im already talking about this vaccines are little ufos (that cause cancer, breast cancer testicle cancer and vagina cancer specifically). and a host of other birth mutations. article with ~25 graphs (disease rates post vaccine boom 1975) coming soon. if you dont want to wait google '4chan/sci/ archive' and search that archive ' Vaccines are devolving people?' additionaly the sperm count avg has bombed since 1975 when…
“Children of Men”'s vision of the future is now disturbingly familiar
101–110 of 227 posts
Re: “Children of Men”'s vision of the future is now disturbingly familiar
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
You sound clinically insane.
well debate me on video or fight me boxing in real life or stfu. nerd. im totally sane. (and a good boxer and great debater, and engineer. and f* you) google lobotomobile, then go get one plz
Re: “Children of Men”'s vision of the future is now disturbingly familiar
#103im already talking about this vaccines are little ufos (that cause cancer, breast cancer testicle cancer and vagina cancer specifically). and a host of other birth mutations. article with ~25 graphs (disease rates post vaccine boom 1975) coming soon. if you dont want to wait google '4chan/sci/ archive' and search that archive ' Vaccines are devolving people?' additionaly the sperm count avg has bombed since 1975 when…
You sound clinically insane.
Re: “Children of Men”'s vision of the future is now disturbingly familiar
#104It's an old movie. If he spoiled it for you, it's your fault. Vader is Lukes father. The Titanic sinks at the end. Lost was all a communal dream while everyone on the flight died together.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13248453 and marked it off-topic.
Re: “Children of Men”'s vision of the future is now disturbingly familiar
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
Conversely, in William Gibson's Neuromancer, there are no cell phones, despite being set decades into the future. Gibson knows a thing or two about seeing their scifi becoming dated, of course. The famous opening line, "The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel" no longer resonates with anyone born the last 20 years or so (although for a number of years, many digital TVs would displa…
>There's also some fun stuff about people physically carrying information (this also happens in short story "Johnny Mnemonic"). For a world where there's a highly connected, super fast worldwide computer network available, people sure travel around a lot. Sneakernet isn't an irrelevant concept in any sort of context where data transferred through a computer network can be intercepted.
But, sneakernets are relevant because the internet is slower.
Re: “Children of Men”'s vision of the future is now disturbingly familiar
#106> The one aspect of the film that doesn’t seem to be coming true is its central premise. The idea is that no human beings have been born in the last 18 years, so when Theo meets Kee, an African woman who is miraculously pregnant, he has to protect her from the various groups who want to exploit her condition. Obviously, we know that this infertility pandemic hasn’t happened: in Children of Men, the youngest person on…
> It's not really about population -- it's about having no future, which is something a lot of people constantly worry about. One thing the movie (unintentionally) got right was how absurd this is. It really ruined the movie to me, TBH, because it was laughably implausible. Reproduction is what life does best. I'll obviously have to watch again for the world building....
Re: “Children of Men”'s vision of the future is now disturbingly familiar
#107Slightly OT but pertains to "Children of Men" The scenes where main character Theo Faron (Clive Owen) is on the really nice buses, and there is classical music playing in the background, while outside the window there is so much poverty really resonated with me. I've lived in SF going on 6 years now. My apt complex has private buses that run from here to FDi in the morning and evening. The route sometimes changes but…
I worked in a gated, enclosed, guarded community in a Central American country with a bunch of expats - British, Canadian, American - and saw nothing but abject poverty outside of our small enclosure. Everything was delivered. McDonalds, Pizza Hut, local food, drinks, newspapers, groceries... We had transportation to the local office and I saw much the same as you, but in way worse conditions. It affected me just the…
Re: “Children of Men”'s vision of the future is now disturbingly familiar
#108Slightly OT but pertains to "Children of Men" The scenes where main character Theo Faron (Clive Owen) is on the really nice buses, and there is classical music playing in the background, while outside the window there is so much poverty really resonated with me. I've lived in SF going on 6 years now. My apt complex has private buses that run from here to FDi in the morning and evening. The route sometimes changes but…
Re: “Children of Men”'s vision of the future is now disturbingly familiar
#109On a lighter note, I had a good chuckle when the article mentioned that the director deliberately avoided depiction of cellphones to avoid creating an unintentional period piece[0]. The last movie I watched in the treatre is Clint Eastwood's "Sully" and I distinctly remember the main character using a chronologically appropoaite Samsung flip phone and that single prop instantly dates the movie to the first decade of…
Reminds me of "It Follows". David Robert Mitchell made some pretty interesting prop choices specifically to avoid dating the movie. From his AV Club interview: > There are production design elements from the ’50s on up to modern day. [...] if you show a specific smartphone now, it dates it. It’s too real for the movie. It would bother me anyway. So we made one up. And all of that is really just to create the effect o…
Re: “Children of Men”'s vision of the future is now disturbingly familiar
#110Slightly OT but pertains to "Children of Men" The scenes where main character Theo Faron (Clive Owen) is on the really nice buses, and there is classical music playing in the background, while outside the window there is so much poverty really resonated with me. I've lived in SF going on 6 years now. My apt complex has private buses that run from here to FDi in the morning and evening. The route sometimes changes but…
Second, treating the world as a software project gives us a rationale for being selfish. The old adage has it that if you are given ten minutes to cut down a tree, you should spend the first five sharpening your axe. We are used to the idea of bootstrapping ourselves into a position of maximum leverage before tackling a problem.
