Originally posted by NatureBoy
Thanks for the upload, i hated it, but thanks.
Fair enough. We all have our opinions.
To be honest, and i always am, i found the gender bias a little insulting and the style putridly mawkish while the faux-ideal society was a
little unrealistic.
Gender bias? [shrug] I thought I made it clear that, regardless of gender, choice is the option we all could have. My style? Heh. Sure. If you
dislike it...whatever. The style was not the point of the piece.
And do please explain what is "faux" about this ideal, where every Individual of Sentience can choose where and how they live their lives? Yes, I
showed one, high-tech perspective, but in this story, between the lines, there are people choosing to live on the land, hunting and fishing, farming
and washing their clothes by hand. If that is their bliss...they are welcome to it. So what's "faux" about that concept of Utopia?
My main topic of study has been 'visions of utopia' for quiet some time so i gave your's a chance and read huge chunks of it,
Ah. You did not read it beginning to end. That might explain why you reacted unfavorably. That may explain why you failed to take the message from
it. Perhaps you should follow the story, actually look at the full map, before you jump to "reviewing" based on incomplete impressions.
alas i couldn't bring myself to consume it entirely but i think i got the point.
Nope. I do believe you failed in the point-getting department.
The technological utopia which you describe has been covered in quiet alot of sci-fi, the most well known of course 'Star Trek' which
non-federation life is lived on the maxim that we're all catholic (not the religion but it's original meaning i.e. universal, a collective, etc) and
everyone can have whatever they want supplied from the central pool because any form of personal development adds to the greater whole.
Nope again. Perhaps you should actually read the piece...oh. Wait. You can't bring yourself to. [shrug] Don't know what to tell you.
However many other tales point out the issues that may come with this approach, 'Soylent Green' shows an attempt at a tech utopia in which
the population outgrows its bounds and the only protean source left is reprocessed people..
Soylent Green is a scarity paradigm.
'Logans Run' shows an attempt at using technology to limit peoples maximum age,
The need to limit age places Logan's Run into a scarcity paradigm.
'Texonherize' (i can't spell it sorry) is a Japanese work showing the possible issues involved in human-machine augmentation,
I am unfamiliar with this work, but will bet that it has a money based development, and likely is based in scarcity... I will look for it and see.
'1984' shows how the state uses technology to oppress people who disagree with 'the system'
1984 is deep into the scarcity paradigm.
while brave new worlds details the loss of #real# humanity in the attempt at reaching a tech utopia.
And yet... It does not depict a free internet (a key in diseminating information and social ratings). Also... It is a scarcity paradigm.
You might well think that none of these works have any bearing on your text but indeed they do, it might be nice for your lucky heroin to float
her zen garden ship down the grand canyon and take in the sublime air what about my MASSIVE gunship?-
What would you have this gunship for? Why do you want it? What are you planning to take from others with it? What would be the point of it? Do
please explain.
i was going to float around that canyon too and so were 2.4million other people,
All at the same time??? I doubt this seriously. And considering that my father once calculated that one could take the mass of every single human
and fit it into one small side canyon - with a bunch of space in that small canyon left over... Seems there would be plenty of room to hold 6.5
billion + people in the main canyon itself.
But I doubt it will have all converging on that spot at once.
although i'm sure my huge sub bass speakers are the biggest (78 thousand killowatt) i suspect others like loud driving beats too

I imagine you could make a complete pest of yourself if you tried, but then... I also imagine others would avoid you and you could sit with your guns
and amps all by your self all you wanted.
So, in reality this massive beauty spot is a horrendous cram of offensive people,
Offensive people??? Like you, I take it? I doubt it. Most people of human heart are considerate and compassionate when they can afford to be.
Perhaps your heart is of lizard...?
just like every other inch of the earth, sky and solar system. So are you going to ban things you don't like,
Nothing at all is banned, but behaving towards others such that they are not fully informed and willing to participate will earn you the status of
pariah.
such as the hardcore porn i've painted all over my gigantic battleship? Are you going to limit access to sections of the globe? How are
transgressors and trespassers punished? How do you ensure people obey the rules?
Have all the porn you want. No limits except into personal space - domiciles, in other words. Transgressors? Shunned if they choose to behave that
poorly. Really. All this is answered in the book, and if you can't bring yourself to actually read it...
As politely as I can muster... Shut up. [smile]
hehe you think just because someone has video of me playing offensive loud music it will make me stop?
No. Just make them choose to be elsewhere. If you choose turd behavior, expect to be treated as a turd.
Think just because i have been filmed every day of my life i will stop wanting to resist?
Um... Resist what?
you think that you can convince me to like zen nonsense (also can't you just call it west-coast-buddism not zen) and gold brocaded lavender
popery?
Nope. Not at all. Be whoever you are. As ye sow, so shall ye reap. [shrug]
haha "it was then in the corridors of MinZen as Winston felt the bullet enter from behind he realized, he truly loved Angel
Fairy's"
Irrelevant. But then, not having read the book, you wouldn't know that.
What if i don't like your rules? hehe EVERYONE RUNS!
What rules are those? To not create deliberately unhappiness in others such that they cannot walk away? I mean... That's really the only rule.
And if you break it, nobody will play with you any more. Geez. What's so tough about that?
Also more to the point you don't really cover how we move from now, the complex system which is required to assure that the LIMITED wealth of
the planet and humanitys LIMITED production potential are distributed in a way which allows the society to continues to function and thus humanity to
continue progressing towards an eventual tech utopia, if indeed it's possible.
Only in your mind... YOU didn't read the book. Again, in all politeness... Shut up.
If we want to get to the point that everyone can have what they desire then we need SCIENCE SCIENCE SCIENCE, this means we need to become far
more honest with ourselves and far more pragmatic in out lives.
True. And that was the point of my book. Well. Again I have to point things out that you would have gotten if you had just taken the whole ride.
This means dropping nonsense psudo-science and logical fallacy from our mind, admitting how hard life is and how imperfect humans and the
universe are and we need to be more open to science, learn to understand it -don't fear it, don't leave it to others, we all need to understand it
or we're never getting anywhere good.
Yes... My point. Except the part about "imperfection." I am perfect. I am the perfect Me. You are perfect. You are the perfect You. The
Universe is in balance overall.
Just curious... What is "pseudo-science" - in your mind?
[edit on 2/9/2009 by Amaterasu]