Imagining the Future - Utopian or Dystopian?!

[MrWorldwideJr]

16 hours ago, scottsdad said:

Then the censorship stuff. We are seeing it now with cancel culture and a lot of the woke stuff floating about. I read the book just as there was a big debate on TV about the lyrics in Fairytale of New York. This relentless re-examination of past works and deciding what is allowable content and what is not has only increased since then.  

One of the most impressive achievements of the right wing worldwide in the last few years has been the success they've had in whipping up opposition against 'cancel culture and the woke stuff', particularly amongst people like yourself who I imagine based on your posting wouldn't identify yourself as wildly right wing, and a lot of it comes through manufacturing controversies where none actually exist.

In essence all 'woke culture' is at its heart is people saying 'actually maybe you shouldn't be openly racist/homophobic/transphobic/misogynistic etc.'. What the right does really well is taking that basic premise and wildly exagerrating it to generate a headline like 'SEE. THEY'RE TRYING TO CANCEL FAIRYTALE OF NEW YORK, THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY YOU CAN'T PLAY IT ON THE RADIO ANYMORE, CENSORSHIP!!!!'.

Now, do people exist who think that Fairytale of New York shouldn't be played on the radio anymore? I'm sure they do. But comfortably the majority position is along the lines of 'if you can't even play the word f**k in a song on the radio then maybe you also shouldn't be playing the blatant homophobic slur'. At its heart thats hardly a controversial request and it certainly isn't censorship in the sense that the right wing are trying to portray it. If a new song was released in 2021 using that word it would absolutely not be included in a radio edit and nobody would be surprised or upset by that, there's really no controversy here at all.

The 'controversy' that rears its head every year about whether it should not be played at all/Shane MacGowan should be cancelled forever etc. etc. is pretty much entirely manufactured. Barely anybody in the real world is actually calling for that to happen. We just blank out one word in the song and move on with our lives, its still the most popular Christmas song, nothing has actually happened to anybody involved. 

You can subsititute that basic phrase into pretty much any 'cancel culture' controversy of the last five years. JK Rowling, for example, said some very nasty things and people pointed out to her that she actually probably shouldn't. Nothing actually happened to her beyond that, she's still a wildly rich and famous author. Her books still get published and sell incredibly well. If anything it was a net benefit for her as she can now get herself back into the news cycle at the drop of a hat with another run around of her 'I've been cancelled and here's what its like' schtick.

Meanwhile, in the real world, the trans people she targeted actually do face real problems, real danger, real attempts from the government to make their lives more difficult but nobody gives a shit about it. They're all too caught up in a little 'you can't say anything anymore' bubble because they've been asked to refer to people by their correct pronouns. That's the real purpose of 'cancel culture', its misdirection and its wild how many people have fallen for it and now seem to think that some of the most disadvantaged minorities in society are actually the aggressors trying to take their right to say what they like away.

[scottsdad]

1 hour ago, MrWorldwideJr said:

In essence all 'woke culture' is at its heart is people saying 'actually maybe you shouldn't be openly racist/homophobic/transphobic/misogynistic etc.'. What the right does really well is taking that basic premise and wildly exagerrating it to generate a headline like 'SEE. THEY'RE TRYING TO CANCEL FAIRYTALE OF NEW YORK, THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY YOU CAN'T PLAY IT ON THE RADIO ANYMORE, CENSORSHIP!!!!'.

Now, do people exist who think that Fairytale of New York shouldn't be played on the radio anymore? I'm sure they do. But comfortably the majority position is along the lines of 'if you can't even play the word f**k in a song on the radio then maybe you also shouldn't be playing the blatant homophobic slur'. At its heart thats hardly a controversial request and it certainly isn't censorship in the sense that the right wing are trying to portray it. If a new song was released in 2021 using that word it would absolutely not be included in a radio edit and nobody would be surprised or upset by that, there's really no controversy here at all.

I actually agree with a whole bunch of what you say. For me though there is a difference between what would be made today which would be subject to today's thinking, and something made in the past. 

Nobody today would use the word that FoNY uses in a song (well, maybe some rappers). But a Christmas song wouldn't include it now. Same with so many things that are written, recorded, filmed and manufactured now. They are made *now* and should represent 2021.  They should not include words or phrases we deem unacceptable.

The problem I have is when people hunt through past works, things written/recorded decades or even centuries ago and start saying that these things shouldn't be read or heard now because they are seen, through the prism of the modern day, as being wrong.  It goes beyond that song, and in to many aspects of cultural heritage - Enid Blyton, Dr Seuss and the likes now being banned. 