In the real world, this has led to a pathology where the tech sector maximizes its own comfort. You don't have to go far to see this. Hop on BART after the conference and take a look at Oakland, or take a stroll through downtown San Francisco and try to persuade yourself you're in the heart of a boom that has lasted for forty years. You'll see a residential theme park for tech workers, surrounded by areas of poverty and misery that have seen no benefit and ample harm from our presence. We pretend that by maximizing our convenience and productivity, we're hastening the day when we finally make life better for all those other people.
- http://idlewords.com/talks/sase_panel.htm
and
if you visit San Francisco, [the poverty] is something you're likely to find unsettling. You'll see people living in the streets, many of them mentally ill, yelling and cursing at imaginary foes. You'll find every public space designed to make it difficult and uncomfortable to sit down or sleep, and that people sit down and sleep anyway. You'll see human excrement on the sidewalks, and a homeless encampment across from the city hall. You'll find you can walk for miles and not come across a public toilet or water fountain.
If you stay in the city for any length of time, you'll start to notice other things. Lines outside every food pantry and employment office. Racially segregated neighborhoods where poverty gets hidden away, even in the richest parts of Silicon Valley. A city bureaucracy where everything is still done on paper, slowly. A stream of constant petty crime by the destitute. Public schools that no one sends their kids to if they can find an alternative. Fundraisers for notionally public services.
You can't even get a decent Internet connection in San Francisco.
The tech industry is not responsible for any of these problems. But it's revealing that through forty years of unimaginable growth, and eleven years of the greatest boom times we've ever seen, we've done nothing to fix them. I say without exaggeration that the Loma Prieta earthquake in 1989 did more for San Francisco than Google, Facebook, Twitter, and all the rest of the tech companies that have put down roots in the city since.
Despite being at the center of the technology revolution, the Bay Area has somehow failed to capture its benefits.
It's not that the city's social problems are invisible to the programming class. But in some way, they're not important enough to bother with. Why solve homelessness in one place when you can solve it everywhere? Why fix anything locally, if the solutions can scale?
And so we end up making life easier for tech workers, assuming that anything we do to free up their time will make them more productive at fixing the world for the rest of humanity.
This is trickle-down economics of the worst kind.
In the process, we've turned our city into a a residential theme park, with a whole parallel world of services for the rich.
There are luxury commuter buses to take us to work, private taxis, valet parking, laundry and housecleaning startups that abstract human servants behind a web interface. We have a service sector that ensures instant delivery of any conceivable consumer good, along with some pretty inconceivable ones.
There are no fewer than seven luxury mattress startups. There's a startup to pay your neighbor to watch your packages for you.
My favorite is a startup you can pay to move your trash bins, once a week, three meters to the curb.
If at the height of boom times we can look around and not address the human crisis of our city, then when are we ever going to do it? And if we're not going to contribute to our own neighborhoods, to making the places we live in and move through every day convenient and comfortable, then what are we going to do for the places we don't ever see?
You wouldn't hire someone who couldn't make themselves a sandwich to be the head chef in your restaurant.
You wouldn't hire a gardener whose houseplants were all dead.
But we expect that people will trust us to reinvent their world with software even though we can't make our own city livable.
- http://idlewords.com/talks/what_happens_next_will_amaze_you....