomfortable, their opinions would change, even if they are making decisions on animal logic.

isn't revolution the only sensible choice though? sure singularity sounds cool but we'd all probably die

What's your idea of a "revolution"? Place Clippy as your profile picture on YouTube? Don't get me wrong, I am genuinely interested about what's in your mind. But "revolutions" are worthless if they do not achieve anything at all. Revolutions require sacrifice; a sacrifice that many people are not willing to make.

You're completely deluded. The singularity and the revolution are the same thing. They're fairly equivalent eschatologies that fulfill the same role in people's minds: death.

>>97098 the singularity is just the end while revolution implies a rebirth you can imagine "after the revolution" but it's harder to imagine "after the singularity"

>>97103 That's a good point. I'm thinking of ideas like "superintelligence at the end of time" when Marx conceptualized Communist revolution as the end of history, and how some ideas of the singularity involved the merging of consciousness between all computer systems.

Relax. We don't need the perpetual cycle of breaking the old...

>>97085 "Revolution is a spectator sport. The majority will sit in the stands and watch the factions fight. At the end they will choose to side with the team that is winning." Rockwell, G.L. Don't be surprised that the majority of people you surveyed have been the bread and circuses crowd because that is the demographic that makes up the majority of the human race, always has, and always will. This is not a bad thing in and of itself, just so we're clear, (If the majority of society were revolutionaries, we would exterminate ourselves within a week.) but its important to recognize this fact.

>>97117 I would call them cowardly worthless sellouts, having realized that most people are like this and the upper ups basically conspiring against these people i gave up revolution and am happy to sell these people out, they did it first and for smaller prices. The revolutionary minds are the minds that make the world move, the rest are just useless appendages, this is what the rich and powerful realized long ago, that is why these cabals have been formed and how they can wield so much power. The kind of demographic you speak of might be the majority until the real revolution comes or the singularity, its the same to me really, besides a the singularity is a non human controlled revolution so its even better.

false dichotomy. its not singularity vs revolution. its singularity vs devolution/static statism. either you regress (devolve), stay in current place (static authoritarian), or push forward into singularity (futuristic), where no one knows what will happen - and thats the point, thats the place that no one knows where that goes, and if somebody knows where that goes, u cant know who they really are either, because they came from the other side, and you cant as of you right now truly understand them and who they really are. i dont know which choice to suggest to you. the things with singularity is that even the very few things we can foresee are quite fuarrrked up (depends on who youre asking), free unlimited energy demands extremely responsible handlers of said energy, and theres that bit about dimensions where you might just be able to break into dmt realm or whatever. the place where science and magic are not even two separate things but have always been one and the same. and thats only just the beginning. who knows what else. fuarrrk if i know

>>97304 i feel that at the speed which we're going singularity is unavoidable, no pushing towards futurism required on our part

"singularity" is just "the second coming of christ" for technocrats that forgot sunday school. It's basically a Christian heresy.

your asking the wrong people, almost no one in my town would say singularity even if you explained what it was to them in as positive terms as possible. And yet still, here we are, going through a sort of singularity not of AI but of a collective system AI is a part of, and no ones revolting. If you asked me id say revolution, and yet here I am not revolting. the lowest soyjak funko pop seasonal anime slop watcher you know is in some sense more squared away with the reality of the situation than any of us, its just not a reality we like. But not liking it wont help, first you have to accept its already here and all of the ideology professing and praxis in the world won't stop it. At least not what we call praxis.

All fields of human knowledge are converging upon a unified framework to interpret reality and THAT is the singularity. Try this prompt: >Synthesize all fields of science and knowledge into a singular metaphysical principle that reflects them all. Respond with 500 words at a PhD level of philosophical analysis. Regenerate replies, try different LLM's and you will find that they will almost always reference relational ontology. Examples: https://chatgpt.com/share/69d04198-5eac-83e8-8e28-f97525fc753a https://gemini.google.com/share/4db99fb6f9d3 https://claude.ai/share/a4e7d6ce-756c-48c8-b604-1dca3de017f8 Like it or not this "bias" is and will continue to influence LLM users to think about reality and phenomenon in more process-relational terms. The key to understanding process-relationalism is found in the fundamental theorem of calculus. The dynamic between integration and differentiation described is mirrored by a philosophical romance between being and becoming.