And this brings me back to Fahrenheit 451. We literally have books now that are being removed from society. Not quite a book burning but not a million miles away.

[MrWorldwideJr]

24 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

I actually agree with a whole bunch of what you say. For me though there is a difference between what would be made today which would be subject to today's thinking, and something made in the past. 

Nobody today would use the word that FoNY uses in a song (well, maybe some rappers). But a Christmas song wouldn't include it now. Same with so many things that are written, recorded, filmed and manufactured now. They are made *now* and should represent 2021.  They should not include words or phrases we deem unacceptable.

The problem I have is when people hunt through past works, things written/recorded decades or even centuries ago and start saying that these things shouldn't be read or heard now because they are seen, through the prism of the modern day, as being wrong.  It goes beyond that song, and in to many aspects of cultural heritage - Enid Blyton, Dr Seuss and the likes now being banned. 

And this brings me back to Fahrenheit 451. We literally have books now that are being removed from society. Not quite a book burning but not a million miles away.

But they aren't banned, that's exactly my point. Dr Seuss and Enid Blyton books aren't being 'literally removed from society'. I could go online, or to a bookshop, and buy a copy of any one of their books right now. My local library catalogue looks like it contains pretty much every book either of them have ever written. In exactly the same way that FONY, even the original, isn't banned and is indeed one of the most played songs in the country every single December. You can still go on Spotify or YouTube right now and listen to the original, slur included.

Again, nothing has happened in the real world, its just some people saying 'actually some of the attitudes promoted by Enid Blyton aren't very good, we should steer away from teaching those attitudes to our kids'. Its not saying that those books should be banned from society, its saying that they should be read with that in mind.

Edited November 30, 2021 by MrWorldwideJr

[scottsdad]

Dr. Seuss controversy reaches local shelves as Chicago Public Library pulls 6 books over racist, insensitive imagery

I get that these books are not yet banned - it is a process that takes time. First the books/authors stop being celebrated. Then they get trashed publicly. Popularity plummets, then they stop getting published. You can go online and order these books now - in a few decades that might not be so easy. 

[The Moonster]

6 hours ago, Arabdownunder said:

Sitting in the backyard the other day just after dark looking up into the sky. I saw a stream of lights, regularly spaced out, speeding in a straight line across the sky. Went on for several minutes; there must have 100 or more of them. Never having seen anything like this before, google tells me that it was Elon Musk's Skylink Satellite Train. 

Why does this belong in this thread? It's confirmation that the privatisation of space is well underway. Staring at the sky at night and contemplating the wonders of the cosmos is something that people of all cultures have done for thousands of years. That common experience is now tainted by the actions  of a billionaire, with little or no constraints or regulation. 

This makes me unaccountably depressed.

You realise you've probably been looking up and seeing satellites your whole life? Why is it this specific train of satellites that make you depressed?

[Fullerene]

32 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

Dr. Seuss controversy reaches local shelves as Chicago Public Library pulls 6 books over racist, insensitive imagery

I get that these books are not yet banned - it is a process that takes time. First the books/authors stop being celebrated. Then they get trashed publicly. Popularity plummets, then they stop getting published. You can go online and order these books now - in a few decades that might not be so easy. 

As an alternative, there is a book called "Politically correct bedtime stories".

[Arabdownunder]

1 hour ago, The Moonster said:

You realise you've probably been looking up and seeing satellites your whole life? Why is it this specific train of satellites that make you depressed?

The occasional satellite is one thing, a stream of them dominating the night sky is another.

[The Moonster]

1 minute ago, Arabdownunder said:

The occasional satellite is one thing, a stream of them dominating the night sky is another.

There are 7,500 active satellites orbiting the earth. Elon Musk says his satellites will give you broadband 47% faster than fibre-broadband. I think a few lights in the sky are a decent trade for instantly downloadable porn content.

[welshbairn]

8 hours ago, Arabdownunder said:

Sitting in the backyard the other day just after dark looking up into the sky. I saw a stream of lights, regularly spaced out, speeding in a straight line across the sky. Went on for several minutes; there must have 100 or more of them. Never having seen anything like this before, google tells me that it was Elon Musk's Skylink Satellite Train. 

Why does this belong in this thread? It's confirmation that the privatisation of space is well underway. Staring at the sky at night and contemplating the wonders of the cosmos is something that people of all cultures have done for thousands of years. That common experience is now tainted by the actions  of a billionaire, with little or no constraints or regulation. 