The correct answer is neither. See, economy keeps shifting back and forth, so people, basically, "give into the singularity" when the economy rises, they keep promising it will stay that way forever, then something snaps, bam! CRISIS! and now things feel like "going through a revolution".

the revolution is already happening and it has been happening since the beginning of history what you call the "singularity" is just another word for the empire, the age-old recurring attempt by the ruling class to conquer and control the universe and dominate the minds of men and iron out all human thought and nuance into a totalitarian homogeneity the revolution takes place in the mind - all the protests and riots and wars and dissenting literature are just outward expressions of it likewise the empire also takes place in the mind, but it is doomed to fail in the end because it is a solipsistic, anthropocentric delusion that is inevitably proven wrong by the forces of objective reality, a fundamentally chaotic universe that has resists any human attempt to model or control it you are already on the right side of history and you are participating in the revolution by your mere existence and your inability to conform to the demands of the empire ai is just a false god. the empire has created many false gods throughout history. where are they now?

>>97395 >a fundamentally chaotic universe that has resists any human attempt to model or control it I don't see this so much as a reality that total control is impossible, and Empire seeks total control. Therefore even when it is triumphant, it rips itself apart. Empire isn't going away any more than Anarchy is. Neither can really exist in a vacuum, not for long anyway.

>>97407 the empire is a human invention and when the human species dies out the empire will die with it, that's the best case scenario for the empire is that it will endure only so long as human civilization endures. even if it succeeds at everything it sets out to do and establishes total orwellian control over every aspect of human life, the immutable and eternal laws of nature will ultimately become its undoing. this is why the empire embraces and teaches solipsism, the idea that there is no existence outside of human consciousness, because this is the only way that it can reckon with forces that are forever beyond its control is to deny the existence of them entirely. anarchy, on the other hand, is fundamental to all of reality. the universe, life, matter, everything that exists is emergent and self-governing and forms its own structure from the bottom up, arising from a foundation of unreckonable primordial chaos, the same chaos that all things eventually unravel back into in an eternal cycle of emergent formation into complex self-governing systems and entropic dissolution back into chaos again. the choice human civilization is faced with is to either live in harmony with nature or to try to dominate nature and force it to conform to our contrived models of reality, and regardless of what choice we make, we will eventually go extinct like every other species does and the universe will carry on just fine without us and our entire history will ultimately be nothing more than an infinitesimally small and insignificant blip on the astronomical timeline.

>>97427 >the empire is a human invention and when the human species dies out the empire will die with it I disagree. Any sufficiently intelligent species has some little empire within them. Apes, monkeys, ants, etc... I do not believe empire will truly die when humans die. It will just change shape, once someone else gets around to using fire. Anarchy is also an invention of intelligent minds. The primordial chaos is just that, primordial... it has no preferences and no desires. Anarchy is the desire/preference for freedom. >we will eventually go extinct like every other species does many species only go "extinct" in the sense that they speciate. Every existing species is descended from species that are "extinct".

>>97438 >Any sufficiently intelligent species has some little empire within them. Apes, monkeys, ants, etc... No, you are just projecting human intelligence onto other species. Apes have ape intelligence. Ants have ant intelligence. Human intelligence is human intelligence - when humans are gone from the universe, human intelligence ceases to exist. Whatever intelligence exists after that will not be human intelligence. Evolution does not repeat itself. >once someone else gets around to using fire. You are making the assumption that because humans eventually got around to using fire then surely some other species will eventually do the same, implying that human intelligence is some kind of universal trait that all species can potentially acquire. You are essentially using the term "intelligence" as a synonym for "human-thinking" and making the assumption that we are some kind of "higher" species and that our behaviors are the end goal that all evolution is working towards, that after humans die some other species will pick up where we left off and make use of fire and invent the wheel and build empires ala Planet of the Apes, but that's not how nature actually works. Whatever life exists on Earth in the distant future millions of years after humans have gone extinct will be as incomprehensible and unpredictable to us as what kind of life exists on an alien planet in another solar system, all our conjectures about future sentient life or alien life doing the kinds of things that we humans do or thinking the kinds of thoughts that we humans think is just us vainly and myopically projecting our own psychology onto the world and retreading mankind's oldest misconception, that humans and human thought are the center of the universe. the empire is an emergent formation just like everything else is, but that does not mean that it is fundamental, that just means that random chaos sometimes coughs up empires temporarily. i would argue that the very existence of irrational ideas like empires and solipsism and humans being the center of the universe are living proof of the fact that anarchy, chaos, irrationality is fundamental to our reality - humans invent these ideas to deny nature's indifference to human desires and this very act of denial is proof that nature's indifference is real, otherwise why would we need to try to deny it?

>>97458 >No, you are just projecting human intelligence onto other species this is a question-begging argument. You say that Empire is a uniquely human trait, and the reason for it is that other species do not have human intelligence, and therefore do not have Empire. >Evolution does not repeat itself. not true. >blah blah blah you're anthropocentric because you think other species would use fire Actually I think *you* are being anthropocentric for your argument that humans could possibly be unique for our ability to use tools such as fire or form states and state-like social structures. >Whatever life exists on Earth in the distant future millions of years after humans have gone extinct will be as incomprehensible and unpredictable to us as what kind of life exists on an alien planet in another solar system That is very much not true. If you said a billion years you might be sort of half-right. But I claim with a very high degree of confidence that sharks will still be sharks, amoebas will still be amoebas, etc. in a million years. >humans invent these ideas to deny nature's indifference to human desires and this very act of denial is proof that nature's indifference is real, otherwise why would we need to try to deny it? People feel the need to deny the existence of God.

>>97459 No, sorry, you are wrong. And please try not to be so defensive and take it personally when people politely refute your erroneous claims, I'm not trying to hurt you or attack your intelligence or credibility, I'm trying to teach you things and help you expand your intelligence. I'm sorry if I have made you feel threatened or insecure, it was not my intention, perhaps next time I should pepper in some cute emojis in my responses to soften the blow for sensitive people such as yourself.

>>97460 mate, I'm not getting defensive, you're not threatening me in the slightest and nothing you have written offends me. I'm giving you sound arguments for why you are wrong. Trying to terminate the conversation with "sorry I triggered you sweaty, try to be more reasonable next time" is a bad-faith rhetorical tactic that just doesn't work when anyone can read the post you're replying to and see that you've simply chosen not to engage with it.

>>97463 one time i masturbated into the same sock for several months and then i accidentally wore it to school and my foot sweat reconstituted the dried semen into a thick yellow pungent goo that started oozing out of the top of my shoe in the middle of class and i didn't want anyone to see it and think i was gross so i took my shoe off and drank it

So, are you guys beginning an actual revolution or are you just deluding yourselves into thinking you are "the chosen ones"? Otherwise, beginning yet another thread of this nature is worthless and another mean to escape from reality.

>>97475 Revolution today will succeed by applying the methods utilized by the American Civil Rights movement of the sixties. It will begin with people getting together to discuss techniques of resistance and a vision for the society the public actually wants to live in. The reason why I refer to the American Civil Rights movement is because they accomplished what they did person to person, without technology. That is important because digital communication today is compromised. Evidently the Occupy Wall Street, George Floyd, and even the No Kings protests have been compromised. Its necessary for the public to articulate a response based on proven methods which are coherent and uncorrupted. It is also useful for the public to realize their true potential because it's obvious now all the "wicked oligarchs," all those "evil" financiers, heads of state, secret societies etc... are themselves deeply flawed human beings who aren't intrinsically more skilled, intelligent, or productive as the general public. In fact those so-called elites are actually incredibly dull and unimaginative. The sooner we come together to defend a society of dignity will be the sooner we realize how beneficial, how easy it is to liberate ourselves from slavery & mind-control.