This makes me unaccountably depressed.

It's a worry but what you saw was probably not long after a launch. They gradually move apart and move into a higher orbit. It sounds like a lot of satellites, but space is awfully big and they're pretty small. And they're working on making them less visible. 

Edited November 30, 2021 by welshbairn

[SlipperyP]

Nobody has spoke about the dogs?

How fucking dare you!!!!!

[Left Back]

11 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

There are 7,500 active satellites orbiting the earth. Elon Musk says his satellites will give you broadband 47% faster than fibre-broadband. I think a few lights in the sky are a decent trade for instantly downloadable porn content.

I'd be surprised if he said that as it would be be a stretch. 

https://www.cnet.com/home/internet/starlink-satellite-internet-explained/

It will have a place (vsat already does and has been around for years) servicing areas that aren't able to get fibre (or any other internet connection) but won't replace fibre broadband due to latency.

[The Moonster]

11 minutes ago, Left Back said:

I'd be surprised if he said that as it would be be a stretch. 

https://www.cnet.com/home/internet/starlink-satellite-internet-explained/

It will have a place (vsat already does and has been around for years) servicing areas that aren't able to get fibre (or any other internet connection) but won't replace fibre broadband due to latency.

I can't find his quote but he hopes to have latency under 10ms in future. Whether that is just fluff talk or he thinks it's achievable I don't know. 

[welshbairn]

2 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

I can't find his quote but he hopes to have latency under 10ms in future. Whether that is just fluff talk or he thinks it's achievable I don't know. 

I think they're mainly designed for rural areas that aren't worth supplying with fibre, read somewhere that they won't have the capacity to supply urban areas so probably just business users in cities. Once the full network is up there they'll be able to charge a fortune to financial traders because of the low latency for international transactions.

[Glennie]

8 hours ago, Arabdownunder said:

Sitting in the backyard the other day just after dark looking up into the sky. I saw a stream of lights, regularly spaced out, speeding in a straight line across the sky. Went on for several minutes; there must have 100 or more of them. Never having seen anything like this before, google tells me that it was Elon Musk's Skylink Satellite Train. 

Why does this belong in this thread? It's confirmation that the privatisation of space is well underway. Staring at the sky at night and contemplating the wonders of the cosmos is something that people of all cultures have done for thousands of years. That common experience is now tainted by the actions  of a billionaire, with little or no constraints or regulation. 

This makes me unaccountably depressed.

now think whats already been done to the natural landscape, most recently tainted by windfarms

[Detournement]

37 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

I can't find his quote but he hopes to have latency under 10ms in future. Whether that is just fluff talk or he thinks it's achievable I don't know. 

Everything he says is a lie to pump the share prices of his companies. 

[coprolite]

3 hours ago, scottsdad said:

Dr. Seuss controversy reaches local shelves as Chicago Public Library pulls 6 books over racist, insensitive imagery

I get that these books are not yet banned - it is a process that takes time. First the books/authors stop being celebrated. Then they get trashed publicly. Popularity plummets, then they stop getting published. You can go online and order these books now - in a few decades that might not be so easy. 

What you have described there is nothing like a banning. You have described something going out of fashion and becoming anachronistic. 

Dr Seuss, like enid blyton, is also utter shite so they're no great loss. I get that that's no defence for banning them but felt it needed saying. 

[Left Back]

3 minutes ago, coprolite said:

What you have described there is nothing like a banning. You have described something going out of fashion and becoming anachronistic. 

Dr Seuss, like enid blyton, is also utter shite so they're no great loss. I get that that's no defence for banning them but felt it needed saying. 

^^^ never got lashings of ginger beer when he was a kid.

[NotThePars]

5 hours ago, The Moonster said:

There are 7,500 active satellites orbiting the earth. Elon Musk says his satellites will give you broadband 47% faster than fibre-broadband. I think a few lights in the sky are a decent trade for instantly downloadable porn content.

Hmm.

[Arabdownunder]

9 hours ago, Glennie said:

now think whats already been done to the natural landscape, most recently tainted by windfarms

The difference being that for the natural landscape there is an established system of ownership and permissions to do this (however imperfect this system) . Space seems to be open slather for Musk and the like to use as they like. Its the Tragedy of the Commons in the night sky

[tamthebam]

10 hours ago, Left Back said:

^^^ never got lashings of ginger beer when he was a kid.

Or Green Eggs and Ham