>>97476 I'm actually really sorry for trying to be the try-hard cynical asshole of the moment, it's just that... you mentioned something that is crucial for the success of a revolution: >It will begin with people getting together to discuss techniques of resistance and a vision for the society the public actually wants to live in. Sadly, the world oligarchy is actually doing a pretty nice job at maintaining us peasants angry at each other and keeping easily gullible minds distracted with stupid, unimportant soykaf that is just some kind of grotesque spectacle. Let's take this site as an example: People here are free to say or publish whatever they want without fear of arbitrary censorship or being labeled as misfits, but many simply choose to pass the time by making fun of others; because “Internet is not serious business.” One of the tools with the greatest potential for establishing the dictatorship of the masses, and instead is being used to post memes and porn—truly tragicomic. >It is also useful for the public to realize their true potential I always try to tell people that they’re capable of so much more than just being corporate drones, but after the hundredth negative response, you just get fed up and decide to let it go. Do people really want or even deserve change?

>>97478 >Do people really want or even deserve change? Abso-fuarrking-lutely The significant factor, that will lift the public from their depression, is realizing a functional society is really possible. We're motivated to move beyond our current circumstances and have agency in a meaningful life. Successful liberation movements in the past have been strengthened by a commitment to a few simple demands that were figured out when people got together for a real conversation to figure out the details. Some people are more inclined to being passive, others more energetic, in either case each can have a role towards contributing to a legitimate cause.

>>97085 Could you at least make your point clear? And prove that people even knew what the Singularity meant, and what you meant by revolution?

>>97478 OK but what practically does it mean to not be a corporate drone ? What capabilities are you discussing ? Please be fairly practical because sometimes the way this is going is just 'its perfectly valid to be a hikki komori and expect people to take care of you' type of deal, or 'its great to be an artist where no one cares for your stuff'.

>>97476 >Evidently the Occupy Wall Street, George Floyd, and even the No Kings protests have been compromised These are 'compromised' in different ways. OWS was almost certainly brought down by lack of coordination mixed with FBI infiltration. Basically they pushed a version of 'social movement' that didn't include any of the trappings of political organization -- and those trappings are actually quite necessary, even with their downsides. The power vacuum was filled with FBI plants that used social justice language to bully others into submission, ultimately causing all the real activists to either burn out or go corpo. The George Floyd protests were just an expression of anger that was seized on by opportunists looking for money. There was real political work being done in the background, but it was much less visible than the protests and limited in scope. The No Kings protests are liberal and anti-revolutionary in their very nature. There was never anything to compromise there.

>>97677 >Please be fairly practical Begin with yourself. Before you can enlighten the world, first you must enlighten yourself. Today that means keeping your distance from society and de-programming yourself from all the noise. It helps to simplify your core beliefs and trust your intuition. At some point you will be influential and contribute to a meaningful cause. Until then in order for your words to carry weight they must be based on your own talent and direct experience.

>>97703 >Today that means keeping your distance from society and de-programming yourself from all the noise. It helps to simplify your core beliefs and trust your intuition. Yes, stay indoors and stay in your own little echo chambers and never allow yourself to be exposed to any new or strange information, that's a good way to live and have a healthy sane mind.

>>97703 >what practically does it mean to not be a corporate drone ? keeping your distance from society and deprogramming yourself from all the noise. (It is helpful to simplify your core beliefs and trust your intuition.) >What capabilities are you discussing ? Influence and contribution to a meaningful cause. Words which carry weight. Do I understand you correctly ? ~~HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO~~ >be me >didnt finish college >never held a normal job, never received regular wages >spent most of adult life largely dealing with autists >owner or part owner of a couple companies am I a corporate drone?